The New York herald., 1868-03-06
NEW YORK HERALD. FRIDAY, MARCH ., 1863

with celebrity. certainty. nrmnsss and inparalityf
II be the Of adequate protection, and Con,
gress may interfere for tho want OF ~ fear tney WIZ
have their hands full Four have been insisted
upon justify these military satuteA and the frat IS
that Congress is the sole Judge OF Whist is republican
guarantee to each State q republican form Of govern
mcnt To guarantee Is not to create but to warrant
TO give to the federal government the unlimited power
of destroying State government upon the allega.
ton that IL is not republican to give to Me central
than was ever dreamed Of before, and TO make way
for consolidation fatal to the rights .oi
reases for the military government Of the South ~
we have conquered the rebel States, ana Wc
Hew have we conquered the rebel s.atcsY We have
overcome the rebel armies Has this operated to trans
Ter tho government from the conquered 70 me
conqueror2 Has IL worked transfer from The sove-
reignty from sovereign to another from the con-
qnered sovereign TO tho conquerng sovereign ~, Inc
conquered State was sovereign before in qualified
sense the conquering States sovereign before,
also In qualified Tho suppression by the latter
Of the rebe Of the former entirely consistent
with the relations which previously existed between the
two sovcregns neither the war nor the victory changed
the doxble allegiance Of the ctizenone to his state
and tho other TO hls nation. The laws OF conquest
havo application 10 a civil II county
in New York Is declared to be 10 state
Of nsurrecton, force k applied to put the nsnrrecton
down; but when IL done the law resumes its sway
fne legal relations OF the county to the State are not
permanently changed, though their operations may
have been suspended tor the time beirg We maintain
that act Of the federal government can exclude
state rom h9 onon SO no acs ol ne s'ase no fan rar
subject 70 its laws tho war left II In tho Union subject
10 tho same laws third reason given for the military
Of the South Is that the rebel States and
thor people forfeited their rights by the rebellion Our
present concern Ia not what they deserve, but what
q right to do. We arc restrained by the con-
stintion, which we have fought TO maintain and which
now assert for tho sake OF our own rights There
can be no treason Of a Sate though there may bc OF
all The persons who compose it. Whatever may have
been the misconduct OF the citizens OF Mississippi even
though every one Of them wero guilty tho State, the
n hpIU 1tA mt
the crime OF reason The fourth reason given IS that
Congress may now govern the rebel states in the excr
else of bclgerent rizhts. What counenance docs that
givo TO the present government OF the South by the
armyg There no longer beligerent rights because
ceased, the laws OF ceased also. Civil war can
no longer be reco9pizcd as existing In M'ssis-
whether during tho war no Just exercise Of oogern
rights would have authorized the federal government 70
take into its the entire government OF that state there
Is warrant for any such exercise now. Beigerent
rights are exercised by the Executive and not by
Congress- In the present instance the Executive exer
cses and attempts TO exercise against the State or
Mississippi any Of hcr people Indeed, he dsciams
such authority; these military acts passed over MS
veto: and " the argument from beIgerency should
we should have The extraordnary spectacle Of
the Legislature exercising an executive function with
out the consent and AGAINST the proes Of tho Executive
Now, 10 may be asked, cannot tho federal army
which goes into state TO suppress rebellion govern
It a. IL advances into nY answer, as similar qucs-
ton was answered IN the Mnliisan case, nee srs quod
cogh dcjenda Tho advancing and occupying army
must govern itself by the laws OF II must keep
must govern tho people within them and far only as
ord nary civil government Is impossible. Even this
power ceased with this necessity OF Its exercise Tho
moment the military occupation ceases, that moment
tho right to govern ccascs also. Ia there no
period, then, after tho cessation Of hostillties,
during which the military occupation may continueP To
this answer:-rhe occupying forces must have rca-
sonablo time to retire with their material, and so
long they necessarily remain for that purpose long
the OF tho rue applies and, therefore the ruo
ITSELF but they have right TO remain there longer
The federal government s OF course capable OF being
a u
pressed To guard the federal property to protect the
federal officers TO nssist ~ the execution OF federal
process tho troops may always remain, in peace
II no State authorities whatever left and the
people absolutely without magistrates officers Of
any kind that the withdrawal OF tho federal troops
would be tho signal Of general massacre or pllage,
then the troops may remain. II there bc an existing
State government dc fdco or d. jtve, the question
cannot ariso The retirement OF the federal
troops would have left the State impoverished and
exhausted no doubt, but not without government
In conclusion submit have shown. first, that there
whatever for the proposition that Mississippi
Is not State OF the American Union; second that
only Is she State OF the Union but her people have
the rights OF citizens Of State third that whether she
be or be not Sate has has not tho rights OF
state the people thers residing cannot be subjected 10
military government OF tho United States and that
therefore the petitioner McCardie. 10 entitled TO his
release from the military commission which presumed
| to sit in Judgment upon him.
tho conclusion OF tho argument tho court adjourned
In order that the Chief Justice might proceed 10 The
Senate 10 organize tho Court Of Impeachment.