The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1864-02-12
HIGHLY IMPORTANT DECISION.
United States Circuit Court of
Minnesota.
Citizens OF States in Rebellion Con.
sitiered as Enemies and Not En-
titled to Sue in this Court.
OPINION OF JUDGE NELSON.
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA.
ISRAEL. G. LASH, vs.. LYMAN DAYTON, ct ais.
IN EQUITY

IN EQUITY.
This case comes before the Court for decree
upon the pleadings no evidence having been
taken by either party.
The Bill of Complaint was filed by Israel G.
Lash, of Salem, iii the State OF North Caro-
lima, and citizen of said State, against Lyman
Dayton, ct as, Of st. Paul, citizens of the
State of Minnesota. The counsel for the De-
PENDANTS insists that upon this allegation of cit
HenShip on the part of the complainant, he
appears to be a public enemy, not entitled to
sue in this Court, and that the bill must neces-
sarily be dismissed.
In order that we may arrive at correct con-
ausion in this case, it is necessary to determine
FUst.-Does war actually exist between the
Government of the United States and those
States which have combined to form q new
government?
Second--If civil war exists, can the belliger-
ents exercise under the law of nations, as
against each other all the rights resulting from
a war inter geates.
The first proposition was settled !y the Su-
premc Court of the United States at The De
cember term, 1862. The Court unanimously
recognized a state of war to exist. but differed
only as to the time of its commencement The
majority say:
The parties bclligcrent in a public war are
independent nations. But 1t Is not saecessoly 10
cGnstifHe tcnr Lt1 5oth ;)o,tits Sho"id Je ac-
haomiedged as independent nuiions Or soryycigss
States. / may erist ,rtere oac ot' tie bel
Agerent5 ci,am Socereiga rights Us aycunSt tie
OthcY.
Instruction against a government NAV or
may not eliminate III organized rebellion. but
civil war always begins by instruction against
the Lawful! authority of the government. * =;
When the party in rebellion occupy and hold
in hostile manner Il certain portion of terri
tory: have declared their Independence have
cut off their allegiance have organized armies:
have commenced hcstii!ties against their for
mer sovereign, the world acknowledges them
as belligerents and the contest Il ards G. Black
rep, p. G6G.)
The minority OF The court say:
This act of Congress (alluding to act of july
18th, 1861 we think recognized state of civil
war between the government and the Confed-
crate States, and made it territorial.
The nature of the contest, therefore i. clear
ly defined by the court.
The second point is as clearly established
and the international law upon the subject well
settled. Every citizen of the hostile State in a
cicI or perfect var Gas war inter gentes is call
ed) becomes public enemy. and the law treats
him accordingly in brief as stated by the court
in the prize cases. G Black. Rep, p. 6S7.)
The people of the two countries become i'm
mediately the enemies of each Other-all inter-
course, commercial or otherwise, between
them is unlawful-aU contracts eaisting ut the
commencement of the acar are suspended, and all
made during its existence utterly void.
1t was urged by counsel that as citizen of
North Carolina. the complainant might be tenn
porarily absent from the State, or although
within its limits. might not aid or favor the re-
belliGn, and still be a loyal citizen of the Uni
ted States, entitled tn all his rights under the
constitution.
We think that all these points were settled
by the decision arrived at by the court in the
case above cited. War exists between the con-
tending parties. The legal consequences re-
sulting therefrOm are well understood. The
national character of a person as an enemy is
not changed by a temporary absence from
country of which he claims to be subject; nor
can any distinction be recognized between
loyal and rebel subjects. All are considered
by the international law as belligerent enemies.
The complainant, therefore, declaring himself
in his bill of complaint, to be of Salem, in the
State of North Carolina, and a citizen of said
entitled to sue in this court
Bill dismissed. R.R. NELSON,
q. s Judge.