Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1867-11-19

ever. became so formidable that, upon
grounds OF humanity, as well as to give
~ the Government the means 10 assist
in its impression, belligerent rights
were conceded to the insurrectionlsts.
HnmRnity demanded that this should be
done. in order to save the butchering oil
prisoners. If our Government had exc
cuted those captured by its forces, the
Confederate authorities would have re-
taliated. Such result would have an-
swered no good purpose towards sup
pressing the rebellion, and would not
only have lacerated the feelings OF our
own people, but shocked the public SEN
timent OF the world. Congress, there
fore, and the President, wisely and win
the best motives, recognized belligerent
rights in the insurrectionary govern
ment. And such concession at the
same time gave to Congress the au-
thoritv 10 exclude neutral nations from
ali intercourse with the South. As Tar
as such nations were concerned, Con-
gress properly claimed the rights OF war,
and upon that claim declared the block.
AIDE of the Southern ports, and provided
for the capture Of vessels and their car
goes attempting to violate it. Such cap
lures we're made and adjudged to be
lawful by our prize courts. This greatly
aided the Government in bringing the
instruction 10 close. In the hrst oil
these, called the prize cases, decided by
the Supreme Court of the United States,
the opinion contains one or two pas
sages which have been relied upon as
;nst;fving Congress in considering the
States in question as conquered prov
inces This ground has been maintained
with confidence in both Houses. The
rest of the opinion, the author thinks,
shows very plainly that the Court did not
design TO announce any such doctrine.
No case has since been before that
tribunal calling for any correction OF the
misapprehension. In one, however,
before Mr.. Justice Nelson a member OF
that Court, occurring since the termina-
tion of the rebellion, involving the per-
soual rights Of citizen of South Caro-.
lima. he ruled that the constitutional
laws of the Union were thereby enjoyed
and obeyed, and were as authoritative
and binding over, the people OF the State
as in any other portion of the country.
This view is plainly inconsistent with the
pretense that the South is now con-
quered territory.
The Judge places South Carolina upon
the same footing, as far as her rights
and the rights of her people are con,
cerned, as New York or any other OF
what were the loyal States. Since that
ruling, one has been made by Chief |
Justice Chase, in June, 1867, in which |
that Judge refers to the opinion in the |
prize cases, and evidently treats the |
pretense that the Court intended to de
eide that the Southern States were not
now equal States in the Union, to be un-
warrantable. The case was this: A citi-
zen of North Carolina was indebted on
promissory note to citizen OF one OF
the States loyal during the instruction.
Pending the insurrectlon, by force OF
law passed by the Government de .fdcto
of North Carolina confscating such
debts. the debtor was compelled to pay
it to the agent of that State, and he re-
lied upon that payment as his defense.
In his opinion the Chief Justice says
ITO maintain these propositions, the
counsel for the defendant rely upon the
decisions of the Supreme Court of the
United States to the effect that the late
rebellion was civil war, in the prosecu.
ton of which bellgerent rights were ex-
ercised by the National Government and
accorded to the armed forces of the rebel
Confederacy, and upon the decision of
the State Courts during and after the
close of the American war for independ-
ence, which affirmed the validity of con-
fiscations and representations decreed
against the property of nonresident
British subjects and the inhabitants of
colonies or States hostile to the United
Colonies or United States" But these
decisions do not, in our judgment, sus
tain the propositions in support of which
they are cited.
"Tbere is no doubt that the State of
North Carolina, by the acts of the Con-
vention Of May, 1861, by the previous
acts of the Governor of the State, by sub.
seauent acts of all the departments of the
State government, and by the acts Of the
people at the election held after May,
1861, set aside her State government and
and connected under the
national Constitution, with the Govern
ment of the United States and established
q constitution and government conRec-
ted with anothaF pretended government
set up in hostility to the United States,
and entered upon course of active war
fare against the National Government
nor is there any doubt that, by these acts,
the practical relations Of North Carolina
to the Union we're suspended, and very
serious liabilities incurred by those who
were engaged in them.
But the acts did not effect for a mo-
ment the separation Of North CaTpliua
from the Union any more than the acts
of an individual, who commits grave Of
fenses against the State by resisting its
officers and defying its authority, can
separate him from the Stats
In referring to the legal effect of con-
ceding belligerent rights during the war
TO the Confederate Government, and 10
the decision Of the Supreme Court, the
Chief Justice further said In the prize
cases the Supreme Court simply asserted
tho right Of the United States to treat
the insurgents as belligerents, and to
claim from foreign nations the perform
ance of neutral duties under the penal
ties known to international law. The
decision recognized, also, the fact Of the
exercise and concession of helligerent
rights, and affirmed, as a necessary eon-
sequence, the proposition that during the
war all the Inhabitants Of the country
controlled by tho rebellion, and ell the
inhabitants Of the country loyal to the
Union we're enemies reciprocally each of
the other But there is nothing in that
opinion which gives countenance to
the doctrine which counsel endeavor
70 deduce from it-ihat the insurgent