The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1866-04-28

cltZen, OWING partial allegiance, at least to both
governments, could not commit the crime Of trea-
son, when his action was controlled by State au-
thority. SO far is this principle carried in Eng
land that the citizen is held exoneratad from the
crime OF treason even for supporting usurper
against the rightful sovereign. He quotes BLACK
STONE, who says:
in other words usurper that hath got possession
OF the throne, is King, within the meaning of
TIE statute as there is temporary allegiance due
and temporary protection of the public; and there
fore treasons committed against Henry vi. were
punished under Edward w., though all the line Of
by act OF Parliament" And again "When, there
fore usurper is in possession, the subject is e1-
o;tsed and Jstysed in obeyinE and giving him as
distance: otherwise under usurpation no man
could be safe, II the lawful prince had right to
hang him for obedience to the power in being, as
the usurper would certainly do for disobedience."
+ Reasoning on the basis Of these we'll establish
cd principles, Judge CLAYTON says: ..
.It is evident that, il this doctrine be correct.
and treason cannot be committed by rendering
assistance to o usurper who has possession OF the
government against the lawful prince, most GER
tainly the citizen Of State, owing not only tenn
porary, but permanent allegiance to the State
government, cahnot be auienable to the general
government. for rendering obedience to the au-
thority OF his State, notwithstanding by so doing
he will violate his Federal allegiance 4 contrary
doctrine In conflict between State and general
from the crime Of treason impossible; for the
obedience OF one would constitute treason against
the other %. '# ..-n -
The Judge proceeds to show that the late war
could not, then be considered as q mere rebellion
but that it was genuine ,oar between belligerent
powers-a "ciyil war;" as he terms it 1--WE think
improperly that individuals engaged in it
are not personally responsible for acts committed
in obedience to the authority Of their respective
governments.
This position is sustained by full array Of
authorities among them by decisions of the Uni
ted States Courts during che war; The next step
In the argument is thus stated:
'We cannot hold that the suspension of the
Federal Constitution and laws left the Confederate
States in perfect anarchy, with no law controlling
OF Bn
functions Of government which they possessed
before the war, and created a de tdcto govern
possessed authority to enfore the law and give
ample protection and validity to the property,
rights and contracts of the citizens. The common
and municipal laws of the States regulating trans
actions and contracts between citizens were not
affected by the war, but remained intact within
the jurisdiction of the Confederate States"
Judge CLAYTON then proceeds to consider the
powers Of the Confederate Government during it's
de tacto existence, and shows, very cenclusiyely.
that, as ,oar measure, it possessed the power Of
issuing treasury notes, and that this power was
entirely independent Of any question of its char
acter de jure. He shows, also, that the Federal
Government has recognized the validity of DUR
chases made with these notes. by seizing cotton
and other property Of the Confederate States, the
title to which was acquired by the Confederate
Government through purchases made with these
treasury notes. .,r ,,.F ....
From these considerations the conclusion is
drawn with irresistible force, that contracts. Of
which the confederation Was the payment of Con-
federate money, during the de Jacto existence of
the Confederate Government, are valid and obi.
gatory.
Our limits Of space and time prohibit any fur
ther statement Of this able and interesting de-
ciBion, although It is impossible to condense 1t
without injustice to the argument. It is, in our
judgment, exhaustive and irrefutable.
The prayer Of the bill was granted, and a de-
cree entered for the delivery of the cotton to the
complainants, or, in case the cotton could not be
had, for the value Of 1.-THE defendant to pay the
costs of the suit. ....