Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1866-04-08

LEGAL IETELLIGENCE-Unit5d States
Great and District CoU7ts.-The cases
Of MeCloud vs.. barge " Navy 2O5, and
McCIoud vs.. barge, name unknown
were submitted after some further argu-
ment. The former case was dismissed
ia the latter Judgment for salvage va
rendered, and sn order Of sale entered.
The following cases were continued
by consent, viz: Merrill vs.. Bans Of
West Tennessee Peters ct al VS.. Booker
ct al. Jelly vs.. McMsnus. The case Of
Shapleigh vs.. Surdam s Hough came up
again, and the order for appointment Of
receiver renewed.
The motion in the case Of Brinkley ct
al. ". the Memphis Cotton Factory and
owners, was argued, and r. c. Brinkley
appointed receiver.
United States vs.. Gen. 7. RuCker.
Presentment for treason in the circuit
court of the United States for the district
Of West Tennessee. In this case the
court rendered the following decision;
The defendant being under arrest upon
q capiut issued from the United States
Circuit Court, by his attorney, moved
the Court to be discharged there!r0m,
upon the ground that he was one Of those
embraced in the terms Of the surrender
and agreement Of c-apitulatiOn between
Generals sherman and Johnston, by
which il was stipulated that, upon the
condition Of his not again taking I'D arms
against the Government Of the United
States, and ObeyiDg the laws Of the State
where he resided, be should not be mo-
Tested BIZ the authorities Of the United
States. The motion was discussed ct
considerable length by the counsel Of the
defendant, and several authorities relied
on % sustain ID. The Court said: "This
question Is not q new y 70 the Court
So far as the convention or agreement
entered into between Generals Grant and
Lee. in command Of the respective bellig-
s-ent forces, was concerned, and the
couutarpart Of the same which was made
bv and between Generals Sherman and
Johnston uBOn the surrender Of the army
of the latter 70 General Sherman,
the power Of these Generals TO make
such an agreement could not be ques-
toned, and the terms OF capltuiatlon pro-
vfded therein would be equally binding
upon both parties 70 the same. And, the
good faith md honor OF the United
States being pledged 10 its fulhlments, IL
would not only bs the pleasure but the
futv Of this court to carry out, IS Tar as
LES Ia its power, the terms OF that agree
went 81 thew were understood and ac-
cenfe6 at the time Of the surrender. But
his like any ether contract which a
eourt might be called upon 70 Interpret,
must bs sabiected 70 q rigid scrutiny
and by q confederation of the SUBJECT as
well as the terms Of the contrael 70 as
certain what was the hlteRtl9a OK ne
parties contracting. In considering ms
contract and the terms Of capit1latlon
made by Ii, we must LOOK - al the cir
cumstsuces surrounding Ii, the particular
points OF stipul8tions embraced in II .
the objects and purposes for which 10 was
entered into. 1t Is unnecessary for the
o 70 r-ecapituiate the unhappy eOndi-
ion Of the country, or the position Of the
resBective parties at the time when
these conventions or agreements were
made. Hheg ere well known 70 all and
form a part Of the history Of the country.
The power Of the Government was being
eXerled for the purpose Of suppEasslng a
most formidable resistance to the AUTHOR
ity and Jaws Of the United States. The
country was engaged in q gigantic civil
war. and it vas while Il vas in this con-
ditlon that these conventions o. agree
rnents were made between the COM
manders respectively Of the armies Of the
Goverument and the hcstile forces. The
General officers IN command Of the forces
offha Government had the powerto make
such terms with The enemy As would the
most sneedily determine and end the con-
6ict. ihfs power il may be- assumed,
thsv exercised with the approval Of
The President, who was their military
superior, sud wa purely q military
power which the laws Of war sanctioned,
and on such could have no wider scope
or extended effects than Il was the prov
inee Of a military commander 10 grant
It was the exercise Of 3 belligerent right,
sanctioned by the laws Of war, ard not
that 81 sovssigav a. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS