Nashville union and dispatch. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1866-1868, 1868-04-02
GEN. HANCOCK ON THE sEPREM-
ACY OF LAW

ACH Ok LAW.
just before he was relieved of the com.
mand at New Orleans, to be transferred
to the Atlantic Department, with head
quarters at Washington, Gen. Hancock
addressed an official letter to Gov Pease
of Texas, in response to an application
to him to suspend the laws in that State,
and administer its government under
military edict and through appointees,
basing his request on the ground that
the laws were being violated, and that a
majority Of the people of Texas were op-
posed to the Congressional despotism set
over them.
The letter is noble one, and coming
from soldier whose road to fame and
promotion lay in compliance to the law
less request, is notable The subjoined
extract will show its style and temper !:
know not how these things are; but
admitting your representations literally
true, If for such reasons / should set aside
the local civil tribunals and order a mill
tary commission, there is no place in the
United States where it might not be done
with equal propriety. There is not State
in the Union, North or South, where the
like facts are not continually happening.
Perfection is not to predicated of man or
his works. No one can reasonably expect
certain and absolute justice in human
transactions; and if military power is to
be set in motion, on the principles for
which you would seem 10 contend, fear
that civil government regulated by laws
could have no biding place beneath the
circuit OF the sun. 1t is rather more than
hinted in your letter, that there is no State
government in Texas, and no local laws
outside of the acts of Congress, which |
ought to respect; and that / should under
take to protect the rights Of persons and
property in my own way, and in an arbi-
trary manner. If such be your meaning,
am compelled TO differ with you. After
the abolition of slavery (an event which |
hope no one now regrets), the laws of
Louisiana and Texas, existing prior to the
rebellion, and not in conflict with the acts
of Congress, comprised vast system of
jurisprudence, both civil and criminal.
Ii required not volumes only, but
libraries to contain them. They laid
down principles and precedents for
ascertaining the rights and adjusting
the controversies of men in every conceiy-
able case. They were the creations of
great, and good, and learned men, who had
labored, in their day, for their kind, and
gone down to the grave long before our re-
cent troubles, leaving their works an ines
Unable legacy to the hnman race. These
laws, as | am informed, connected the civ
ilizations of the past and present ages, and
testified of the justice, wisdom, humanity,
and patriotism of more than one nation,
through whose records they descended TO
the present people of these Ststes. am
satisfied from representations of persons
competent to judge, they are as perfect
system of laws as may be found elsewhere,
and better suited than any other TO the
condition of this people-for by them they
have long been governed. Why should it
be supposed Congress has abolished these
laws? Why should any one wish TO abol-
ish them? They have committed no trea-
son, nor are hostile TO the United States,
nor countenance crime, nor favor injustice.
On them, as on a foundation of rock, re-
poses almost the entire superstructure of
social order in these two States. Annul
this code of laws, and there would be no
longer any rights, either o osperson or prop
erty, here.