Daily Davenport Democrat. [volume] (Davenport, Iowa) 1864-1874, 1867-07-20
NEWS
ny TELEGRAPH,
TO TssE DAILY DEnOCRAT.
rETE pREsIURNr.svs MESSAGE

poets subject 10 the paramount authority OF +
tie United States. how ~ this declsraiQry <
act Il apraars that Congress did not by the 4
original Sc intend to limit The military
~. boTiiy L. any PARTICULAR snhiect therein /
aescrlls-8, hpt meant 10 make 1t universal. /
Thus over ~ the Ten States this military |
government is now declared to have unlim-
tied authority. II Is asserted To be pars-
mount To the existing civil governments. IL |
is impossible 10 conceive a state OF society |
more iniolerable than this, and yet |
il Is Ia this condition that twelve mil |
lions OF American citizens are reduced by |
the Congress " the United States. Over
every foot Of the immense territory occu |
pied by ihese American citizens the Constr
tuition oi the United States Is in full opera |
ton. II binds all the people there, and |
should protect them. Yet they are denied. !
The veto of the original bill OF the second |
OF Marcn was based on two distinct grounds. |
The interference Of Congress in duties
strictly pertaining 10 the reserved powers OF
the States. and the establishment OF military |
tribunals for the trial of citizens in time OF
peace THE imperial act before me not only
declares that the intent was TO confer such
military authority, but TO confer unlimited
military authority over all the other courts
of the States, and over all officers OF the
State, Executive, Legislative and Judicial.
Not content with the general grant, Congress
in the second section Of this bill specifically
gives to the military commander power To
suspend or relieve from office any officer
holding, any civil or military Office in
such district under any power thereof; u
power that hitherto all the departments OF
the federal government, acting In concert or
setarately have not dared To exercise, Is
here ATTEMPTED to be conferred on o sub0r.
dlnate military officer.
What next? The district commander
who has thus displaced the civil officer Is
authorized to fill the vacancy by detail OF
an officer or a soldier Of the army. BY
the appointment OF some other person, an
officer or soldier Of the army may be made
| a Governor, q Legislator, or Judge, how
ever unfit he may deem himself for such Of
tcial duties Thus, An officer of the nited
States detailed to fill IN office in one OF these
states gives no official bond and takes no
official oath tor the performance of his new
duties, but as civil officer OF the State, only
takes the same oath which he had already
taken AS military officer Of the United
States The result ls, that the federal gov
eminent by the agency OF its own officers in
effect, assumes the civil government OF the
State. A singular contradiction is apparent
here. Congress declares these local
State governments to be illegal gov
ernments, and then provides that
these illegal governments shall
be carried ON by Federal officers. II Ger
tainly would be a novel spectacle II Congress
should attempt To carry on legal State
Government by the agency of its own 9th
GERS. IL IL yet more strange that Congress
should attempt To carry on AN illegal State
Government by some Federal agency. In
this connection must call attention to the
10Th and nth sections of the bill which
provides that none OF the officers or appoint
ees of these military commanders shall be
bound in his action by the opinion OF a
civil officer CT the United States, and that
all the provisions OF the act shall be con-
s,rued literally to the end, that all intents
therefor may he fully and perfectly carried
out A soldier or an officer detailed for q
civil service, perhaps the most important In
"A State, with the duties OF which he is per
haps altogether unfamiliar, and can only
ask the opinion of another military officer
who perhal understands as little OF his Gu
ties as he does himself Military appointces
would not be bound even by judicial opin
ion This they might very well say when
their action Is in couilict with The Supreme
Court Of the United states.
This bill and acts TO which it Is supple
mental are all founded upon the assumption
That these ten communities are not States
and their governments are not legal. Ihrou
ghout the legislation upon this subject they
are called rebel states, and IN this particua
they are denomnated so-calied States. IL Il
now too late To say that these ten commu
mites are not States, declarations to the con
trary made in these three acts, and contra
dlcted again and again by repeated acts o
legislation by Congress, from the year lS6
to year 1867.
The President proceeds to cite proof o
, this point in acts of Congress and the Su
preme Court also asserting that Executiv
recognition has been frequent and unwavei
: ing.
Another ground on which these recon
: siruction acts are attempted to be sustained
is that that these ten states are conquere
= territory, their citizens conquered people
" and in this new relation Congress can gov
: ern them by military power. Such lands \
did belong To the pretended Government
= called the Confederate States We may clair
% to bold by conquest rs To all other lands @
; territory, Whether belonging to the Sta'a
or 10 individuals, the Federal Governmen
!. has nov M more tile or right TO 1t iha
1t had before the rebellion. Our own foit:
ARSENAL, navy yards, custom houses, au
other Federal property situated in Ties
:, states We now hold not 10y the title
conquest, but by an Of title acquired b
purchase or condemnation Tor pubic us.
We have not conquered these places bu
4. simply repossesesd them.
| must respectfully call the attention c
Congress to the consideration OF one mo.
u question. IL rests in Il military commando
subject only to the approval of the Genert
OF the army of the United States. an ur
limited power to remove from Office an
civil or military officer IN each of these IL
. f,,Vt hsy at stay
officer or soldier 10 nppoin, any officer {
the United States to perform the duties {
1 the officer SO removed. and fill all vacancie
&c. Is he n civil officer OF the State or
>. civil officer Of the United Ststesy Wher
is the Federal power under on
, Constitution which authorizes his az
:, pointmeu, by any Federal office
il, however, he is To be considered u CIV
: officer Of the United States, as his appoin
ment and oatn would seem to indicat,
where is the authority for his appointment
D by the Constitutions The power OF al
o poin,ment Of all officers Of the United States
civil or military, where not provided for i
the Constitution, is vested in the Presiden
] by and with the advice aud consent of IN
Senate, with this exception, thar Congress
!. by law, may vest the appointment OF sue
!, inferior officers as they think proper in tn
n President alone. in the courts of law, or i
y the heads OF departments. But this bill,
, these are to be considered inferior officer
within the meaning ofthe Constitution, doe
not provide for their appointment by tn
President alone, or by courts of law, or b
heads of departments, but vests appeintmen
in . subordinate officer. So, ii we put thi
question and fix the character cfihis miltis
~ appointee. Either way, this proviso
OF the bill is equally opposed to the Consti,r
|. ton.
Within period of less than year, tn
!. legislation of Congress has attempted I
q strip the Executive Department of the gov
eminent Of some Of it's most essential pow
ers The Constitution and the oath provid
:, ed in il, devolves on the President the pow
er and duty to see that the laws are faith
fully executed. The Constitution, in orde
to carry out this pc yer, gives him tn
choice OF the agents, and makes them sui
ject TO his control and supervision. But i
. the execution Of these laws the constitution
al obligation remains the same, but th
power To exercise that constitutional dut,
is effiectually taken away. The militar'
commander is. as to the power Of the ap
pointment made, to take the place of th
President, and the General OF the Amy III,
place Of the Senate; and whilst hold tn
Chief Executive authority of the Unite
l. States " hist the obligation rests on me q