The Cecil Whig. [volume] (Elkton, Md.) 1841-current, 1865-09-23

rlSht-the Summum Jus Is still recognized IN
exceptional cases where the cause of the
war or the character of the belgerent, OIL
the safety of the victors justify its exercise.
The same thing may be said of the seizure
of property and land. Halleck $50 says
some modern writers-Hautefeuille, for ex-
ample-contends for the ancient rule, )'that
private property on land may be subject to
seizure. They are undoubtedly correct,
with regard to the general abstract right, as
dcduccd from the laws of nature and ancient
of practice" Vattel says: "When, there
fore, he has subdued hostile nation, he I'M
dcniably may in the first place, do himself
justice, respecting the object which has given
rise to the war and indemnity himself for
the expenses and damages which he has
sustained by it." And at page 1863: IA
conquerer, who has taken up arms not only
against the sovereign, but against the nation
herself, and whose intention it was to sub
due fierce and savage people, and once for
all to reduce an obstinate enemy, such a
conquerer may, with justice, lay burdens on
the conquered nation, both as compensa
ton for the expenses of the war, and as a
punishment"
l am happy to believe that the Govern
ment has come to this conclusion. cannot
otherwise see how Captain Wirz can be tried
by a Court Martial at Washington for acts
done by him at Andersonville. He was in
no way connected with our military organi
cation, nor did he as citizen connect HIM
self with our army so as to bring his case
within any of the Acts of Congress. If he
committed murder in Georgia, and Georgia
was Il State in the Union, then he should be
trie! according to her laws. The General
Government has no jurisdiction over such
crime, and the trial, and execution of this
wretch by a United States Military Court
would be illegal. But if he was an officer
OF a beligerent enemy, making war as an
independent people, now being conquered
it is competent holding them as a conquer
ed foe to try him for doing acts contrary to
the laws of war, and if found guilty to exc
cute or otherwise punish him. As am sure
the loyal man at the head of the Govern
mcnt will not involve the nation in illegal
acts and thus set Il precedent injurious to
our national character, am glad to believe
that hereafter we shall treat the enemy as
conquered, and remit their condition and
reconstruction to the sovereign power of the
nation.
In short. all writer's agree that the victor
may inllict punishment upon the vanquished
enemy even to the taking of his life, liberty,
or the confiscaton of all his property but
that this extreme right is never exercised
except upon cruel, barbarous, Obstinate.
or dangerous foe who has waged an unjust
war.
Upon the character of the bclligcrcnt and
the justice of the war, and the manner of
conducting it, depends our right to take the
lives, liberty and property of the bclligcrent.
This war had its origin in treason without
one spark Of justice. 1t was prosecuted be-
fore notice Of it, by robbing our forts and
armories, and our navy-yards by stealing
our money from the minis and repositories,
and by surrendering our forts and navies by
perjurers who had sworn to support the Con.
stitutlon. In its progress our prisoners, by
the authority of their governments were
slaughtered in cold blood. Ask Fort Pillow
and Fort Wrgncr. Sixty thousand of our
prisoners have been deliberately starved to
death because they would not enlist in the
rebel armies. The graves at Andersonvile
have each an accusing tongue. The purpose
and avowed object of the enemy ''to found
an empire whose corner stone should be
slavfy," render its perpetuity or revival
dangerous to human liberty.
Surely, these things are sufficient to justify
the exercise of the extreme rights of war
ito execute, to imprison, to confscate. y
How many captive enemies it would be
proper to execute, as an example to nations
| leave others to judge. am not fond of
sanguinary punishments, but surely some
victims must propitate the names of our
starved, murdered, slaughtered martyrs
court martial could do justice according to
law.
But we propose to confscate all the estate
of every rebel bclligerent whose estate was
worth 10000, or whose land exceeded two
hundred acres in Quantity. Policy if not
justice would require that the poor, the ig-
norant, and the coerced should be FORGIVEN.
They followed the example and teachings of
their wealthy and intelligent neighbours
The rebellion would never have originated
with them. Fortunately those who would
thus escape would form a large majority Of
the people, though possessing but small
portion of the wealth. The proportion of
those exempt compared with the punished
would be believe about nine-tenths.
There are about six millions of freemen
in the South The number of acres of land
is 4G5, 100000. Of this those who own
above two hundred acres each, number
about 10000 persons, holding in the aggre.
gate together with the States) about 1884,
900 acres, leaving for all the others be-
low 200 each about II, 200, 900 of acres. BY
thus FORGETTING the estates of the leading
rebels, the Government would have 1914, OOO,.
900 of acres beside their town property, and
yet nine tenths of the people would remain
untouched. Divide this land into conven.
lent farms. Give if you please forty acres