Year: 1864

Il the act OF Congress placing in the field PrinI


c1paIs who have furnished substitutes Conf
:stitutIonalf


The Confederate government having as yet failed
to pass act establishing Supreme Court and tba
Courts Of the various State having held
that it their duty to entertain jurisdiction in all
cases, where writ Of habeGs corpus had been sned
outby citizen ofthe State alleging detention BY an
officer of the Confederate government under an act
OF Congress, we purpose briefly examining the va
lidity of the late act requiring principals who had
furnished substitutes for the military service, also
to 60 into the field. Our inquiry will be confined
to the validity of the law as it affects citizens OF
this State, for there is no Confederate Supreme
Court, it may be that there will not be that uni
forrhity of decisions which would arise, was there
Court to which all the various State Courts were
bound to yield obedience upon the construction of
acts of Congress. If there was Supreme Confed-
crate Court composed of able lawyers, such as l
doubt not the President would appoint, have no
doubt it wOnld place the same construction upon
the conscription and exemption acts as has been
done by our. own Supreme Court So far as the
question is concerned whether the act of Congress
. allowing substitution was a mere privilege or an
indulgence, or a contract, this question has been
decided by our Supreme Court after a FIJI and able
discusson-a discussion marked with great ability,
and in which the Confederate government was rep
resented by two of our most distinguished lawyers,
and the opinion of the Court that it contract,
has met with the general appreciation of the jurists
OF The country.


Then, as it is contract has Congress the Con.
stItutional power to annul nP To ascertain this
question it will be necessary to revert TO the organ
ic law and see what powers have been conferred on
the legislative branch of the government The first
thing which we discover in this instrument, is the
fact that the Confederate Constitution is brought
into existence not by the people of the Confederate
States, but by the States themselves, leach State
acting in its sovereign and independent character"
However much we may have heretofore differed
about the sovereignty of the States, or the power
and strength of the old Union that question is now
patent from the unmistakeable wording Of the or
ganic law.


1t is based upon the idea of the sovereignty of the
States, and the Confederate government is the
agent of the separate sovereigntes which compose
. it 1t possesses no inherent principles of soyer-
eighty, except as such are expressly delegated by
the States under the Constitution. 1t possesses no
powers except such as are necessary to prevent
ternal we'll as internal violence. The paramount
object in its formation, gathered from the instru
ment ITSELF seems to have been a closer alliance Of
che different sovereign States composing it for their
mutual protection. 1t declares that all powers not
expressly delegated, belong to the States thus ig
noring every such an idea as that the government
can do any mot expressly sanctioned by the
ganc law. II ignores all internal improvem ents on
the part Of the government and leaves such things
to be performed by the sovereignties interested,
1t repudiates the great principle upon which
many suppose ed the old United States government
was founded-that of being formed by "the people
of the United States for moro perfect Union :"
and those who formerly held that the Constitution
embodied the doctrine Of consolidation OF the
Union indispensable to our prosperity and happi-
ness must be satisfied upon reading our present
organic law, that it the constant aim and stu
dous intention of the trainers of the Constitution
| that no such conStructon.should be admissible.
The Constitution establishes a government of
limitations and restrictions and allows the egisla-
tive branch of the same to pass no law which is not
| warranted by that instrument. The powers grant.
ed to this department Of the government plainly
marked out and "blaZed )" and those powers not so
expressly delegated by the sovereign States, COM
posing the Confederate government are, by the Con-
stitution, reserved to the States. Even under the
| old government which possessed many Of the es-
senlials Of nationality which wanting in our
Constitution, Judge Patterson of the Supreme Court
of the United States held in the case of Calder %.
Bull, Dallas 1885, that the State Legislatures re-
tdined ercLusiUsly, all the poUers of legislation
tohich toere not expressly taken array By the Con-
stitutioR and that constructive p0uers could be
exercised by the Federal gOUernment If this q
correct exposition of the law under the old govern
ment, how much more correct is it under the new
The States upon ratifying the Consultation restrict
ed themselves Of the right to enter into treaties,
| grant letters of marque and reprsal coin money,
make any thing but gold and silver coin legal ten.
der in the payment of debts; they also covenanted
not to pass an post tacsO law any lao impair
ing the obligation ofcontrdcts Now it is apparent
to the most casual observer that the States had
deprived themselves of the above enumerated rights
they could be exercised by the Confederate gov
ernmeut unless they were expressly delegated. The
| States, therefore, do delegate to the government
some ofhe above powers, such the right to enter
into treaties, coin money, grant letters of marque
and reprisal &c Here then we find that the States
are not allowed to make any thing but gold and
silver coin legal tender in the payment of debts,
| nor pass any law mpairing the obligation of con.
tracts Why were these restrictions imposed on
the Statesi The reasons are obvious. Gold and
silver coin has the same relative value in all well


regulated governments. Suppose the States were
allowed TO make bills of any corporation legal ten.
Ger in the payment Of debts and if acted upon, the
| effect would be deplorable. A man might be com
PEELED to accept in full satisfaction OF hundred
dollar note, paper currency, which would not com
mand five cents in the dollar. Such an act might
deprive q man Of bis property without just compen
sation. The reason why State can pass no Law
imparing the obligation of contracts, is another
wise restriction, for were 1t otherwise, 1t would de
stroy all enterprIse-check all commerce-deprvt
men of vested rights without any equivslent--in
word such an act would shock the moral sense o
| mankind.


IT. then, there be such weghty reasons why tn,
States should not be permitted to make any thing
but gold and silver coin legal tender in the pay
ment of debts, nor pass any law impairing the OBJ
legation Of contracts, We may inquire whether tn
States have delegated any such extraordinary pow
ers to the Confederate government Let any on
! who supposes that the States have so stult6eC
themselves as to have delegated such powers, study
the Constitution closely, and he will rise from it
examination satisfied that no such authority cal


be found.


Suppose, when the Constitution was being sub
mtted to the States for ratification it lad containe


clause allowing Congress TO pass laws impairinl


the obligation of contracts, can any one doubt wha


would have been its fate 1t could never have re


ceived the sanction of a single State The incOr