Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1866-05-02
MARTIAL LAW I'm THESOUTH-
ERN = RATES.

DENTS anH0tion-ImPOrtant Or
der by mai. Gen. Candy.
New Orleans April gO) Correspondence of the New
York Word1
Yesterday morning the following order
from Gen. Candy was published. 1t Is so
important that l give it to you in full. 1t
will be seen that. under instructionSetrom
the War Department, Gen. Candy declares
that the Presidents proclamation does not
put an end to martial law; nor does 1t take
out of the hands of the military authorities
the jurisdiction over Oiienses committed
prior to its promulgation. The only ma
terial change ia our States is that the ju-
risdiction conferred on military cdurts by
the act of Congress, approye March 3,
1868, and other acts. is suspended. why
| the word abrogated wils not used, was not
! very clear. If the result tlows from the
| legal operation Of the proclamation, and
does not depend merely on the will of the
executive, something more than "suspen-
| sion" must ensue.
After quoting the Presidents proclama-
tion in full, the general orders continue as
| follows: "'
/ The foregoing proclamation OF the Presi-
| dent of the United States Is published Of
4 flcially to the troops in this Department;
| and in conformity with instructions from
| UnG w udJtu n ADIll iCOOS
approved blythe President, the following
! rules areprescribed for the Information and
| government of the officers and men of this
! command: '.'''
| /. The proclamationd does not remove mar
| tial law or operate in any way upon the
! bureau of refugees, freedmen and abandon
| ed lands in the exercise of itslegitimate ju-
| risdiction under the act of Congress APP
proved March 3, 1865, and "under such
| rules and regulations as may be prescribed
| by the head of the bureau, and approved
| by the Presidents" but resort will not be
| had to military tribunals when justice can
be attained through the medium of civil au-
thority. ..
2. Does not effect the jurisdiction of mil
| itary tribunals over offenses committed pri-
| or to its promulgatiOn, and which then
came legitimately within their jurisdiction I;
| but, in all cases where arrests have been
made or proceedings instituted for olfenses
! committed subsequent to its date, the case
will be dismissed and the accused parties
! discharged from custody and turned over
to the proper civil authority.
3. 1t does not affect the exclusive juris-
diction of the United States in all cases of
captured or abandoned property the pro-
| lection of the officers and agents ofthe Gov
ernmentinthe possession and control ofsuch
property until disposed of by the author
ity of tie United States; and the protec-
tion of private individuals in their titles to
such property, derived from the United
States.
4. 1t does not affect or impair IN any way
the duty of protecting from civil prosecu-
ton. or from suits in the State or municipal
courts, the persons who, under the orders
from the War Department of January 12
1866, are entitled to such protection. (See
General Orders No. 8, Headquarters, De-
partment of Louisiana, OF January IS,
1860 .,. ...
5. The jurisdiction conferred on military
courts by the act of Congress, approved
March 2, 1863, and by the 18th section of
the act of Congress, approved March3, 1863,
and other statutes, and limited in its opera
tion to slime of war, insurrection or re-
bellion," over certain Ofienses committed
by persons who are subject to the rules and
regulations made for the government of the
military and naval forces of the United
States and subject to the articles of war, is
suspended from and after the date of the
proclamation, as to ofienses committed after
that date. .....
All proceedings before military courts
for such otfenses, that have been committed
accused parties will be held in custody until
they can be turned over to the proper civil
authority having jurisdiction over such
offenses. Commanding officers will imme-
diately report all such cases to department
headquarters, for such orders as the case
may require. . .' .rH. H . mi,
6. In the caseof any writ or other process
Issuing from a State or municipal court,
against any person imprisoned or any prop
erty held by authority of the United States,
the officer or agent in whose custody or
control the said person or property may be
will make a respectful return to the writ or
process, setting forth the fact that the said
person or property Is subject to the judicial
or executive Jurisdiction, as the case may
be, of the United States, and is so held by
him, together with such other facts as may
be material to the case. ....-. ...-.s A.
Z. If any person shall combine to oppose
by force the authority OF the Unied States,
or by power to hinder or delay the eXecu-
tion of any law, or seize any property Of
the United States, or by force or intimida-
tion to prevent any person from accepting
or exercising any office under the United
States, the military authorities will take
such measures as may be needful to protect
the property of the Government and the
persons of its agents, and will promptly re-
port the facts and the evidence in support
of them, to the end that the offenders may
be prosecuted under the act Of Congress,
approved July 81, 1861. .'',a
s. The division between the United States
and State jurisdiction is not always distinct
ly marked; but in all cases where the Of
tense is in violation of any law of Congress
and the Jurisdiction Is committed to the
courts of the United States, or when the
offense has been committed at any place
where the jurisdiction has been ceded or is
reserved, the process must issue from a
court of the United States. Officers will be
guided in their action by the principles es-
tablished by the Supreme Court in the case
of Ableman VS.. Booth, q Howard, 506. In
cases where concurrent jurisdiction may
be exercised, the offenders will be turned
over to the civil authorities for trial, un-
less for evident and satisfactory reasons
Justice cannot be attained through the me-;
dium of civil courts, or unless the prisoners
have already been arraigned before mill
tary court and have made their pleas. .,a
0. Commanding officers are enjoined to
see that there be no reasonable grounds of
conflict between the civil and military au-
thorities; and in the case of any process is
suing from a court of the United States
military aid will be given, when necessary,
to enforce it.; but only. when the process
has been issued by competent authority.
The civil authorities of the State will be
treated with Difference and respect; but no
military interference will be authorized eX-
cept upon requisition by the proper author
ity, and after the means under the control
of that authority have been exhausted 2
10. In all cases of the arrest by military