Staunton vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1860-1896, 1866-09-14

tee. II ilitc We desHe 10 lay Erloic Jul ie"o
ers the views of Mr. Baldwin, we are unwlll-
ing that they shall be construed as an ex-
preston of the sentiment Of this community.
Some may view this matter as does Mr..
Baldwin, but we think that very few, here
or elsewhere, will agree with him in the
opinion he states as lawyer. If anything
is plainly laid down in the law books, it is
the de6nition of what constitutes ctrit asar
in eontradistinction to rebellion.
Even in cases of popular commotion, in
surrection or sedition, not rising to the dig
nifty Of civil war, Vattel says, (Chap. XVIII
Of Civil War, page All and all modern pub
licists agree with him, s.that while every
citizen should even patiently endure evils
which are not insupportable, rather than dis
turb the public peace, denial of justice on
the part of the sovereign, or effected delays
can alone excuse the furious transport of a
people whose patience has been exhausted,
and even justify them if the evils be intoler-
aolc and the oppression great and manifest.
That in such cases the conduct of the Sow
ereign shall at the same time be most conso-
nant to justice and salutary to the State. Altho
it be his duty to repress those who unneces :
sarily disturb the public peace, he is bound
to show clemency. towards unfortunate per-
sons, to whom just causes of complaint have
been given, and whose sole crime consists in
the attempt to do themselves justice. They
have been deficient in patience rather than f.
deity. Subjects who rise against their Prince
without cause deserve punishment, yet even in
this case, on account of the number Of the
delinquents clemency becomes duty in the
sovereign"
But the same author, when he comes to
speak Of civil war, says ''when party. is
formed in State, who no longer obey the
sovereign, and are possessed of sufficient
strength to oppose him, or when in Repub-
lie the nation is divided into two opposite
factions, and both sides take up arms, this is
called cirI war. Solae writers confine
this term to just Instruction of the sub
jects against their Sovereign, to distinguish
that lawful resistance from rebellion. which
is an open ard unjust resistance. But what
appellation will they give to war which
arises in Republic torn by two factions, or
in Monarchy between two competitors for
the crown? Custom appropriates the term Of
civil war to every war between the members
OF one and the same political society IF it
be between part Of the citizens on one side
and the Sovereign with those who con-
tinue in obedience to him on the other,
provided the nlalcontents have any reason
for taking up arms, nothing further is re-
quired toentitle such disturbance to the name
of ciuH acor and not that Of rebellion
* The Sovereign indeed, never
fails to bestow the appellation Of rebels Oh
all such of his subjects as openly resist him,
but when the latter have acquired sufficient
strength to give him effectual opposition, and
to oblige him to carry on the war against
them according to the established rules he
must necessarily submit to the use Of the
term civil war"
- A civil war breaks the bands Of society
force ana effect. 1t produces in the nation
two Independent parties, who consider each
other as enemies, and acknowledge no COM
mon judge. Those two parties, therefore,
must necessarily be con sidered, as thencefor-
ward constituting at least for time, two sep
nrate bodies, two distinct societies. Though
one of the parties may have been to blame III
breaking the unity of the State and resisting
the lawful authority they are not the less d.
vidcd in fact. Besides who shall Judge them?
Who shall pronounce on which side the right
or the wrong lies? On earth they have no
common superior. They stand therefore,
in precisely the same predicament, as two ma
tons, who engage in a contest, and, being
unable to come to an agreement, have recourse
to arms. * x = They decide their quarrel by
arms as two different nations would do The
obligation to observe the common laws of
war to each other is therefore absolute-in-
dispensably binding on both parties, and the
same which the law of nature imposes on all
nations in transactions between State and
State"
The only exception Which thisauthor makes
to that immunity of the citizens of each con-
tending party, which belongs to the citizens
of independent States, is that * when the
Sovereign has subdued the opposite party.
and reduced them to submit and sue for peace,
he mag except from the amnesty the authors
of the disturbances, the heads of the party
lie may bring them to legal trial and pun
ISL them if they be found gnilty. He may
act IN this manner particularly on occasion
of those Disturbances, in Which the interests
of the people are not so much the object in
view, as the private aims of some powerful
individuals and which rather deserve the ap-
pellation Of rerolt than of GIRL aeor"
This exception does not embrace the case
Of the Southern Confederacy, where no pow
erful individuals interviewed, but which was
emphatically a movement Of the people, to
promote the supposed interests of the people
alone, in Which the leaders of the people were
their servants. Under the light of the fore
going authority, which We believe is the ex-
ponent of the views Of all publicists since the
days when the head of Charles of England
fell from the block, we are at loss to con
ceivc how the crime of treason can be attrib
1ted to the citizens Of the Confederate States.
in consequence of acts done during the late
war, when the North and South sestood IN
precisely the same predieament, as two ma