Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1871-11-23


Carolina to appreciate the entertainment
which is in store for them? The fact that
a State is Republican is no security.
South Carolina is the banner Radical State
Of the South, and yet the first to be de-
prived Of self-government."
The President is not authorized by what
is known as the Ku-Klux act to declare |
martial law, but under the authority con-
ferred upon him by that act, be does about |
what is almost the same as declaring mar
tial law. He suspends the writ of habeas |
corpus and sends troops into State where |
there is not even the semblance of rebellion |
TO arrest citizens without warrant but |
simply upon information lodged with a !
United States Marshal or the commander |
of such troops, and this in the face of the
Constitution he has sworn to ''preserve, pro-
tect and defend, }" that ''no person shall be
held to answer for capital or otherwise in
famous crime, unless on a presentmen
or indictment of grand jury" This
provision of the Constitution has
been treated as dead letter in
South Carolina. Two thousand citi-
zens have been arrested in that
State, and it is clear that many of these
were arrested upon the flimsiest sort of
testimony. Many of them have been
guilty Of 10 crime whatever, yet they have
been arrested and imprisoned to perhaps
crafty the spite of some malicious fellow.
If Grant can with impunity tIample upon
the laws of South Carolina and the rights
of citizens, what is to hinder him from do
ing the same thing in any other State, pro-
vided the arrests are confined to those who
may oppose his reelection 1t is an easy
matter to satisfy his political friends that he
means no harm to them, and arrests will go
on as they have in South Carolina. He
may not attempt this in any Northern
State, but he will certainly do it if he re-
CARDS that step as necessary to secure his
reelection. If he should pur-
sue the same course in other
States that he hasin South Carolina, he will
as fully divest them of self-government as if
he were to declare martial law. And yet
the Radicals of the North act as though
they saw no danger in the course he is pur-
suing. +" If there is any thing the annals
of the world have taught u.s." says the
Baltimore Gazette, Z" is that the only Sc
curity for freedom, under any system, is to
be found in the absolute exclusion of all
discretionary power, where personal liberty,
or right, is involved. Discretionary power
means arbitrary power-nothing more,
nothing less. 1t is simply what we are
fond of denouncing, on the other side of
the water, as personal government"
where the ruler and not the law rules.
The whole spirit of our Constitu-
ton, and all the principles and traditions of
our Government and history, are in arms
against the liberation of any such thing
among us. Until the passions of the recent
war made every usurpation welcome that
was 4oyal,' and deifed brute force and
commanding Generals, no man could have
suggested it without being Kissed and hooted
down. And yet, to-day, in the midst of
peace-with nothing to thwart the absolute
supremacy Of the law and its civil tribunals
"a great part of the people of this country
look, not only without apprehension but
with positive approval, upon the enactment
of laws clothing the President of the United
States with discretionary powers, which
nothing but his own will and pleasure
stands in the way Of his prostituting, to the
entire overthrow of individual freedom,
and especially the freedom of the ballot,
all through the land. 1t is not only the
supineness on this point of those who call
themselves Democrats that astounds US,
but the blindness-the gulled and stupid
callOusness-Of the Radicals themselves
They say they have confidence in General
Grant-that he will not abuse the authority
entrusted to him. What they mean is that
they do not think he will interfere with them.
They expect him and desire him to interfere
with their political opponents, and will
be disappointed and disguised if he does
not. Their idea of freedom is their own
freedom. While they are tolerated in that,
the Executive may do as he pleases with
the rights of other people. But, did they
ever hear of a ruler made absolute, who ex-
ercised his power to please any one but him
self? Was such thing ever known, in
history, as power honestly limited, where it
was allowed to prescribe its own limita-
tons? During our late war, for instance,
did Mr.. Seward hesitate any more about
silencing a loyal newspaper than dis
loyal one, if it dared to assert its indie
r pendence? No Union man in the country
would have been permitted to advocate a
cessation Of hostilities, no matter how con-
scientiously or how periodically his convic-
tons might have been reached. Then, as
f ever, arbitrary power was no respecter of
persons. During the canvass for the recent
Gubernatorial nomination in MaSsachu-
, sets, Gen. Butler and certain Gen. Haw-
ley came to words. They had been old
friends and heroes together, and knew each
other well, and they vituperated each other
accordingly-Hawley actually charging the
hero of Fort Fisher with telling "a smost
infamous lie die out of the whole
CLOTH as if Butler had ever needed
, anything to make lie from. As soon as
this scandal became notorious, a New York
Herald correspondent at once interviewed
Gen. Hawley to find out the history of the
quarrel. We do not care to enter upon that,
but Hawley stated one thing that ought not
20 be let die. We give the words of the
correspondent as they appear in the Herald
of Aug. %. He represents Hawley as
speaking:
''Hawley-T was under Buffers COM
mand over eight months, beginning in April,
1864. He recommended me for Brigadier
General just after the severe fight at Deep
Run, Aug. 10, 1864, and gave
me command of a division of troops
IL October afterwards, which divi-