Weekly national intelligencer., 1864-03-10

The claim this ls LOT pfbhS pi'Poip N''i'yNN
and abandoned in Arizona on the 18th OF july ie6lo oy
order Of Capt j. Moore, 60 imanding United States
troops in the vicinity of Tucson Grant was contractor
with thu Government tor furnishing commissary and quar-
supplies for the forts and military posts IN
and in urherance of his contract had expended
large sums money n the repair and erection OF hourng
mills dWellng-houses store houses shops, ana corrais
He had personal property also of considerable value con-
sstpr in part of -four, wheat corn, barley beans, mer
chandse furniture, &c In the mills and store houses OF
Grant we're valuable supplies belonging TO the Govern
ment. rm@N .s
The people Of Tucson were lawess adyenturers ana
intensely hostile to the Government Of the United STATES
Lieut. Lord speaks of the citizens OF the Territory as
traitors of the deepest dye " that they openly aAeo
secession long before the war commenced especially those
in the vicinity of Tucson" Capt Chapn in hs deposl
ON saws: Tucson was full Of gamblers and murderer
Large numbers of the white people southerner IN
feeling and ready to take up for the Southern cause
Exc.nt;ons to this rule were rare" Confederate nag
ss gpp at Tucson and when the property was burnt
the peopIe assembled in large numbers armed ana Win
such threatening demonstrations as induced Lieut. "iu
to prepare for expected attack on his tram fort
Breckndes had been burnt and abandoned on the loth
of july and Capt Moore had received information ny ex-
press that Fort Buchanan also to be abandoned and
DESTROYED He also had information that Iexlan rebel
forces held Fort Union and determined to occupy
the Tsrtory and cut of the United States troops within it,
with this information and the state of things as ne
knew them to exist at Tucson Capt Moore directed Lieut.
Lord commanding company Of Dragons, TO destroy such
Government stores be could not transport together
Nth such private property of Grant might be Of value
IN the rubic enemy or the dsoyal people Of Tucson
IN rsceiyng information that Fort Buchanan to be
abandoned he took an and reached that fort in ad
vance of the main body In his report to the War DE
partnen he says On learning the urgency OF the case
sent the enclosed written order TO Lieut. Lord, IN com
roand of troops from Fort Breekinrdge his re-
port in the case forward Neither the order nor the
report here spoken of before u.s. Lieut. Lord 10 MS
deposition says 1he property was destroyed IN accord
ance with written orders given me by Capt j. Moore
did make a report Of the matter to Capt Moore ana ne
annroved f it, nd said would enclose 10 his report
10 the War Department and that should be iaVorably
mentioned for manner in which had act'd: CAPT
Chspn command At Fort Buchanan says III MS oepoS
ton capt Moore told me- the day alter be arrived al
Fort Buchanan that he bad ordered Lieut. Lord, now
Capt Lord, destroy all the public stores ana All pro-
visions that had been stored by Mr. Grant Tor he use
the Government Grants mill and all otner property that
could not ransl ortd which would be OF any oeneh
10 the people IT u at country.
We do not doubt from this evidence taken in connection
with the active participation of Lieut. Lord IN the de-
strucon property himself setting hre to The large
mill aud giving orders to his men to e The other buld
ipgs and property that he acted under and ~
with the express orders OF Capt Moore. Lord nnnhed
Mr. Grant half hour before the hre was set o his IN
tenon To burn all his buildings and property and re-
quesed him to secure at once such vausDes ana paper
a. he wished to preserve The fact that Capt Moore gave
the order for the destruction Of the property for which
camed being established 1t immateral
whether it was written or verbal
IL the Government legally aud equaby bound 10 m
demny Grant tor the loss OF his property under snch
crcumstancesf Was there apparent TO the Commanding
officer such necessity justified its destruction Was
il taken for public uss1 proper application Of legal
principles to the facts Of the case VIII give solution 70
these inquiries ...
Tor private property taken under pressure
of state necessity and for the public good The Stat s
the proprietary OF all the property real ana
persona Of its citizens subjects This transcendenta
right the domain OF the State, 10 all countries
where rights REQUESTED by law, s exercised as 10
work no wong to nfct private injury without giving
10 the party sggreved ample redress This doctrine WAS
not enerstted on the public give cence despohc
and arbitrary soveegns IL has its foundation 10 the or
panz of societies and States, and Is as essential 6
Republic to the most absolute despom IL u OF the
very and withouts State could not
perform its first and highest duty its own preaeryaon
Vital this high prerogatve OF States t must De exer
c-ed subordnatou to the clear principles OF justice and
right Whenever from necessity policy State apprG-
pirates public the private property of an individual
il obi ged by law mperitive that 10 virtue of
which makes the appropriation, to give to the party
aeQrieved redress with the injury he has
sustained Upon any other principle the social compact
would work mischief and wrong. The State would have
the right mpoverish the citizen It established ia
protect; to trsmpe these rights OF properly security
for which Of the great objects OF Its creation
Every elementary writer OF authority susains the views
here taken Of the duty and obligation Of States
"When sovereign dspoees OF the possessons Of
mum or an individual the alienation will be valid. Hun
Justice requires that community this individual lie
demnihed a. the public charge. .'-Idtte, IL.
Is the State bound indemnify individuals for the dana
ges they have sustained in war We learn fr Gro
us that authors divided THE question The damages
under co alteration be distinguished into kinds
those done by the State itself the sovereign and
done by the enemy OF the rst kind done debe
rsfeIy and by OF precauon as when field house,
garden belonging private Is taken for the
pose of erecting the spot rampant other
piece where his standing or his store
houses are DESTROYED prevent their being OF 20 the
enemy Such damages be made go0tt the Individual
who should bear only his quota Of the loss Tdtie 43
1--WE must observe this that the King may in two ways
deprive hs subjects Of their right either by way Of
by virtue Of his eminent power But II be do 80 III
last way IL be for public advantage aud then
the subject ought receive il possible slscon foi
the oss he suffers Of the stock Grot'ns b. =
oh. H. sec. T.
The State emiuent properly the goods
of the Sub ect that the Stae those that
not only on extreme necessity the public benefit
add, that the State Il oblp ed TO repair the
damages suffered by any pnbject that of
public stock Neither shall the State be ab-ovGd from hs
obligation though for the present not able TO satisfy but
whenev State capacity, this suspended obligation
shall its force "-GroUs, b. 3, ch. 20 rec. z.
The authorities cited are direct and emphatic, and are
supported by every writer Of rsspectabiy upon publ
aud naons law. Itmay safely b. assumed, the settled
governments bound make just indemnify the c-
zen or subject whenever private property taken for the
public good, convenience, or stfrty.
The limitation imposed the Government Of the