The daily Cairo bulletin. (Cairo, Ill.) 1878-1???, 1880-08-04


had intcrferred and overued the decision
OF the state court, there might have been
doubt, certainly; but the federal court
only interfcred to complicate, not TO decide
or override. Anyhow, it is
NO BUSINESS OF THE ARMY
to enter upon such questions and, even if
it might be SO, in any event--if the civil
authority is supreme, as the constitution
declares 1t to be, the South Carolina case
was one In which the army had q plain
duty, Had Gen.. Ruger asked me for ad-
vice, and if I had given it, should of
course have notified you of my action i'm
mediately, so that it could have been
promptly overruled if it should have been
deemed advisable by you, or other supe-
riors in authority. Gen. Ruger did not
ask for my advice, and l inferred from that
and other facts that he did not desire il, or,
that, being in direct communication with my
military superiors at the seat Of government,
who were nearer to him in time and distance
than l was, deemed it unnecessary. As
Gen. Ruger had the ultimate responsibility
of the action, and had really the greater
danger to confront in the final action IN
the matter, did not venture to embarrass
him by suggestions. He was department
commander and the lawful head Of the mil
ltary administration within the limits of
the department; but, BESIDES knew that
he had been called to Washington for con.
sultation before taking command, and was
probably aware OF the views of the admin
istrahon as to civil affairs in his command.
l knew that he was in direct communica-
ton with my superiors in authority in ref
erenee to the delicate subjects presented for
his consideration, or had ideas Of his own
which he believed to be sufficiently
in accord with the views of
our common superiors to enable him to act
intelligently, according to his judgment
and without suggestions from those not on
the spot and not as fully acquainted with
the facts as himself He desired too, to be
free to act, as he had the eventual greater
responsibility, and so the matter was gov.
erned as between him and myself,
As have been writing thus freely to you,
l may still further unbosom myself be stat
ing that
HAVE NOT THOUGHT IT LAWFUL OR WISE
TO USE FEDERAL TROOPS
in such matters as have transpired east of
the Mississippi within the last few months,
save SO far as they may be brought into ac-
ton under the article or the constitution
which contemplates meeting armed resist
ance, or invasion of state more powerful
than the state authorities can subdue by
the ordinary processes, and then only when
requested by the legislature, or if il could
not be convened in season, by the governor,
and when the president of the United
States interviewed in that manner, it is a
state OF war, not peace. The army is labor
ing under disadvantages and has been used
unlawfully at times, in the judgment OF the
people TO mine certainly, and we have
lost great deal Of the kindly feeling
which the community al large once felt TOR
US. at is time 10 stop and unload
Officers in command of troops Of ten find it
difficult to act wisely and safely when supe-
riors in authority have different views Of
the law from theirs, and when Legislation
has sanctioned action seemingly in conflict
with the fundamental law, and they gen
orally defer to the known judgement Of
their lsuperiors. Yet the great crises, and
are held to such responsibility, especially
those at or near the head Of 1t, that it is
necessary on such momentous occasions to
dare to determine for themselves what is
lawful and what is not lawful under our
system.
IF THE MILITARY Authorities SHOULD RE
INVOLVED,
as might possibly be the case in such eX,
ceptonal times, when there existed such
divergent views as TO the correct result the
army will suffer from its past action if it
had acted wrongfully. Our regular army
had little hold upon the affections Of the
peopole of to-day, and its superior officers
should certainly, as far as lies in their pow
er, legally and with righteous intent, aim to
defend the right, which to us is the law,