The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1868-12-02
4ithn,ond 1ispatth,
wrnyrsn,y DECEMBER 2, 1868
We pro.es. against Chief Justice CHASE

We protest against Chief Justice CHASE )
aesr;tiou of de facto Government, as con-
,.;,ed in the opinion which wepuolish TINS
,norn;ng. II seems to have been made up
- crit his case. If il be a correct defini-
zion. de facto Government can never exist
In Ireland, Scotland, Canada. or any of the
British provinces. If it be true that the
Confederate Government was never a de
facto Government because cit never heid
the national capital" then the fleeing Far
lament Of dethroned King might easily
prevent the formation of de facto Govern
ment by passing. law removing the capt.
tai and then, also, the Confederate Govern
ment would have been a de tdcto Govern
ment if EARLY had only captured Washing
ton, as he could easily have done in lS64,or II
BEAUREGARD and JOHNSTON had taken IL
after the battles in July, 1861. II the
Confederate Government was not de Jdc'o
Government because it "neuer asserted any
authority to represent the nation" then we
are to lose because instead of continlng
ourselves to our own States, we did not also
assert the right to govern the northern
States. If our rulers had only captured
Washington and claimed to be the real Go
yernment of the United States, instead of the
Confederate States, then the Confederate Go
vernment would have been Government dc
fncto, and we should now be entitled to the
protection of the United States Government
against any suit or claim Of any sort that
might be brought against us for having
Welded obedience to that de .facto Govern
ment. Mr.. CHASE says cit cannot be
maintained that acts against the King
" committed in obedience to usurper
temporarily in possession of part
"of the kingdom would not be trea-
"son in England" We suppose the
"catch" in this point is the word
"usurper.' But, then, the unsuccessful
man was always in British law the nsurper.
HENRY VII. was q usurper. RICHARD Ill.
was usurper. Either the "good ELIZA
BETH" or one Of the children of EDWARD
was the rightful heir. Yet RICHARD held
part Of England, and HENRY another part
before the battle Of Bosworth field. Were
not the adherents of RICHARD held to be
guiltless of treason after HENRY took the
crown Was not RICHARD merely tempo
rarily in possession of part of the King
dom Practically the great mass of the
people of England were always held to be
innocent Of crime, no matter to what King
I" temporarily in possession they had
yielded obedience. The judges of CHARLES
II. respected the decisions made by those OF
that most notorious or famous of nsurpers
OLIVER CROMWELL.
The amount of Mr.. CHAsE's definition is
that de facto Government can never ex-
ist in this country. For if it succeed, it is
at once de jare Government; and if it
fail, it has never been even de facto Gov
eminent. In word, he does away with
de .facto Governments altogether on this
continent, explodes them as unsubstantial
things, and proves that their existence
within the limits of this immense ocean,
bound republic is impossible. They may
flourish in little England; but they cannot
even be born in colossal America.
We respectfully submit that the definition
is morally and legally wrong. The people
of these Confeder ate States are as clearly
entitled to the protection accorded to peo-
pie who have yielded obedience to de
tacto Government as any people that ever
lived. Cessante ratione, ceSsat ipsa ct lea.
We reverse the maxim, and say that the
reason existing the law also exists. We
are surely entitled to all the protection ever
accorded to people who were held blame
less for obeying powerful Government.
We imagine that the history Of the world
might be searched in vain for previous
instance in which the reason Of the policy
of recognizing the acts of de facto Govern
ments could with greater truth be urged IN
favor of the supposed delinquents.