Daily national Republican., 1863-03-11
Judge criet,s Dselsion In ths Prize Cases,
United states supreme Court, March 10,

4 would b proper 70 disouha and decide before re-
ferring to lhe spepial mot peculiar TO each.
They werei nrat, has tho President the right to
initlate blockade Of ports In possession Of per-
aons In armed rebellion against the Government
onthe principle OF International law, as known
and acknowledged among civilized statesi
Second, ia the property Of persons domiciled or
residing within those States proper subject of
capture and seizure as rebel property Do yaeio and
also what is the authority ofa party exercising the
All parties were bound 20 recognize the rirhta of
a helligerent engaged In civil war, TO use this
mode Of coercion, vizi tho blockade, for the pur-
pose Of coerclng the enemy. ~.
That blockade dc faciO actually existed, and
was formaliy declared BY the Proclamation OF the
18th q April 1881, was an admitted fact in these
That the President, who was the Executive Chief
| Of the Government and the COmmander-in-Chiefo Of
the army and navy, was the proper person to make
| such notification, could not be disputed.
| The right Of reprisal and capture had their ORR
gin laid down In code ofthe law Of nations. To
render the capture Of neutral vessel or property
on the high seas legitimate, a war must exist de
| JdctQ, and the neutral must have q knowledge or
notice ef the intention Of the one party TO this
no1e ~ % oi coercion against port city, or territory
| TheJustice thcn proceeded 10 answer the inquiry
as to whether At the time this blockade was insti
tuted as stated war existed Il would justify re.
sort 10 these means to subdue the hostile foei
| War was defined as that state in which q nation
prosecuted It's rights BY force. The pHrty bellge-
rentin public war was an independent nation,
but Il was not necessary in order 10 constite ,yar
that both parties should be acknowledged As indie
pendent nAtionsN InsurrectiOn against govern
ment might or might not culminate in war In an
| organized rebellion, but civil war always begun
by tnsurreeton against the lawful authority OF the
| Government. hcivil war was never soiemniy de-
olared. II became such by accident and the num-
ber, power, and Organization Of AL the persons
who originated and carried II on, When the party
In rebellion occupied footing certain portion
Of the territory o. hostile one, had cast of their
msncsd hostiIitss sSanst forosS ,o1s,eI ~,
were belllgerents, and the contest was war. these
men claimed 70 be in arms for the purpose Of seek
states.
This very admission Of their intention to re
| nounee all allegiance 10 their former Government
made them rebels, and the punishment meted out
by law to traitors was death, but the laws of war
among nations had their foundation In reason, and
hence efforts were made to mitigate the cruelties
Parties therefore engaged In civil strife exohang
ed prisoners and adopted other courtesies and rules
common to public warfare. civil war broke the
bonds Of society and Of government, or, at least,
suspended the full administration of affairs. II
produced in nation two independent parties, who
considered each Other enemies, and acknowledge
| no common brotherhood. These two parties con-
stitute, At least for time, two separate bodies,
they stood in precisely the same position as two
nations who engaged In q contest, ndhad recourse
This being the case II was very evident that the
common law In the usual acts Of humanity, mo-
deration, and honor should be observed by both
|
| engaged In a civil war, conceive that he has Au-
thority to hang up his rebel prisoners, and see pro-
per to exercised, the war would be marked with
the acknowledged modes Of warfare adopted by
different independent nations, A civil war was
never publicly proclaimed 60 ROHine against the in
surgents The true test Of its existence was when
the regular course Of Justice was interrupted BY
rebellion or insurreetion, so that courts Of Justice
could not be kept open, Its existence being fact
hostiitles were to be prosecuted on the same foot
Ing as II those opposing the Government were for
| eign enemies invading the land.
| by the Constitution, Congress had all the powers
to declare foreign war; but II could not declare
against State, or any number OF States BY virtue
Of any clause in the Constitution. The Constitu-
ton also conferred on the President the whole
| Executive power, He was bound TO take care that
the laws be faithfully executed, and TO enable him
| TO do this efectuAlly he was constituted CommAn-
derin-chlef OF the army and navy and OF the mill
tia Of the several States when called into active
| service, He had no power to initiate or declare
war either against foreign nation or domestic
foe but by the act OF Congreaa OF the 29th Of Feb
ruary, 1859, he was authorized to call out the mi
ttia and use the military and naval forces Of the
United states in case Of invasion by foreign ma
tiOns, and to suppress insurrection against the
war be made BY invasion OF a foreign nation, the
| President was not only authorized but bound 10
resist force oy force. lie could not initiate the
challenge without waiting for any special legiala-
tive authority. And whether the hostile party be
II was mono the less a war, although the declAra'
tion of be lateral In fact war, As laid down by
the best WRITER'S might exist without decla ration
| on either side. The declaration Of war by one
country only was not mere challenge to Do Ao-
oepted or refused at pleasure BY the other. Itwas
provinces or states be Acknowledged to declare
| this war.
Foreign nations had already acknowledge It as
| = war, by declaration Of neutrality. The condl-
tiOn Of neutrality could not exist, unleIs there
were two belligerent parties. -la'.
As soon as the news Of the attack on Fort sum-
| ter became known In Europe, on the l3th OF May,
1851 the Queen Of England Issued her proclamation
OF neutrality thus recognising as exist
This was Immediately followed by similar declAra-
tonB or silent acqueBcence By other nations, After
such recognition by the soyereigns and citizens
of foreign States, II was foolish TO deny the exist
ence ofwar, or rights as regarded neutfals. They
could not AFFECT technical ignorance OF the exiS-
encc of war which all the world acknowledged to
be the greatest civil war known in the history Of
the civilized race, and thus cripple the arm OF the
Government and paralyEe Its powers BY Sophlsti-
The law OF nations was also called the law OF ma
ture, which was founded on the common consent
| as well rs the common sense of the world.
| II had been insisted that the insurgents, who had
risen in rebellion agalnst their sovereign, estab-
lished revolution In the Government, organized
armies and commenced hostilities, were not enc
mics, because they were trAitoTs-thAt IL was an
insurrection and not war.
Whether the President, in fulfilling his duty As
Chief in suppresslng the insufrec-
ton regarded II as Of such proportions as to COM
pei them to give them the character of beligerents
10 question to be decided by him, and this court
must be governed by the party In the Government
in which this power is entrusted He must de-
termine what degree Of power the crisis demands.
The proclamation directing the block aiding OF diff
ferent ports iB itself official and concluslye eyi-
denoe to the court, that state of war did exist
which demanded such a measure. The corres-
pondenee OF Lord Lyons and the Secretary OF state
admitted the fact. II II were necessary TO. the
technical existence Of war that 1t should have
legislative sanction, such was found in almost
every act passed at the extra session Of Congress
In 1851, which was wholly employed in enActing
laws to enable the Government to prosecute the
war with vigor and efficiency. In 1862, act was
passed legalzing and making valid all acts Of the
President, as II they had been done under the
previous authority and consideration Of the Prosi-
dent of the United States.
After citing the opinion of Judge Story and others
on the point as to whether the President had the
right to assume power TO blockade certain ports,
Without the consent Of Congress, Justice GrieF re-
marked that on that first question they were all
of the opinion that the President had right tTIHt
beih TO Institute a blockade which neutTals were
bound to respect.
In reply 10 the inquiries as to what was included
In the term enRmy'B property" and whether the
property Of all persons residing within the terri
tory of the States in rebellion, captured the
high seas, was to be regarded as enemy's property
| whether the owners be In arms against the Gov.
eFnment or not he said the right Of one beligerent
TO coerce the other not only by direct force, but
also to grasp his resources by the seizure and
duetOn If the property Is necessary result OF the
. state OF war. ...
Money, wealth, the products OF agriculture and
commerce, are said to be sinewB OF war; and AZ no
oessAry in it's conduct numbers and physical
forces Hence, the laws OF war recognized the right
4 Of begerentB to cut the sinewB OF the rebellion
| An ha