Evening star., 1895-06-01
When Did the Civil War End.

When Did the Civil War End:
| To the Editor Of The Evening Star:
l noticed in The Star of last week the
| ruling of the pension bureau In Barle-
young's case. 1t seems that his service
commenced April 10. 1866. The necessities
of his case required that he should have
served in the time of the war of the rebel
| lion, to determine which it was necessary
| to ascertain the exact date when this war,
as matter of fact and law, was terminated
The bureau took up the question as a new
problem. The assistant secretary of the
interior held on this point that the actual
termination Of hostilities was in July. 1861
| and adds, 1T is not believed that Congress
intended to pension those whose rendition
of service, military or naval, had no con-
nection whatever with the belligerent opar-
ations of the war, was not upon the theater
OF the conflict, and had nothing to do with
the objects and purposes of the war"
1t is submitted that this question was
distinctly passed upon by the United States
Supreme Court at its December term, 1861
which came to very different conclusion.
There were large number of cases then
pending in the Supreme Court, under "the
captured and abandoned property act' of
March II, 1863 Q2th Stats, 500 This act
authorized loyal owners of such property
| to bring suit in the Court of Claims agt
the United states, 'at any time within .wo
years after the suppression of the rebel
property taken and sold by the govern
ment during said war.
The Court of Claims had in each case
ascertained the facts and rendered iudg-
n,ents pro fornna for the several claimants,
and the United States appealed them to the
supreme Court, where the Attorney Cen
eral selected from the mass four or five,
which, collectively, presented all the points
which he wished to urge against the claims
severally.
He made four several points The first
statute of March y, 1863; were not COM
menced within two years after the sup
preston of the rebellion" as required by
the third section of said act, cited above.
1t is thus seen that this point stood at
the front to be argued and decided by the
court.
The Attorney General, E. lockwood
Hear, was aided by R. S. Hale. special
ney General argued all the points at
length; Messrs. ]. A. Wills, T. j. d. Full
ler w. +. Clark and A. G. Riddle for the
several claimants. Mr.. Hale opened and
closed the argument for the United States
The Attorney General replied at length to
the three first named counsel for the claim
ants. and to Mr. Riddle was specially as
signed the task of replying to him. One
point of his reply was thought to be good
he was able to produce an opinion of that
distinguished lawyer settling the question
against his argument.
Justice David Davis delivered the onin
lon of the court. His labor was mainly
with the limitation-the time when the war
ended. when for all purposes where private
rights We're involved, the rebellion was sup
pressed.
The time of the institution of the suit
where the question arose was June 5, 1865.
and under the rule of the pension office
that would be too late.
This point wes elaborated with exhaust
I've care. Justice Davis thus stated the
proposition: When, in the sense of this
law. was the rebellion entirely sup
pressed?"
The opinion declares that the question Of
when the war ended was not to be left for
each claimant to settle, at his peril but
was to be determined by some formal pub
lie act of the government.
The first official declaration hearing on
this point was the Presidents proclama-
ton of August 20, 1865. which referred to
his proclamation of April ., 1866, that arm
ed resistance had everywhere ceased.
The opinion declares that Congress adopt-
ed this date of August 60 1860. as the day
the rebellion closed.
The court said that It was the purpose of
Congress to favor this class of claimants
and 1t is clear that the point of time
should be construed most favorably to the
person. who adhered to the national
Union"
clear language: "As Congress, In its legfs-
lation for the army, has determined that
tho rebellion closed on the 2Otn day of
August. 1866. there is no reason why its
declaration on this subject should not be
received as settling the question, wherever
private rights are affected by it,"
Ard SO the judgment of the Supreme
Court was. United States vs.. Anderson.
9th Wallaces Reps. 56-72D Contrast this
language with the harsh. cruel spirit of
the pension office decision. which violates
the humane rule Of all courts and writer's
English and American that remedial stat
utes shall be most literally construed. 20
secure to benefciaries under them the re-
lief they provide for them. r.