The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1867-07-31

y -. Y! II - = 3S
j ground. It is new title acquired by
! war. 1T applies only -tost territory, tor
4 goods or moYeable5 things regularly cap;
I tured in war are acalled ea.'booty, = or. it
!. taken yindiyidual soldiers "plunder.s' ~
There is not a; foot of land in any one.
i of these ten, States which the. United
States holds by, conquest, save only such
land as did not belong to .either OF these
Estates or to any individual owner
i T mean such lands as did belong to the
4 pretended Government called the Confed-
i crate States. These. lands we may claim
5lsto. hold by conquest. AS to all other land
cor. territory, whether belonging to the
State or to individuals, the Federal Gov
Il ernment has now no more title or right
4 to it than it. had before the rebellion.
Over our forts, arsenals, navy yards, Gus
s| tom houses and other Federal property
J. situate in these States we now hold, not
i blythe title of conquest, but by our old.
! title, acquired by purchase or ondemna-
! tion for public use with compensation to
. former owners. We have not conquered,
I these places, but have simply 'srepossess-
J. edn them.&eH we require more sites for
!. forts, custom houses or other public use,
n we. must acquire the title to- them by
j, purchase OF, appropriation in the reguler
: mode, Atthis moment the United States,
Bin the. acquisition of sites for national
!. cemeteries in, those States, acquires title
). in the same way. The Federal courts
{ sit in court houses owned OF leased by
;] the United States. not in the court
houses Of the States The United States
pays each of these, States for the use
!, Of its iails. Finally, the United States
!. levies its direct taxes and its internal
revenue upon the property in those States,
including the productions of the lands
within their territorial limits-not by
way of levy and contribution in the char
!, acter. of conquerer, but in the regular
!. way of taxation, under the same laws
!. which apply to all. other States of the
u Union. q
4 ~ From first: to last, during the rebellion
a and since, the title of each ofthese States
:. to the. lands and public buildings owned
4 by them has never. BEEN disturbed, and
u not a foot ofsit has. ever been acquired by
{, the United States even under a title by
J, confscation, and not a foot of it has ever
4 been taxed under Federal law.
j, Inconclusion l must respectfully ask
! the attention Of Congress to the conside-
:. ration of. one more question arising under
:: this bill. It vests in the military COM
|. .mander, subject only to the approval of
). the General of the army Of the United
:. States, an unlimited power to remove from
E. Office any civil or military officer in each
: of these ten States and the further pow
], er, subject to the same. approval, to detail
}, ), or appoint any military officer or soldier
]: of the u United States to perform duties OF
J. the officer 80 removed, and to fill all the
J, vacancies occasioned in those States by
j. death, resignation or otherwise.
: The military appointee thusrequired to
: perform the dutiesgof civil officer ac-
J. cording to the laws of the State, and as
J. such required to take an oath, is, for the
j. time being, civil officer Whatsis his
3S character? Is he a civil officer of the
). State. or a. civil officer of the United
: States !? If, he is a civil officer Of the
:. State, where is the Federal power, under
our Constitution, which authorizes his
appointment by any Federal officer? If,
!. however, ho is to be considered a civil
!, officer Of the United, States, as his ap:
: pointment and oath would seem to indi-
J, cate, where is the authority for his ap-
pointment vested by the Constitution ?
f The power Of appointment of all officers
!, of the United States, civil or military,
! where not provided for in the Constitu-
Z ton, is vested in the President by and
4 with the advice and consent of the SEN
ate, with this exception-that Congress
may by law vest the appointment of such
inferior officers as they think proper in
the President alone, in the courts Of law,
or in the heads Of Departments. But
J. this bill, if these are to be considered in
! ferior officers within the meaning of the
! Constitution, docs not provide for their
T appointment by the President alone, or
j, the courts of law, or by the heads of de-
!. partments, but vests the appointment in
:, one subordinate. executive officer. So
{ that if we put this question and fix the
character Of the military appointee either
: way, this provision of the bill is equally
. opposed to the Constitution.
Take the case of a soldier OF, officer ap-
: pointed to perform the Office of Judge in
one of. these States, and as such to ad-
!. minister the proper laws Of the State.
Where is tho authority to be found in the
!. Constitution for vesting in military Or
! an executive officer strict judicial flnc-
tions to be exercised under State law |?
!. It has been again and again decided by
the Supreme Court Of the United States
that acts of Congress which have attempt
ed to vest executive powers in tho judi
cial courts, orjudges Of the United States,
are not warranted by the Constitution.
If. Congress cannot clothe judge with
merely executive duties, how can
l,theu clnthe an officer or soldier of the ar.