The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1880-06-25


among them. To best preserve the state of
things he proposed to let the civil authorities
execute the civil laws. War he regarded rs
only necessary to destroy opposition to law
tul authority, but when peace was established,
and when the civil authorities were ready and
willing TO perform their duties the military
power should cease to lead, and the civil ad-
miuistratou should resume its natural and
riehtiul conditions. He declared himself SOL
emily impressed with the belief that the
great principles OF American liberty were the
lawful inheritance Of the whole people, and
should forever continue to be. He declared
that the right of trial by jury, haOeas corpus,
liberty of the press, freedom of speech, the
natural right of person and Of property
should be preserved. He believed that free
institutions being essential to the prosperity
and happiness of the people were themselves
tho strongest inducements to peace and
order. He declared that the civil authorities
and tribunals should have the consideration
of and jurisdiction over crimes and offenses,
and should be supported in the exercise of
that Jurisdiction. But while thus recognizing
the rights of the people he announced, with
soldet-like directness and brevity, that he
should suppress armed insurrection and for.
chile resistance to law by force # arms at
once. What sort Of language was this to
hear from the mouth Of the military satrap
they expected? They looked for Caesar
and they found in his stead tho expounder
and defender of the constitutional laws of the
fathers, and the exponent of the rights OF the
free men who speak the English tongue
Louisiana and Texas for the time being
moved forward on the road to reconstruction
with brisk eagerness, outstrippng their sis
tiers; and had General Hancock remained in
command, the disorders which followed, the
misrule and contention eliminating in actual
anarchy, and rendering Louisiana at last fit
instrument for the preparation of great
crime would not have taken place. General
Hancock maintained the purity and independ-
ence Of the elections, refused to
organize military commissions to take
the place of judicial trials and
would permit no military interference with
civil administration. The mayor of New
Orleans formally requested his inter-
ference by military order in certain proceed
ings against the corporation. General Han
cock declined, on the ground that his inter.
ference would be unconstitutional, and
could only be exercised in an emergency
which did not, in his opinion, then exist. He
was requested by the general commanding
the district Of Texas to order military
commission for the trial Of acertain offenders.
He declined, stating rs his reasons, that
while the act passed by congress "for the
more efficient government of the rebel states"
made it the duty Of commanders of military
districts to punish disturbers of the public
peace and criminals, that power, from the
nature Of things, should only be exercised
when the local civil tribunals were unable or
unwilling to enforce the laws, o supposition
which did not exist, state government in
subordination to the United States being
then in the full exercise of its power in
Texas. General Hgncocks predecessor had
summarily, by military order, removed the
clerk of y court and bad appointed another
in his place, General ii mock revoked this
order, on the ground that if there were any
charges against the clerk so removed the
courts were competent to take action in the
premises. His predecessor had rendered the
administration Of justice inefficient by insti.
tuting certain qualifications for persons to be
eligible to do jury duty, such qualification
being made by military order General
Hancock revoked the military order, an
nouncing that he would not permit the civil
authorities to be embarrassed by military in
reference. In December be issued an order
prohibiting military interference with the
elections unless when necessary TO keep the
peace at the polls, as being contrary to law
and he ordered that no soldier be allowed to
appear at any polling place unless as q citi-
zen of the state registered voters, and for
the purpose of voting; but he ordered fur
Their, that commanders Of posts act promptly
in preserving the peace in case the civil au E
thorities failed to do so. Men interested in
civil controversies in great numbers applied
at the gent RAILS headquarters for interference,
assuming On his part both the arbitrary
power to interfere and the willingness to do
so. General Hancock, by general order,
again announced that the administration of
civil justice pertained only to the regular
courts, and that the rights of the liugsnts
did not depend on his views as TO the merits
of their cases. Having been appealed to by
the governor Of the state to remove from
office the president and memb rs of the
police jury Of the parish of Orleans, they
being charged with sppropriating to their
own use public funds, General Hancock re-
iterated the principle that they were matters
pertaining to the civil administration and
should be solely deal; with by the courts.
CONTROVERSY WITH GOVERNOR PEAsE.
It was in General Hancocks discussion
with Governor Pease, of Texas, in regard to
these very principles, that the evidences of
the qualifications of great civil ruler and
statesman were most clearly displayed. Gov
ernor Pease was not an executive elected by
the people. He had been appointed by the
military power of the federal government.
Shortly after this official came into office all
OF the judges Of he supreme court of Texas,
five in number, and twelve out of seventeen
of the district judges wero arbitrarily re-
moved from Office, and others, whom this
functionary desired, were appointed in their
places. In addition to this, the county off
GERS in seventy-tive out of the one hundred
aud twenty-eight counties wero removed, and
Others appointed in their places. By arbi-
trary order, none but persons capable of talk
ing the test oath, and registered as such,
We're allowed TO serve as jurors. Such had
been the state of affairs in Texas when Gem
eral Hancock became the equally irresponsi-
bic, almost autocratic military ruler of both
states. No people but one defeated and eX.
hausted by q long and bloody war would have
endured such outrages. Such arbitrary acts
of themselves would have been sufficient,
under ordinary circumstances, to have DEL
uged any state in blood. This wrong, Cen
eral Hancock, rs soon rs he took command,
aimed to repair, and his first step in this di.
rection was the promulgation Of the famous
General Order No. 49," to which reference
has been made, declaring that the people of