Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1876-01-29
ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA.
SATURDAY, JANUARY %, 1876.

SATURDAY, JANUARY %, 1876.
The Supreme Court of the United States
recently rendered q most important decision in
relation to the rights of heirs OF Southern bel
ligerents whose property was confscated dur
Jug the late war;; declaring that the Contsca-
ton act of 1862 Invested the entire interest OF
he held no rights in reversiou that could b.
lawfully conveyed to the detriment OF his heirs.
This decision is mainly devoted to the prop
er construction of the Constitutional clause pro-
vidiug that no attainder OF treason shall work
a forfeiture except during the life OF the person
attainted, and the joint resolution Of Congress
explanatory ofthe Con6scation act of uIy, 1862,
likewise declaring that no proceedings under
the act should be so construed as to work a for
fixture of the real estate of the offender beyond
his natural life.
The Supreme Court 10 Interpreting the spirit
and effect of these provisions, held that the
sale of a supposed reversiou of real estate in
Washington by the late Maj. Chas. S. Wallach,
of that city, who was an officer in the Conted-
crate army, to John Van Riswick, subsequent
to an adjudication of con6scation aud sale OF
such estate, was void and imperative Us against
the claims of Major Wallach' $ heirs, who, not
withstanding the conveyance of their ancestor,
upon his demise, became, by operation OF law,
seized of the estate in fee simple.
The opinion of the Court, delivered by MIR.
Justice Strong, argues that the conhscatlon
proceedings divest the entire estate out OF the
offender" and negatives the idea OF a remain
ing vested interest expectant upon his demise,
clothed with the incidents of such estates, and
the power of alienation at common law, or by
devise.
The Court intimates that the heirs might
take the inheritance by descent, although the
ancestor be not actually seized, but deny the
applicability Of the common law maxim, that
the fee can never be in allegiance, ADD rest their
reasoning upon the spirit and intention Of the
law-makiug power.
They asslnilate the rule of law in such cases
10 this country with that laid down 10 the case
Of Lord De LaWarre, as analogous 10 principle,
and hold that the effect of the legislation upon
this subject has been to impose a bare personal
disability upon the person whose estate has
been confscated, for his life only, and the
unanimous conclusion of the Court iu this case
is 10 restore it to the heirs of Maj. Wallach.
The decision is of peculiar interest to the
Southern people, not only as illustrating the
general tenor OF judicial construction upon
legislation inimical to those of the South, who
participated iu the late conflict, but will be a
future inhibition against all dealing 10 such
estates, and Specializing upon the mistoriuues
and calamities of war.
Corollary to this it is observable that in con-
STRUNG enactments Of Congress, passed 10 pur-
suance of the powers conferred by the Consti-
tuition of declaring the punishment of treason,
the Court has Invariably employed cautious
terms and guarded language. When review
log the English statutes and decisions, Mr..
Justice Strong does not hesitate to consider
those engaged in ~leyyiDg War against the King
10 the comprehensive light of TRAITORS" and
to regard their acts as absolute treason, but IN
marked contradistinction to this pharaseology,
the act of Congress is termed IAN act for the
con6scation Of enemies property" whose pur-
pose was ito take away from an adherent of a
public enemy his property, and thus deprive
him Of the means by which he could aid that
enemy" and this purpose would be thwarted
by leaving a portion 'of the estate still vested
10 the enemies adherent," which (f) be could
sell and convey, his power to aid the public
enemy would thereby remain" Major Wallach
Is spoken OF when personally referred to as
'the offender ''the person whose estate has
been coniscated, aud classified as one of "those
who, under the act, had forfeited all their es
tate" Sc, aud it is a noteworthy observation
that of all the various phases 10 which acts Of
the Southern people during the late war have
been reviewed by the Supreme Court, 10 no
one instance has that august body declared any
ofthem to have been treason against the Con
s~titution Of the country. This h~esitaucy upon
the part of the Supreme Court is suggestive of
the existence of a grave legal doubt, amoog the
members of that body, conceroing the main
questions submitted to, and supposed to have
been decided by the irrepealable arbitrament
of the sword. The cause 10 which the decision
alluded to was rendered was argued by Gen.
Albert Pike and Major Hamilton Pike, of this
city, for the heirs, and Mr.. L. j.. Durant, of
Washington, D. g., for Van Riswick.
In a notice OF the Lersner Boiling case, in
the Gazette, a few days ago, unintentional in-
justice was done Hon. j. Randolph Tucker,
whose name was entirely omitted in the notice,
but who originated the suit, for Lersner, argued
the cese before the Court of Appeals, and with
Mr.. Brooke, submitted a written argament to
the Supreme Court.
PILOT LAW.-rhe Legislature has passed
a bill to repeal the twenty-third section, chap
TER 81 of the Code of 1878, 10 relation TO