The Cleveland leader. [volume] (Cleveland [Ohio]) 1865-1865, 1865-05-01
me status OF the Surrendered Aru'ieS-


me stains OF tns Surrendered Armies
Parhaps the most interesting qrestion
now OCCUPYING the attention CT the nation,
a,dtbe one on which it is still most invol-
veA IN doubt, is this: What is the status
of Il leading rebels belonging 10 and sur
rendered with Lees army, under General
Grants terms. Now that Johnston's army
has also submitted TO the same terms, ana
as almost the entire military power oil tne
rebellion, on this side of the Mississippi, Is
included in the two surrenders, the ques-
4ion ia one of eugrossing importance The
people are most anxious TO know whether
under these terms the good faith OF the
government is pledged to the perpetual
Immunity Of men like Lee, Ewell, Long
street, Johnston, Besure- ard, Hsrdee, and
Hampton, or whether they are still liable
TO trial snd punishment blythe civil authOri-
ties.
Grsnts terms of surrsnder seem to US
much misunderstood. That they are mill
4ary terms, made by one military man with
another, and regulating only military sf-
fairs, Isl fact so transparent that needs it
only 10 be sta ed 10 be understood. Gen
Grant did not intend, in the terms which
he hiss made, to bestow pardon for ofenses
sgsinst the civil law upon single REBEL
Even hsd be so intended, he would have
had no power 10 carry out his design. His
functions are purely military. he can
grant to no man immunity from prosecu-
tion for crime, whether past, present or
prospective. If there is a man in Lees or
Johnsion's army who bss committed muir
der. robbery, or arson, he is still liable TO
trial, conviction and punishment according
70 law. How much more, then, are the
great traitors who hold high command in
these armies liable to the law which they
have outrs ged-lisble to punishment for
the greatest crime which men can possibly
commit
Another fact has been too generally over
looked. Gen. Grants terms of surrender
promise to those included in the surrender
immunity from disturbance by United
States authority, so long as their parole sub
sists The very nature of parole implies
state of war. Il is given in order that
the person paroled may not take the field
again in that war until it is relinquisbed.
nature, becomes null snd void. Nor can
military convention protect any person af-
ter the cessation Of affairs which 8 military
conVentson suppOses, viz: state Of war.
The armies OF Lee and Johnston are thus
paroled prisoners, free from molestation by
civil authority SO long as they eOntinuepa-
rolled prisoners of war. They msy be de-
clsred exchanged, or by the cessation of
the war they msy lOse their character IS
prisoners Then they are liable to civil
laws, fnot before.
How far it will be deemed wise 10 en-
force the civil law against those who have
thus offended sgsinst it, cannot at present
be determined. Much will depend upon
questions not yet decided-the remaining
military strength of the rebellion-tbe
capture or escape Of its civil lesders-and
the general disposition and temper of the
Southern people. There can be little
doubt however, thst the leading rebels,
especially the pejured villains who vio-
lated their oaths as officers of fhe United
States army to serve in rebellion against
1t, will feel the majesty snd terror Of the
law.