The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-04-27
Ths RECOMMENDATION Act in georgia.

ana then IL Will WIN sPeeuy NIoVOIy'
Tn. RECOMMENDATION Act I'm georgia.
From he Times
Although General Pope's intimation to the
Governor of Georgia wears an arbitrary
aspect. and reveals one of the unpleasant
characteristics of military government, it can
scarcely be deemed unwarranted or unjust.
Governor Jenkins has publicly exerted his
official influence in opposition to the law. In
his official capacity he has raised the issue of
its oonstitutonality, and has advised the citi-
zens of his State to disregard its requirements.
Besides invoking the interference of the
Supreme Court, he has counselled indiffer-
ence to the law, whatever be the judicial
decision in the case, alleging his preference
for any course that would practically nullify
the act, and necessitate the continuance of
military rule.
We said the other day. commenting upon
the proceedings of Governor Jenkins and other
Southern officials who share his views, that
they have misinterpreted the leniency of Gene
raj Pope's administration of affairs. OF this
fact, probably, they are now convinced. For
the terms of the Generals communication to
the Governor sets forth very plainly the rela-
ton which the executive officers of a Southern
State hold to the Military law. They are, as
he says, simply provisional, exercising their
authority only by suiIerance, and with special
reference to the work to be performed. In
other words, the law has permitted them to
retain their positions in order that, by becom
ing its agents, they may prevent needless dis
turbance of the local machinery of government.
To use these positions, then, to defeat the law
and postpone the business of reconstruction, is
to abuse the forbearance of Congress and chal-
lenge the action of the Commanding General.
His obligation is to apply the law which they
are endeavoring to evade or annul. And he
must either arrest their efforts or permit his
own to be challenged in a manner prejudicial
to his influence. His warning to Governor
Jenkins therefore became q necessity unless
he were prepared silently to see obstacles
created in the line of his duty. If he is as
the law declares, master of the situation, with
specific ends to accomplish, he must be pre-
pared to remove provisional officers who fail to
accept the law or to respect its obvious intent.
General Sheridan, in the exercise of his dis
cretion, removed the Rebel functonaries of
Louisiana; and it will be not less incumbent
on General Pope to remove the Executive of
Georgia If that officer peTvert his provisional
power for purposes antagOnstic to recOnstruc-
tion. The right so to act cannot be questioned
under the law, and we have the admissions of
a local journal in the interest of the Governor
that the notification given by the General is
wise and COnsiderate." Its smOderatiOn should
preceded it evidently has been.
The case is adduced by the EEpresS as proof
that military government under the Recon
structiOn law allows "neither official freedom
of fspeech, nor of the press, nor the right of
petition, nor any manly act of opposition to a
despotic law" Nothing of the sort is proved.
" Official freedom of speech'' is indeed circum-
scribed by the terms of Gen. Pope's letter to
Gov. Jenkins, but not in a sense that implies
harshness or despotism. Rightly or wrongly,
the Governor as a provisional officer is sub
ordinate to the Commanding General, and the
latter is certainly not guilty of tyranny when
he reminds the Governor that he must
abstain from opposition to the law unless
he be content to play the role of pri-
vate citizen in which capacity he may
exercise ''freedom of speech" without
molestation. As for the rest, the assertion
of the Express is wholly at variance with fact.
There has been no attempt on the part of Gen.
Pepe, or any other district commander to
fetter the Press, or deny the right of petition,
or to NEEDLE with any other peaceful form Of
opposition to the legislation of Congress. The
widest latitude Of discussion has been afforded
to both press and people, as might be easily
shown by reference to our Southern ex-
changes. denial Of the right of a 'prOvi-
sonap' official to abuse his opportunities,
ought not to be cOnfounded with the right of
private citizens to the freest expression of
opinion on political subjects. The latter has
been scrupulously respected in Georgia and
throughout the South.
In truth the only really arbitrary acts of
which we have heard in connection with the
administration of the Reconstruction law have
occurred in South Carolina, where General
Sickles has decreed certain restraints upon the
privileges of creditors as against debtors. That
act might seem to challenge criticism, because
| it affects very seriously private rights But
/ of this phase of tyranny we find no complaints
among the people whom it most concerns. On
the contrary, they applaud it as wise and
merciful interposition to stay the desolation
of poverty. To them, at any rate, General
Sickles' most despotic act conveys the idea OF
mercy.