Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1880-07-16
Gen. Hancock to Coy Pease.
A Siatesnha n-lil<e Letter which Clearly
Defines tho Great Issue involved tn
the Present Campaign.

IIEApQR's Fifth MILITARY DISTRICT,
NEW ORLEANS, I.a.) March ., 1868.
To His Ercellency Z. ". Pease, Coz
rrnor Of Isras:
SIR:-Your communication of the
18th January last, was received in
due course of mail, (the 9th Janu-
ary) but not until it had been widely
circulated by the newspaper press.
To such q letter-written and pub
lshcd for manifest purposes-it has
been my intention to reply as soon
rs leisure from more important bust
ness would permit.
Your statement that the act of
Congress "tO provide for the more
efficient government of the rebel
States" declares that whatever gov
ernment existed in Texas was pro-
yisional; that peace and order should
~ enforced; that Texas should be-
part OF the Fifth Military power;
that the President should appoint an
officer to command in said district
and detail q force to protect the
rights of person and property, sup.
press insurrection and violence, and
punish offenders, either by military
commission, or through the action
of local civil tribunals, as in his
judgment might seem best, viii! not
be disputed. One need only to read
the act to perceive it contains such
provisions. But how all this is sup
posed to have made it my duty to
order the military commission re-
quested, you have entirely failed to
show. The power to do thing if
shown, and the propriety of doing
it, are often very different matters.
You observe you are at loss to un-
derstGnd how government without
representation in Congress, has all
the powers which the act intends,
and may fully exercise them accord
ingly. If you think it ought to lave
more powers, should be allowed to
send members to Congress, WELD a
militia force, and possess yet other
powers, your complaint is not to be
preferred against me, but against
Congress, who made it what it is.
AS respects the issue between us,
any question as to what Congress
ought to have done has no perrin
ence. You admit the act of Con-
gress authorizes me to try an offend
er by military commission, or allow
the local civil tribunals to ny, as l
Nail deem best; aud you caunot
deny the act expressly recognizes
such local civil tribunals as legal
authorities for the purpose specified.
When you contend there are no legal
local civil tribunals for any purpose
in Texas, you must either deny the
plain reading of the net of Congress,
or the power of Congress to pass the
act
You next remark that you dissent
from my declaration that the coun.
try CTexas) is in n state of profound
peace" and proceed tc state the
grounds of your dissent. They ap'
pear to me not little extraordinary
l quote your words: 1T is true
there no longer exists here (Texas
any organized resistance to the au
thority of the United States. But {
large majority of the white popula
tro Who participated in the late re
h>Iiion, are embittered against th'
Government and yield to it an un
willing obedience. Nevertheless
you concede they do yield obedience
You proceed:
None of this class have any af
lection for tho Government, an,
very few, if pny, respect it. The,
regard the Legislation of Congress
on the subject of reconstruction IL
unconstitutional and hostile to thei
Interests, and consider the Govern