Knoxville weekly chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1875, 1870-11-02

both, one thrusts the other from it, and he |
is drowned this homicide is eXcusablc, !
through unavoidable necessity, and upon
the great universal principle of self-preser-
walton, which prompts every man to save
his own life, in preference to that of anoth-
er, when one of them must inevitably per-
ishp
" Anold case almost analogous is drawn
from the Criminal Code. Now, pray how
do they get the analogy between a case
whore human life has inevitably to be lost,
and the law, therefore, excuses the one i'm
saving his own life, rather than let the other
survive and perish himself? In other
words, how, and by what process of rea-
sonng, can an act of self-preservation or
self-defense, he tortured into an analogy
to one man pointing out and having an
others property taken, because of his po-
litical opinions? This is what might be
called a law for stealing in self-detense.
The opinion is ventured, that this opin-
ion of Judge Nelson, will be regarded by
the cooler heads of even the Democratic
party rs novelty in the jurisprudence of
civilized people. And the Court although
throwing out this absurd illustration, TO
convince the ignorant, Immediately con-
TESS the irrelevancy of the case put, and say
that az the IdtO Of necessity, as applied to
the sdUing Of life, is jRoPpttcd6te to the pre-
serUdtioR Of property, ne hOtd upon the
facts of the CASE &c, and proceed then
to decide that there is no proof to sustain
the verdict After deciding the case first
on the ridiculous legal, or pretended to he
legal, grounds already stated, and then de-
Gliding it on the merits and proof, each
time deciding it for the rebel and against
the Union man, the learned Supreme
Court through Judge Nelson, proceed -
decide it the third time, and admit that all
! they say is unnecessary. In reversing TINS
| case the third time, the Court lay down the
ell. IL 11ff
| to It's Effects is to be accounted just on both
sides. I'd. That the justice of the cause
being reputed equal between two enemies,
| UhdteUer is permitted to the one, IN pirtue
Of q state Of cdr, is also permitted to the
! other, and Sd, that this voluntary law of
| nations, which is admitted only through
| necessity and with view TO avoid greater
evils. does not, to him who takes up arms
! in am unjust cause, give any real right that
! is capable of iustifying his conduct and
! acQuitting his conscience, but entities him
! to the benefits of the external effect of the
law, and to impunity among mankind"
Here this learned Court decide, first, that
| the war on the part of the South was just /;
secondly. the war 10y the rebels being just,
they had equal rights with the armies of
! the Union; and, thirdly, the law of ma
tons gives the rebels perfect impunity for
all they did during the war, and that Bra
ZeltOn, the man who was robbed, having
been Union man, Smith, the robber, IN
| cured not the slightest ciCH reSpOHSiOtHty.
After this remarkable holding, when the
Court itself says the questions do not arise
in this case. they proceed to deny the doc
trine enunciated in Gust vs.. Stout, Cold
well, Dos and then turn around and admit
the only belligerent rights ever accorded to
the rebels by the United States were eX-
torted to prevent the mstreatment of pris-
oners of war. Having detailed the objects
and purpos, of the rights conceded to the
Contederacy, all of which is in direct con-
fict with themselves, this learned Court
decide the case the fourth time, and say,
at is lawful to stare the hostile bettgercnt,
armed o. UNARMED, so that it leads TO the
spcedier subsection of the enemy They
say it, gentle reader. The Supreme Court
of the State Of Tennessee have spoken.
And having said this, they proceed to de-
eide the same case the fifth time, and de-
clare, "Such being the law of war; as re-
coguized and promulgated by the United
States, we hold that during the war, the
Confederate States were entitled TO the
same belligorent rights; and that it was
lawful for the armies of General Vaughn
and General Longstreet to encamp on the
lands of the defendant in error, and to ca
2 dOiUR and consume the tiaber WCreOB'
= &c. and that il tCds IdrfW for the pidin
7 Gf IN CiTOr, tcAO 1cdS then icthiR NeT ltht
rebel lines, oad SYDipdthizcd 1UHh Hei
BraZelton's hogs, corn, &c; and that " ~
2 trcSD0sS Wds, either IN tar or fact, commit
c tcd.n
And thus the Court continues, and re
cognizes the independence of the COntede
e racy again and again. 1t decides, and re
e decides, the Smith and BraZelton case, ant
1 vet asserts more than half dozen time
e that it Is not necessary. In fact the wa
q questions decided do not belong TO tn
c case. and the Supreme Court can onl.
0 Justify its course i'm deciding questions no
/ involved, and the same questions five o
!, six times, by appealing TO the preceden
c set by the Democratic Legislature of intro
n ducing bills to repeal laws that never ha
r any existence, and of actually repealin
r statutes as high rs two and three times
e Union men of East Tennessee! think of
/ dignifed Supreme Court announcing a
IS opinion from the Bench that the plundel
d ing by Vaughn and Longstreet was Lawful
d An offer to argue the legal bearings Of thi
7. decision, or to refute its illogical assel
!. tons or to assume to present authorize
Z or precedents to show it not to be founde
G i'm the philosophy of the law, would /
i presuming on the intelligence of the reaC
Is er. There is nothing like it under the SUI
IL Nothing similar can be found in any Ian
} guage, nor among any people. II is some
II thing new under the sun.
II \ UNION MAN.