The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1867-05-09
!, lately in rebellion until that bodv ,hsll

lately In rebellion until that BODY shall
have declared such State entitled to re-
presentation. Whether this action of Con-
gress 'cds right, proper, or erpedient, is a
matter ,eih ,chich this court has no concern.
Certain it is that these States had practi-
cally severed their connection with the
Government of the United States for the,
time being. The same Legislatures that
we're sending senators to the rebel Con-
grcss could not at the same time send Sc
majors to the Congress of the United
States. The time ,ohen they had so far Sc
vered their connection with the rebel Go
vernmcnt and returned to their allegiance
to the Government of the United States
was question for Congress to determine.
This court cannot recognize the validity
and binding force Of laws passed by Le-
gislature whose members had sworn allie
glance to the rebel Government, and were
using their power and official position for
the purpose Of overthrowing the Govern
ment of the United States. When such
State shall be so far restored to its prac-
tical relations and allegiance to the Go
vernment of the United States as to be
entitled to exercise the power of sove-
reignty belonging to one of the States is
also a question for Congress to determine.
Until Congress recognizes the status Of such
States as restored to their allegiance and
entitled to exercise the rights of sovereignty
as States of the Union, this court cannot so
recognize them.
1t is true that Virginia occupies a posi-
tion somewhat different from other States
lately in rebellion. She had a government
which was recognized by Congress until
the close of the Thirty seventh Congress,
and a part, if not all, of the Thirty eighth.
But the Legislature organized after the
surrender of General Lee, which met on
the first Monday of December, 1865, Con-
gress has steadily refused to recognize. 1t
is not intended to inquire whether Con-
gress acted consistently or not in recog-
nizing the government so long as it did, and
refusing to recognize it longer. Doubtless
they would have been justified in refusing
to recognize it much sooner than they did.
But it is the fact Of the refusal, and not the
reason for 1t, that the court haze to deal Nth.
1t is not seen how the power of Congress
over the subject can be questioned. Con-
gress surely is not bound to recognize the
government of State in open and fragrant
TeDeIllOn. Anu WlletncT III is Ill IeDclilou
or not is question for Congress to deter
mine. So this court held in the prize cases
in Blacks Reports. And Congress hav-
ing once determined that State is in re-
bellion, who shall say when she has changed
her status and become loyal State
But it is also submitted that this law is
imperative because the transfer Of the
counties became fact accomplished by
the subsequent ratification and consent of
Congress. A joint resolution of March 10,
1866, not only consents to the compact and
agreement, but it thereby recognizes the
transfer" This joint resolution was mani
testify designed to have retrospective
operation, and to meet and overreach any
attempt that might be made to invalidate
it. The effect of it is to legalize the
transfer from the time it was completed
by the action of the States, and it relates
back to the time of the transaction which
it ratified, and has the same legal effect as
if it had passed on the day or before the
State of West Virginia accepted the trans
fer.
Andrew Hunter and B. R. Curtis for
Virginia; Stanton, Allison, and Reverdy
Johnson, for West Virginia.-National In
telltgenCer.