The tri-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1866-1868, 1867-06-20

tive treassntlon to plain overt acts, bring
ing TICS in conspicuous relief as being al
>tays, and in essence, reasonable. .se-U United
War; theieiore leyt led RRaa13ddblic under the
States 9y ci aathar; ., new State gov
p reuenue Of n nr4iI or of the so-cahed
G ern,1eas =. loil91ent which assumeefea-
t G4nie of rat gsSsSRfederate states,n
son aoainssf6e United Sts.tteHby some siren
It iasSeen IlhSat the North Carolina
uousIy maaiaatta1se1, which purported to ore re-
OT3Iffhhe North Carolina Ordinance OF LOO;
uh;ch the Constitution OF the Unlted
10y 49, W. 1nos ratified. and/to repeal also all
o Sases by which the assent OF North
suusI was givsd to amendments OF the
CCallLooeitution, did|in fact repeal that Orol,
z1ce and tho,e acts, and thereby aosoiveo
,|the people ofthe State from all oDilga5lon
as citizensof the United States and made 1t
imnossiHe to commit treason by levying
war a<ainst the National government.
NO elaborate discussion of the theoretical
J Question thus presented seems now to be ne
lcessary. That question, as practical one,
is at rest and is not likely to be revived. 1t
is enough to say here, in our Judgment, the
answer which it has received from events, is
that which the soundest construction OF the
Constitution warrants and requires.
Nor can we agree with some persons, dis
tinguished by abilities and virtues, who IN
sst when rebellion attains the proportions
and assumes the character of civil war, it is
purged of its reasonable character and can
only be punished by the defeat of its armies,
the disappointment of its hopes. and the
calamities incident to unsuccessful war.
Courts have no policy and can exercise no
political powers. They can only declare the
law. On what sound principle, then, can
we say judicially that the levying of war
ceases to be treason when the war becomes
formidable that war levied by ten men or
ten hundred, is certainly treason, but is no
longer such when levied by ten thousand or
ten hundred thousand that the armed at
tempts of few, attended by no serious dan
ger to the Union and suppressed by slight
exertions of the public force, come, unques-
tionably, within the constitutional definition.
but attempts by vast combination, con-
trolling several States, putting great armies
in the field menacing with imminent peril
the very life of the Republic and demand
ing immense efforts and immense expendi-
lures of treasure and blood for their defeat
and suppression, swell beyond the hounda-
ries of the definition, and become innocent
in the proportion of their enormity
But it is said that this is the doctrine of
the Supreme Court. We think otherwise.
In modern times it is the usual practice of
civilized governments attacked by organized
and formidable rebellion, to exercise and
concede belligerent rights. Instead, under
such circumstances, of Furnishing rebels when
made prisoners in war as criminals, they agree
on cartels for exchange and make other mutu-
ally beneficial arrangements and, instead
of insisting upon offensive terms and deslg
nations in intercourse with the civil or mill
tary chiefs, treat them, as far as possible,
without surrender of essential principles,
like forei gn foes engaged in regular warfare.
But these are concessions made by the
Legislative and Executive departments of
government in the exercise Of political dis
cretion and in the interest of humanity, to
mitigate vindictive passions inhamed by
civil conflicts, and prevent the frightful evils
of mutual reprisals and oscillations. They
establish no rights except during the war.
And it is true that when war ceases
and the authority of the regular government
is fully re-established the penalties of viola
ted law are seldom inflicted upon many.
Wise governments never forget that the
criminality of individuals is not always or
often equal to that of the acts committed by
the organization with which they are con-
nected. Many are carried into rebellion by
sincere though mistaken convictions; or
hurried along by excitements due to social
and State sympathies, and even by the COM
pulsion of public opinion not their own
When the strife of arms is over, such gov
ernments, therefore, exercising still their po-
litical discretion, address themselves mainly
to the work of Cancellation and restoration,
and exert the prerogative of mercy rather
than that of justice. Complete remission is
usually extended to large classes by amnesty
or other exercise OF legislative or executive
authority, and individuals not included in
these classes with some exceptions of the
greatest offenders, are absolved by pardon,
either absolutely or upon conditions pre-
scribed by the government
These principles, common to all civilized
nations, are those which regulated the action
of the Government of the United States du-
ring the war of the rebellion and have regu-
lated its action since rebellion laid down its
arms.
In some respects the forbearance and lib
crafty of the nation exceeded all example
While hostilities were yet fragrant one act of
Congress practically abolished the death
penalty for treason subsequently committed,
and another provided mode in which citi-
zens of rebel States maintaining a loyal ad-
hesion to the Union, could recover after war,
the value OF their captured or abandoned
property.
The National Government has steadily
sought to facilitate restoration with adequate
guarantees of union, order and equal rights.
On no occasion, however, and by no act
have the United States ever renounced their
constitutional jurisdiction over the whole
territory or over all the citizens of the Re
public, or conceded to citizens in arms
against their country the character of alien
enemies, or admitted the existence of any
government, de tacto, within the boundaries
of the Union, hostile to ITSELF
In the Prize Cases the Supreme Court sim
ply asserted the right of the United States to
treat the insurgents as belligerents, and to
claim from foreign nations the performance
of neutral duties under the penalties known
to international law. The decision recog-
nized, also, the fact of the exercise and
concession of belligerent rights, and affirm
ed, as necessary consequence, the propo-
sition thatF'during the war, all the IN
habitants of the country controlled by the
rebellion, andsall the inhabitants of the coun-
try loyal to the Union were enemies recipro-
cally each of the other. But there is nothing
in that opinion which gives countenance to
the doctrine which counsel endeavor to de-