The Camden journal. [volume] (Camden, S.C.) 1866-1891, 1868-01-16

We copy below the concluding let
ter Of a correspondence between Judge
Aldrich and General Candy on the
subject of an order issued by the
General stopping the salary OF the
Judge.
.. BARNwELL, Jan. 7, 1868.
Sir: I reply Immediately to your
note of the 4th January, justreceived.
I did not expect and did not ask,
that you, a Military Commander,
weuld consider the constitutionallty
of the Reconstruction acts. But l dId
expect that you would point to the
clause in those acts which empowered
You to suspend me from the perform,
ance of the duties of my office, and
then to deprive me of my property
in that office, by ordering the State
Treasurer to withhold the salary
which the State contracted to pay me
when I was commissioned one Of her
Judges. You will remember, that l
am still Judge of South Carolina.
You have not ventured to remove me
yet, and if you had, you cannot de-
prive me of my office. You cannot
point to any authority in the acts,
but excuse your injustice and usurpa-
ton by saying, "that your action m
volved a serious delay in the admin
istration of justice, and imposed upon
the State, in its impoverished condl-
tion, additional expenses for the main
tenance' of prisoners, and for holding
special terms of the courts IN seV-
eral of the districts in the Southern
Circuit. I did not consider it proper
or lust to add to those burdens by
authorizing compensation for services
that were not rendered. -
[ Indignantly rcpel this slander'-
Twas in the ctual performance OF
NV duties, under the laws OF the
State of South Carolina, that had
conferred on me my judicial othce'
and to whom, alone, | am account,
able. When you, by a high handed
usurpation of authority, not confer
red on YOU by any law of congress-
or article of war, suspended me in
tho vorv effort T yas making to ad-
minister justice to a suffering people;
What Justice was to be administered
bv such juries as you had directed te
be drawn ? You know. orshouId have
known, that your order as to iurles
was not authorized by any act OF Con
gress. You know, or should havt
known, that, juries, selected as
YOU directed, presented the most Sc
rious impediment to the admlnlstra,
tion of justice. You know, or should u
have known, that my oath OF Office
prevented me from carrying out your
order-and yet as a mere partisan,
without considering the dignity OF my
position, the character my beloved
State, or the responsibility of youl
own station, in the very wantonness o.
power, you put upon me an 'md'gn'
ty which was unworthy of tho grea,
government you represent, and
must add, appears to me. now to o'
MOI only resentful, but unmanly. Le
vour brother officers Of the old a'm5s
Judge.
of honour, could not carry out you1
order without violating my oath o.
Office. I said so frankly. You sus
pended me. I yielded without muir
mer, and now because l have a con,
science, that will not permit me- a as
think, to violate my oath OF office
with high-handcd tyranny, you moi
only deprive me Of the dignity OF tha1
Office. but rob me. of its support, and
then insultingly tell me that my "ac'
ton has involved a serious delay lr
the administration of justice, y for
getting that it was your own unau
thorized and officious interference
with the laws of the State that placed
the first and only impeachment in the
vay of Justice. With what conslsten'
cy can You talk about the empower
ished condition of the State. whcr
only on the 81 DecemoeI las5, 1aa you
issued General Orders No. l39, as
sessing tax for the very salary you
have directed the Treasurer to With
hold, and did actually. make an ap'
preparation for its payment? lilo"
does it help the people OF an lmpov,
erished State, to wiring taxes out Of
them, which you afterwards direct tc
be locked>up in the treasury!
WHY trouble yourself about State