Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1872-09-15
CONTRAST.

pafred-when the most confident hope;
of ultimate success animated the soldier
and citizen, subsequently receiving con-
frmation by many brilliant victories
the Army of Tennessee, then with it:
headquarters at SheIbyville, witnessed 8
conflict between the civil law and mill
tary authority, the result of which We
present to the people Of the State in
contrast with the conduct of Andrew
johnson in the Surratt case. While the
army occupied the line Of Duck river,
a citizen of Bedford county, not in the
employ of the army,nor in anywise CON
nected with it, guided a body of Federal
troops in an attack on an outlying cav
airy post of Confederates. It was a
complete surprise Of the latter by the
enemy, and consequently many of the
Southern soldiers were killed and
wounded, but few escaping. The man
who guided the Federal column was sub
sequently arrested by the order Of Gen
eral Bragg, then in command, and
brought into our lines to be dealt with
according to military law. He was
sent before a Military Court, then in
session at ~Shelbyville, with charges
specifying the acts Of which he had
been guilty. When arraigned, his
counsel put in a plea to the jurisdiction
of the court, claiming that he wa citi-
zen Of the State Of Tennessee, and of the
Confederate States, in no wise connected
with the military service or employ Of
the country. Proof Of the plea was made.
There was no doubt of his guilt in the
matter charged. The question plainly
presented was, Had a Military Court,
under the constitution of the Confeder-
ate States, the right to try a citizen in
no wise in the military employ Of those
States?n The court required of the
Judge Advocate an opinion on the
point. 1t was given, and admitted the
want Of jurisdiction in the court to try a
citizen so situated. The court unani-
mously approved the opinion, and de-
clined to take jurisdiction of the case,
recommending that the prisoner he
turned over to the civil courts. The
action Of the court and Judge Advocate
at first met with disapproval from the
late Lieutenan General Polk, who
a~fterward, on reflection, withdrew his
censure. General Bragg, however, was
not recOnciled to il, and had the record
Of proceedings forwarded to Richmond
for action. Under the advice of Justice
Campbell, formerly of the Federal bench,
the rulings of the court and the opinion
Of the Judge Advocate were sustained
by the Confederate government.
The members composing this court
were the late Hon. Andrew Ewing,
one of the most brilliant advocates and
soundest jurists Tennessee ever had,
and who died in the service; Hon. E.
:. WOrthington, Of Kentucky, now de-
ceased, one of the leaders of the Louis
vile bar; and Hon. ]. A. P. Campbell,
now Of Canton, Mississippi, and one of
the ablest lawyers Of that State. The
Judge Advocate vast. W. Brown, now
of the Memphis bar. How does this
v~indication Of constitutional law, a
affecting the life and liberty of the citi-
zen, compare with that of Andrew
johnson in the Surratt trial? Were
these Confederate officers wrong and
Andrew Johnson right in the applica-
ton and construction of constitutional
safeguards for the protection of life and
liberty? We ask Tennesseeans to whom,
in ricU Of these acts, would they prefer
to entrust for v~indication their cOnstitu-
tiOnaI liberties-to Confederate officers,
who did in the time Of trial, when most
provoked to evade or trample on con-
stitutiOnal restraints, refuse to abate one
jot or title of constitutional law, or An
drew johnson, who absolutely, without
any military necessity therefor, wanton-
ly violated the most precious and valua-
bic Of all constitutional rights, a trial
by jury and according TO the
due course of law? Remember that
in this regard there was no difference
between the Confederate and Federal
constitutions. The military horror Of the
Surratt trial occurred when war had
ceased, after the surrender of the Con-
federate armies. The damnable Mill
tary Court was held at Washington,
where the offense was committed. This
city wa never in possession of the Con-
federate forces. TWAS the capital of the
Federal Union, at all times during the
war in the occupation Of the Federal
forces. The civil courts Of the District
were open, and had never been closed.
The civil magistracy Of the bench could
sit u~ndisturbed by the clangor Of hostile
battalions. What reason can be urged
why this woman should have been re-
fused by Andrew Johnson a fair trial by
the civil courts? We say refused 6y
AndrclU Johnson, because that is the true
historic record of the event. He has not
even the poor consolation OF knowing
that his unexampled tyranny in this
affair fell on a guilty head. On the con-
trary, it became abundantly evident
that Mrs. Surratt was entirely in
nocent Of the crime laid to her
account, and that her life was
sworn away by the 6aldest perjury.
There are, alas ! too many reasons for
believing that Johnson suspected the
perjury. 1t was criminal carelessness
in him that he did not kaot0 it. He is
not only guilty Of violating the consti-
tuition Of his country in denying TO Mrs.
Surratt a fair trial in the civil courts,
but he is still further guilty in that be
ordered her to be hung, when he either
actually knew, or could have known by
the exercise of proper diligence that the
evidence On which she was convicted
was suborned and perjured. Frank
Cheatham belonged to that army whose
Officers vindieated the constitutional
Liberties of the citizen against military
power. After the action Of the military
court at Shelbyville, and its approval at
Richmond, the citizen within the Com
federate States had no apprehension
that his life or liberty would be dealt
with 10y a Confederate military court.
Thus the officers and soldiers Of the
Confederate armies became .imbued
with due respect for constitutional re-
straints, which now well fits them for
civic station. 1t was truthfully said of
the South, by T. w. Brown, on one oc-
casion, that, During the hardest
pressure Of the late war, never was civil
liberty submerged in the bloody tide.
The civil law was at all times supreme
within her borders, wherever the func-