The Cadiz sentinel. [volume] (Cadiz, Ohio) 1864-1911, 1867-07-24


States are described not as Territories bu
rs States; so much for continuous Legislative
recognition. fhe instances cited. however
fall far short Of all that might be enumera
'ed. The Executive recognition. as is "
known, has been frequent aud unwavcrinp
the ,ame may be said as to Judicial recncni
ton throughout the Supreme Court of th.
United States. That august tribunal. from
first to last, in the administration of its du
ties on the bench and upon the circuit ha,
never failed to recognize these ten commu
mites rs legal States Of TIE Union.
The cases in that Court upon appeal and
writ OF error from these States when the
rebellion began, have not been dismissed or
any idea ot ees alton of Jurisdiction They
were carefully continued from term to tern
until the rebellion was entirely subdued and
peace established. They were called f.,
argument and consideration as if no insur.
rection had interviewed. New cases occur.
ring since the rebellion have come from
those States before that Court by writ Of
error and appeal and even by original suit.
These cases are entertained by that tribunal
in the exercise ofacknowledgod jurisdiction,
which could not attach to them il they had
come from any political body, other than a
State OF the Union; finally in the allotment
1T their circuits, made by the judges at the
December term, 1865, every one of these
States Is put on the same footing of legality
with ali other States. Virginia and North
Carolina being part of the Fourth Circuit
are allotted TO the Chief Justice; South
Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama and
Mississippi constitute the Fifth Circuit, and
are allotted to the late Nr. Justice WAYNE;
Louisiana, ArkaLsas and Texas are alotted
to the Sixth Judicial Circuit, in which there
is vacancy Oh the bench. The Chief jus.
tice, in the exercise of his duty, has recent
ly h. Id Circuit Court in North Carolina
II North Carolina is not State of this Tn
ion, the Chief;ius'ice had no authority to
hold Court there, and every Judgment and
dectee delivered by him in that Court was
cor0nt non judtce and void.
Another ground on which these recon
struction acts are attempted 20 be sustained
Is this: that these ten States are conquered
territory; that the Constitutional relation IL
which they stood as States toward the Ma
tIonal government prior to the rebellion
has gwen place to new reIatinn-that l.,
the territory Is conquered territory; theil
citizens conquered people. In this new re
latlon Z ngreSs can govern them by militia
ry power. A title by Congress stands or
; clear ground; it is law acquired by war: il
applies on, to territory. As for goods ol
movable things, regularly captured in war,
it is called booty; or if taken by individua
soldiers, it is plund}r. There is not foot
of the land in any one Of these ten State!
which the United States holds by conquest
and only such land as did not belong tt
either of these States, or any individua
owner.
| mean srch lands as did belong to thc
pretended government called the Confeder
ate States. These lands we may claim tt
hold by conquest. As to all other lands O.
territory, whether belonging to the States
or individuals, the Federal Government ha,
now no more title Or right to it than it hat
before the rebellion. Oar own forts, arse.
nails, navy yards, lstom- houses and other
Federal property situated in these States
We now hotl, not by the title of conqneror,
but by au old title acquired by purchase OF
condemnation for public use, with compen
satnn to former owners.
We have not conquered these places, bu
simply reprcssed them. II we require more
sites for forts. custom houses or other pub
lie uses. We must acquire the tide to then
hV purchase or appropriation in the reeula
mode. At this moment the United States
in the acquisition Of sites for National Gem
eteries in those States, acquires title in The
same way. The Federal ceurtS sit in court
houses owned or leased by the United
States, not in the court houses of thu
States. The United States pays each o
these States for the use Of it, jails. Final
!, y, the q 1ited States levi 3 its direct take;
and ITS internal revenue upOn the pr 'perty
in these States, inclulng the prodnction
e Of the lands within their territorial limits
not BY way OF contribution, in the charac
ter Of c.nquerei, ut in the regular wa,
OF taxation, under the same laws which ap
ply to all the other 81 ties of the Uaion. =
From first ia last during the rebellion, anC
since, the title Of each of these States tc
to the lands and public buildings owned BY
them has never been disturbed. and not
foot of il has ever been acquired by thu
, United States even under title Of cOntis
cation, and not u foot has ever been taxeC
under Federal law. In conclusion [ mus
respectfully call the attention of Congress,
to the consideration of one more question
arising under thus bill; it rests in the militia
ry commander, subject only to the approya
of the Commander of the army of the Unit
ed States, an unlimited power to remove
from office any civil or military officer ir
each Of these ten States; and the further
power, subject to the same approval, to de-
tail or appoint any military otfic r or soldier
Of the United States to perform the duties
of the officer so removed, and ill all vacan.
cies occurring in these States by death, res.
ignation, Or otherwise. The military ap-
pointee must be required to perform the
duties of civil office according to the law,
of the State, and as such. he is required tn
take an oath, aud is, for the tire being, a
civil officer. What is his character?
Is he civil officer of the Stale. or civil
officer of the United States? Where is the
Federal power under our Constitution which
authorizes is appointment by any Federal
officer? IT. however, he is to be considered
a civil officer OF tn United States, as his
appointment and oath would seem to inii-
cate, where is the authority for his appoint
ment by the Constitution? The power of
appointment OF all officers of the United
States, civil or military. where not provided
for In the Constitution, is vested in the
President. by and wi the advice and con.
sent of the Senate, with this exceptions:
that Congress, by law, vest the appointment
of such inferior officers as they think orop
er in the courts of law or in the heads Of
Departments; but this bill if these are to
be considered inferior officers within the
meaning OF the Constitution, does not pro-
vide for their appointment by the President
alone, or by the courts OF war; or by the
heads OF Departments. but vests tht APP
pointments in ii subordinate officer So if
we put this question: and fix the character
OF this military appoiniee, either way this
provision Of the bill is equally opposed to
the Constitution. Take the case OF a soldier
appointed to perform to Office of Judge in
one OF these States, and as such, to admin
lister the proper laws Of the State; where is
the authority to be found in the Constitu
tion for vestlng in military or executive
officer strict judicial functions. to be exer.