The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1867-06-20
THE ATTORNEY aEsERAL's OPINION,

We publish this morning the opinion OF the
Attorney General. 1t is very able opinion,
and from his point of view, clear and conclusive.
We must suppose that its publication means
that the President intends to base some action
upon it. Otherwise that publication is not
only useless but mischievous. If this opinion
is the proper construction Of the Reconstruc-
tion Act. then oil the orders which have been
issued from the Head Quarters of this Military
District are at once cancelled, and what is more'
the, officer issuing them is responsible to any
individual in damages for any loss that those
orders have caused.
q Whether this Interpretation of the Act is cor
rect, is legal question which we will not
undertake to decide. But it does not require
a legal education to perceive that this whole
question of construction depends rather upon
the intention of the Act, than its words. The
real issue is not what this or that clause can be
interpreted to mean, but what really was the
mower, with which Congress intended to invest
the military commanders Of the District. In
other words this Act is something more than
a law of which any individual may claim the
technical construction-it is the solution Of a
political problem, which has an influence
wider than any mere legal enactment affecting
only private rights.
In examining this opinion, therefore, the in
quiry as to its policy, as we'll as its technical
merits, forces itself upon our consideration.
And in discussing this question it is impossible
to disregard tho public history of its passage.
In 1865, after the surrender Of Gen. LEE, it
Immediately became question, whether the
seeded States were to be restored to the
Union. If SO, on what terms, and by whom
these terms were to be prescribed. The Presi-
dent claimed the right to effect this restoration
by scheme of his own devising. Congress
refused to admit his right, and for two years
this question, as to where the right Of read
mission rested, exercised the national legisla-
ture. It was settled by the passage of the Re-
construction Act of 1867. That Act decided
the right to be in Congress, the law-msking
power of the Government, and prescribed the
terms and mode of its accomplishment.
: When this Act was passed, although over his
veto, the President resolved to execute it, and
did SO by the appointment of the five Command
ing Generals required by its provisions. They
were appointed and sent to their commands
acithout Instructions, and were thus compelled
to depend upon their own construction OF the
Act. It is difficult to understand why this
was SO. The same able officer who has now
construed the Act, was then as he is now,
the chief Law officer of the Government
the same views which he holds now, it
is to be presumed he held then-and surely if
ever there was proper time when the Com
manding Generals should have received full
and precise instructions as to their powers
and duties, IL was then when they were
entering upon the exercise of their
novel authority, and before their action
could be complicated by the conflict of civil and
military power. If, as the Attorney-General
says, "their education and training have not
been Of the kind to fit them for the delicate and
difficult task Of giving construction to such
statute as that now under consideration" why
for four months have they not only been allow
ed, but compelled 10 construe it? Not only So.
A month had not elapsed after their appoint
.ment, before, by their acts and their orders,
they gave unmistakable evidence Of what their
construction was-a construction which, we now
learn from the Attorney General, was unwar-
rsntsd and illegal and by which the lives and
the property Of free citizens for all this time
were unjustly imperilled. Why did not the
President interfere! Why, during these months
Of illegal oppression, was the military COM
mander of this District, for example, allowed
to .sput himself upon an equality with the law
making power of the Union," or "to place him-
self on higher ground than the President" !" and
'to deolare, in effect, am the state?"
IT, during all this time, tho authority Of the
military commander depended upon the Presi-
dents construction of the Act, why did he not
do his duty and coustrue its Why did he hand
over the people: Of these States to the mercy
and discretion Of a mere military usurpation
If, on the oontFsry, this power of constrnc-
tion was only to be exercised in conformity
with some political necessity, what has occurred
to change the condition Of things existing ut
the passage Of the act Whence did the mill
tary commanders derive the construction which
they have enforced, and why was not that con-
struction authoritatively oorreatel2 BUT not
only have the commanding officers the right to
complain that they have been betrayed by the
Government, but what is ourposition--the peo
pie of these States? We watched with painful
anxiety the debates on this bill-it was passed.
The commanding officers were appointed. What
was our duty? To obey or to disobey them
Where did we look for information? To the
President We saw him execute the Act; we
saw him appoint the commanders; we read
order after order, dealing with our most i'm
portant interests, reversing our oldest establish
ed laws, revolutionizing the whole frame work
of our State Government, hut we heard no word
of disapproval, no reversal Of these orders, no
interference in our behalf Take, for example,
Order No. 10, which has, perhaps, interfered
more generally and more directly with the law
of the State than any other. If we had the
right to suppose for moment that the Le-
gislature of the State would be allowed to
meet and to take charge of the interests
of the State, does any one doubtthat it
would have been assembled and called upon
to do its duty? But this order was issued
without the slightest manifestation of disap-
proval on the part of the Government, and we
naturally concluded that it was in the exercise
of recognized authority. And under this i'm
preston we have adapted our action to what
we conceived to be the law. Of the land, and
bova nroooadod in oood foifb towor1 tho work