Dallas herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1849-1873, 1866-07-21

tecd, yesterday morning, by Gov.
Watts. %
/. Var between Independent mn.
tIons susponds all commercial or
friendly intercourse between the
citizens of the belligeront powers,
See. / Kent, page Go. Wheaton .
Eaw of Nations, 357, 1868, Vattcl,
SCI. Chitty on Constructs, CTS.
Pillimoro's Law Of Nations. page.
9. Each citizen or inhabitant of
the one becomes the enemy of each
citizen or iihabitant Of the other
Immediately on the commencement
OF the war, | Kent, page 6G, and
authorities there cited. Vattcl, 81 +,
Wheaton, 1855, 366,
q. AL commercial intercourse is
not only suspended, but it is illegal
rs bcing contrary to the laws Of ma.
tions and against tho public policy
Of nations at war. Gritty on Con
tracts 1Sl, and note by American
editor, with authorities there cited
1 Kent, 81. Wheaton, 1855, 1857
md all contracts made between the
inhabitants OF tho belligcrcnt pow
ers arc void, N-' ''' . '''
a.. And all property attempted to
be transported from the one TO the
other is liable to seiznre-is lawful
subject Of capture and prize.
8. The same principles or inter-
national law apply to a civil war
that apply ton war between indie
pendent nations. 'aa h1a,iDi ~
SEQ Prize Cases, 2 Black s he
ports, The HVenico92 Wallace; 3D.
vol. sPhillimore; Mheaton's Inter
national Laws NatteRs Law OF Ma
TONS: nsr ,snvo '"aIo .h p
by the statute of the United
States, of July, 1861. and the proc
]amation OF Presidentllincoln, found
in IL vol U. S. Statutes at large, all
commercial intercourse between the
citizens or inhabitants of the States
in rebellion and other portions of
the United States IS expressly pro-
hibitedLsubject, however, to the
right ofsthe President of the Uni
ted States to grant a special license.
See l21vol.f Statutes. 'fHissl'9
TheoConfederate States passed a
similar law and recognized the
principles of the international law
as applicable to the contest.
mo person in the Confederate or
rebellious States could have legally
paid money to any. citizen or inhab-
liant of the United States. If he
undertook to transmit money to
pay the debts due to northern cred
itors such money would have been
liable to have been seized by both
United iilStates rand Confederate
States. 1t was the duty Of the in
habitants of each OF these belliger-
ent powers to obey these laws of
war and these statutes Of their re-
spective governments, to which @-the
inhabitants of each respective gov
ernment, or belligerent power owed
allegiance. eeaT aa ae7 ah l
IA temporary allegiance was due
to the powers that be, wherever the
authority Of the United States was
displayed and another power reg
nanti substituted, the inhabitants
within Jurisdiction of the power
rcgnant owed temporary allegiance
and obedience to such power reg
.nant. 81 iaE ,oH A5a'2a9 %.
Tho United States being no Ion
ger able to give protection to the
inhabitants within the territory of
the Confederate States, the allegi-
ance due to thenUnited States was
suspended, during the continuance
of the exclusive central possession
and dominion of the Confederate
authorities, and the duty of obey
ing the Confederate authorities dur.
ing such time, necessarily followed.
There can be no duty of allegi-
ance OF of obediance, when there is
no power to protect. See Rice vs..
us. 4Wheaton3f b M
1t necessarily follows from these
premises that interest cannot be
collected during the Continuance Of
the war. oa EDS
This doctrine was applied to debts
due to the subjects Of Great Brit
tain by the inhabitants of the Uni
ted Colonies, during ard after the
Revolutionary War. See the case
of Hoare vs. Allen, 2 Dallas top
page 1O2, and the long note giving
Mr. Jefferson's argument in reply
to the English demand. The same
question was similarly settled in the
case of Blake vs.. Quasb, Sd McCord
$40. Interest is imposed because
90 +ho fa,,lt oP tba dabtor in with