National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1874-02-21

Government, and claimed by the Treasury
agents having them in charge Is captured
confiscable property. This claim was con-
tested by the companies which had run
them; the latter undertaking to show that
they were their private property, although
they had confessedly been operated in the
interest and under the dictation of the Con-
federate military authorities. By order OF
President johnson and Secretary McCul-
loch, they were released to the claimants,
AFTER long and ardent discussion.
Some time during the year 1896. under
decisions of the Attorney General and the
Supreme Court of the United States, it was
determined that the war had terminated on
a certain day. and that no further proceed
ings should be taken under the act of 1862,
except those required for the closing of the
accounts of all Treasury agents.
No sooner had this order been promul-
gated than all sorts of people began to VOL
unteer all sorts of information regarding
confiscable Confederate property. both in
this country and Europe. The amount
asserted to be known of as recoverable in
Europe alone was fabulous, while that
which could be unearthed and recovered in
this country was but little short of sufficient
to pay the national debt. This clamor be-
came 80 great about the Departments and
Congress. that finally. in 1901, alaw
was passed authorizing the Secretary to
contrar: with private parties for the recov-
cry of such property for moiety, or some
other designated portion of the net pro-
ceeds of what might be reclaimed.
Whether anything has been recovered
and actually paid into the Treasury under
these, and how many contracts have been
made under that act, or whether any con-
tracts at all were made for the recovery of
the European Confederate property, but lit
tie has been heard or known until the crop
ping out of the Sanborn contracts and the
appearance of the Piedmont railroad case
before the Departments and the Judiciary
Committee of the House.
Many interesting questions of the gravest
character may be raised by the investiga
ton of these contracts, Can the law of
1871 retroact and disturb the title adjudi-
Gated and determined under the act of 1862 ?
Would not such law be &C post faeto
Is not the Government bound by the act of
its Executive and his minister, even though
that act should be found to have been
illegal3 If property be legally recoverable
under the act of 1871, what security of title |
can any one have to property paid for in
Confederate money and sdjudicated to be-
long to him Under the law of 1862 ?
Does not a person armed with con-
tract under the act of 1871 enjoy facili-
ties for levying black-mail or hush-money |
TOO great to be entrusted by the Govern
ment to anybody unoficiallyf Is not the
tendency of such law demoralizing to the
greatest extent one dangerous to the liber
les of the people as guaranteed by the Bill
If Rights? The evidence upon which |
hese contracts are based is all &c parte, and
he witnesses, spies and informers. Men
whose trade it is to gain information in or
Ter that they may expose it for sale in the
market to the highest bidder are not exactly
he ones to be trusted with the powers at
empted to be conferred by the act of, 1871
through these contracts.