Brownlow's Knoxville Whig, and rebel ventilator. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1863-1866, 1864-04-02

ihal indictment or against the property
Under the ccnfscation act referred to-
The President has accordingly directed
me to instruct you thxt, in any czse whore
proceedings have been commenced, and aro
pending and undetermined, in the District
or Circuit Court of the United States for
your district, against person charged with
acts of rebellion, and not Of the excepted
class, whether they be by indictment or By
seizure and libel Of his property for confis-
cation, (the rights of other parties not hav-
interviewed you will discontinue and put
an end to those proceedings, whenever the
person so charged shall produce evidence
satisfactory TO you that he has, in good
faith, taken the oath and complied with
the conditions prescribed by the Presidents
proclamation Of December 9Th, 1868. Nor
is it necessary that the evidencs which he
produces should be deed Of pardon signed
by the President. It would be quite i'm
possible for the President to furnish the
inultitudes who arsnow awaiting themselves
of tho benefits of the proclamations, and
who likely to do so hereafter, with this
evidence Of pardon. twill be sufficient to
justify your action, if the party seeking to
be relieved from further proceedings shall
prove to your full satifaction that be has, in
good faith, taken the oath and brought
himself within The conditions Of pardon
and amnesty set forth in the proclamation.
II, in any case, you have good reason to
believe that the oath has been taken for the
mere purpose of obtaining possession Of
personal property seized under the confis-
cation acts, with intent to remove it from
the subsequent reach of the officers of the
l-,~x o1x 90 ~
reasons for your belief to this Office before dis
continuing the proceedings or restoring such
property to the possession of the owner.
Ferfeitures under the fifth section of the
act Of the 18th of July, 1861, ,ehapter 3, are
not Of the class reached by the Presidents
proclamation, for, under that act, the ques-
tion whether the property seized is subject
to forfeiture depends upon the predicament
of the property itself, and not upon tho
personal guilt or innocence of its owner
In this respect, forfeitures under that act
have more resemblance to cases of prizes Of
war captured at sea as enemy's property,
than to proceedings under the acts Of Au-
gust, 1861, and May, 1862 Such forfeitures
are enforced not so much to punish the
owner for disloyal acts, as to prohibit COM
mercial intercourse, and to weaken the pub
lie enemy, which are always efficient instru~
ments and legitimate effects of public war.
But, although the remission Of forfeitures
under the act of July, 1861, are thus not
within the scope of the proclamation Of
pardon, still, ample power is conferred on
the Secretary of the Treasury by the 9Th
section of that act, mitigate or remit all for
FIXTURES and penalties incurred under the
act. And it is not to be doubted that, in
all proper cases under that act. whore the
owner of property, residing in the terrific
ry in rebellion, complies with the conditions
of the proclamation, that the Secretary Of
the Treasury win exercise the power of re-
mission Of such forfeitures in the same spir-
it of generous forbearancs and hberality
which inspired and characterized the pro-
clamation. TITAN J. CoFFEr,
Acting Attorney General
To the United States District Attorney