The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-06-22

val, should meet all such attempts to unravel
the threads of human misfortune by the logic
of murder.
Another Muddle in the decentralization
From the Nation
Some of the Generals commanding at the
South being in doubt either as to the extent of
their powers under the Reconstruction act, or
as to the mode in which they should exercise
them, have solicited advice from Washington,
and the President-we may be sure nothing
loath-has called on Mr.. Stanbery, the Attor-
ney- General, to furnish an "opinion" on the
subject. The opinion was laid before the pub
lie in the morning papers on Monday last. A
few people, probably, win read it; but for
the benefit of those who will not read it, its
tenor and effect may be described sufficiently
by saying that it denies to all Military Com
manders at the South the right to do any
thing beyond protecting persons in their
rights of person and property, suppressing
insurrection, disorder, and violence, and pun
ishipg OF causing to be punished all dis
turbers of the public peace or criminals
Consequently, according to Mr. Stanbery, no
commanding officer has any right to remove
any Judge or Mayor or Governor, or interfere
with the process of any civil or criminal court,
or with the operation of any laws actually on
the statute book, or with the obligation Of any
existing and lawful contract, or, in fact, to
meddle in any way with the working of
the State Governments at the South
any more than at the North, except in so far
as may be plainly necessary to repress violence
or insurrection or disorder. All these things,
however, Generals Sckles, Pope and Sheri-
dan have done; and should the President act
ON Mr. Stanbery's opinion, Mayor Monroe,
Judge Abel, and Governor Wells would be
put back in their places; the military COM
manders would thus be humiliated, besides
being shorn of nearly all their authority in
the eyes of the Southern populations; every
obnoxious act of theirs, however just or neces-
sary, would be met by an appeal to the Presi-
dent, and the appeal would be supported by
clouds of political intriguers, and by the time
decision was reached it would have lost all
its value. In fact, during this most important
period, when the new State organization is
preparing and the negro population being called
into political life, the States lately in revolt
would, as long as acts of physical violence or
outrage did not occur in such numbers as to
furnish fair ground for military interference,
remain as completely in the hands of the old
government as if the Reconstruction act had
never been passed.
Now, everybody knows that, whatever the
act may say, this is not what Congress in
tended, and nobody was better satisfied of it
than Mr. Johnson himself. In his message
vetoing the bill he claimed for the military
commanders all the powers under it which
they have been lately exercising, and which
Mr.. Stanbery now denies them-a circum-
stance which has set many people asking who
wrote the message, or, at all events, who sup
piled the law for it. When it appeared, the
popular impression was that the rough out
line, at least, of the scene of horrors which Mr..
ICn1n ota1i in f1yn1xy 30 In
messed under the operation of the new law was
supplied by Mr.. Stanbery, the some gentleman
who now shows that it was one of the most
harmless acts that Congress has ever passed.
Then, it was neither more nor less than the
establishment at the South of military despot-
ism pure and simple, without single mitigat-
ing feature. No,0, it appears it is simply an
authorization to military men to act as police
in aid ofthe local authorities, and to try men
for criminal offenses in the absurdly impro-
bable contingency that the local courts should
refuse to exercise or make any show of exer
cising their authority. Certainly if Mr.. Stan
bery's present construction of the law he cor
rect, somebody cut a very ridiculous figure
last spring when the act was vetoed but
whether it was Mr.. Johnson or his advisers, of
course we have do means of knowing.
The question now is What is to be done or
will be done9 1t is but just to Mr.. Johnson to
say that he did not call for the opinion for his
own guidance and, therefore, its appearance
is no indication that he wishes to put any con-
struction ON the law different from the one he
put on it last spring. But then there is some
danger that, now that it has appeared, he may
act ON it. He is under no obligation to do So
The opinion of the Attorney General is no
more binding on him or ON anybody than the
opinion of any other lawyer off the bench. It
expresses Mr.. Stanbery's own views, ably and
clearly stated, no doubt, and very likely quite
cerrect but it in no way alters the Presidents
duties or responsibilities. He has already de-
clared, as solemnly as a man can, that he con-
siders the law unconstitutional. We have
little doubt that Mr.. Stanbery also thinks it
unconstitutional utterly, wildly unconstitu-
tional. Upon that point not shadow of
doubt, we venture to say, has ever crossed
| the minds of either of them. They have both
accepted it not as a measure which Con-
| gress had a right to pass, or which it was we'll
| for it to pass, but as an evil for which
| there was no earthly remedy. Mr.. Johnson
! well understood that its faithful execution
was not expected or required of him. that it
was the intention of Congress that this should
| be left to generals selected by General Grant;
and in fact, it was well known when the ses-
sion closed that the Presidents meddling in
! any matter not purely one of routine would
| be the signal for his impeachment. The two
| Houses went home leaving this penalty hang
| ing over his head in terTOrem. Therefore, he is
under no moral obligation to interfere with
the actions of the generals in the South in any
way, unless they should commit violations of
| substantial justice. He does not owe it to his
own dignity to do so, nor yet to the interests
of society. Nothing, everybody will confess,
would be gained by the reversal of the action
n