Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

VOLUME XXXIX. j MILLEDGEVILLE, GEORGIA, JUNE 29, 1869. HOUGHTON, BARNES & MOORE, PUBLISHERS A.NU FROBKIEIOBA. S. N. BOUGHTON, Editor. :o: £ [j c £ e b c r a 1 it n ion, IS PUBLISHED WEEKLY IN MILLEDGEVILLE, GA, (Corner of Hancock »ui3 Wilkinson Streets.) At $3 a year in Advance. ADVERTISING. Tkansient.—One Dollar persquare of tenlinea for first insertion, and seventy-five cents f_>.' eaeli riilise- qnent continuance. Tributes of respect, Resolutions by Societies, Obit uaries exceeding six lines, Nominations for office, Com munications or Eiiitoriel notices fur individual benefit, charged us transient advertising, LEGAL ADVERTISING. Lissrnlient Opinion in tlie Two (.'uses of j whether they had a right to withdraw Chancdly cs. Bailey «$r Cleveland i)* The from the Federal Union or CoiVsiitu- Cevtral Railroad vs. Ward & Owen*—j tioual compact wit hunt incurring the pen- ln the Supreme Court of Georgia, June.!<*&*<* they hazarded by so doing, hut 1868. i whether the power to wild raw is not a j right necessarily inherent in every perfect Iverson L. Harris, Judge. j State ? It they were perfect Slates, It is not within the narrow confines j ihey had an inherent right to alter their of municipal law that we are to look j forms .ofgovernment, and to institute tor me principles upon which a correct new governments. Their obligation to decision oi the questions presented by observe the covenants of the Fedetal die records in the above causes can be ! Constitution was exactly the same as made. They are to be collected from that resting upon sovereign Slates die vast field of international law, and m their Conventions, compacts and especially tfiat portion of it occupied treaties with each other, the engage- j meats being between equals, conler- ! * be resolution ol the legality and con fiscation and sale ol l he Railroad shares . in the lirst case, and in the other ol tin' and imposing restric- iverc done by them in theprosccution oj such ins irra tion, were illegal and void. If the late war had been marked merely hv the armed resistance uf some of the citizens of the State to its lawi, or to the laws of the Federal Government, ns in the cases in Massa chusetts in 1769, and in Pennsylvania in 1793, it would very properly have been called an insurrection, ami the acts of such insurgents have been held as illegal, the relations of the States, to wards each other not being affected politically thereby, and those citizens in revolt, not having acquired the epi thet and privileges ol enemies. But when such insurrection covers a Sheriff's Sales, per levy of ten lines, or less, $2 50 i ^g'^'tlj °! 'he consideration of the prom •' Mortgage fi fu sales, per square 500 issurv note eiveil for the services oft hr Citation* for Letters of Administration, ami' , . - ‘ » 1 me services or 111 plaintiff in error as a suostitule in tin Guardianship, 3 00 Application for dismissiou from Administration, 3 00 “ “ “ “ Oor.rdtiinsL.ip,- 3 00 “ “ leave to iell Land 5 00 “ for Homesteads, 175 Notice to Debtors and Creditors, 3 00 Sales of Land, &i., persquaie 5 00 “ perishable property, 10 days, per square7-- 150 Estray Notices, 30 days, 3 00 Foreclosure of Mortgage, per sq., each time, 100 Applications for Homesteads, (two weeks,) 1 75 LEG A L AD V EKTISEM ENTS. Sales of Laud, &c., by Administrators, Execul or Guardians, are required by iav.*to belie! first Tuesday in the month, between the bom s of H in the forenoon and 3 in the afternoon, at the Court House in the County in which the property is situated Notice of these sales tntist be given in a public gu- zette 40 days previous to the day of sale. Notices lor the sale of personal properly must be given in like manner 10 days previous to safe day. Notices to the deb tots and creditors of an estate must also be published 40 days. Notice that application will be ma te to the Court ol Ordinary for leave io sell Land, &c , must be publish ed for two months. Citations for letters of Administration. Guardianship, Sic., must be published 30 days—for dismission from Administration, monthly three months—for dismission from Guardianship, 4(1 days. Rules for foreclosure of .Mortgage must be publish ed monthly for four months—for establishing lost pa pers tor the full space of three months—for conipell ing titles from Executors or Administrators, Where bond has been given by liiedtoeased, tho full space of three months. Publications will always be continued according to these, the legal requirements, unless otherwise ordered. Book and Job Work, of all kinds, PROMPTLY AND NEATLY EXECUTED AT Til IN OFFICE. ranks ol lhe Confederate army for ome of the [fomissors, can depend, in my opinion, only on two propositions. If either of those propositions be true, the judgment of the majority of litis Court cannot tor a moment, be supported. Those propositions tire : 1st. If 1 he Stales which withdrew ring rights tions. J lie reasons of justification j a Territory or Stale, and the citizens for a breach of their engagements jare in arms, not by their own will, hut should be so strong as to vindi- j by the compulsory power of the State cate their acts before lhe world of pub- j Government, such resistance assumes iic opinion. Whether broken with or j ihe proportions, and is acknowledged without adequate cause, or however ( by the nations as ciril war. those engagements may have been In the Supreme Court ofthe United sought to be enforced, the important j States, in what are familiarly known fact Stands out unaffected by any of as the Prize Cases—reported in 2nd these considerations, that theactsdone Black, p. 066—it was urged in argu- were acts of sovereign or perfect .States, rnent, that the people ol tlie South were From what I have said it will ap- insurgents, that they were traitors, and, pear that 1 assert as propositions which as such, could not make war. To this . from the Federal Union and formed af* j I think cannot successfully he coritro- Justice Crier, delivering the opinion of 1 terwards the Southern Confederacy, verted— the Court, replied; “The law of na- lsi. That the Federal Constitution tions is called the law of nature. It is were sovereign or perfect States at that tune, as such Stales, they had a right to engage in public war with those States which continued iu the Federal Union ; or, 2d. If the Stales attempting to with draw from the Federal Union, formed the <lc facto government called the Southern Confederacy, and engaged in war with those which did not attempt to withdraw, and that war was recog nized by the Federal Government as a civil war, and the Southern Confedera cy as a belligcraht. power, then from such was made bv the people of separate, founded in the common consent, as sovereign and independent Stales. well as the common sense, of the world. 2. I hat ratifying the Federal Con- It contains no such anomalous doctrine stitut ion by separate Stale Conventions, as that which this Court is, for the first they, by such action distinctly asserted time, desired to pronounce, to wit :— their sovereign and independent char- That insurgents, who have risen in re ader as States. hellion against their sovereign, expelled • 3d. f hat the Federal Constitution her Courts, established a revolutionary contains, within itself, no surrender of government, organized armies, and commenced hostilities, are not enemies, because they are traitors, and a war levied on the Government by Iraitors, in order to dismember and destroy it, lllillcbgcbillc business pirfetonu Attorneys at Law: BRISCOE, L. H., City Hall. HARRIS, IVERSON L, Hancock st- KEXAN & KENAN, Hancock street. McADOO. W G, over Stet-on’s Store. McKINLEY, W &. A, over Clark’s l>iu£ Store. NEWELL & WILLIAMSON, Newell’s Hall. SANKORI), DANIEL B., Granite Front. WHITE, X. W., Masonic Hull. Physicians : CASE, G D, office at residence on Wayne st. EDWARDS, U., office at resident 11 Jefferson st. HALL. W. II., office at late residence on Hancock st. HERTY.J W., office over J M Clark’s Ding Store. HOLMES, JAS , Wayne st., north Masonic Hall. WHITE, S G.. office at residence on Jefferson st. xScntist: G. W. JONES, office in Dnn.-n Bank building. Dry Goods. BARNETT, W., & CO.. Hancock st- BISCHOF, A. Milledgeville Hotel. JOSEPH. A.. Waitzfelder’s Old Stand. ROSEN FIELD, J. & BRO . Milledgeville Hotel. THOMAS, H. W. & CO., under Newell's Hall. WINDSOR, T. T. & CO., “ Drug- Store : CLARK, JOHN M., S K cor. Wayne & Hancock sfs. Groceries: BROOKS, N'B & CO., Hancock street. CAUAKER, T. A., S W cor Wayne A. Hancock sts. COMl’VON. P. M. & SONS, Masonic HalL CONN. W.T., Brown’s New Building. CUSHING WALLS, Hancock st. ELLISON, W., Washington Hall. JOHNSON, J. L. & CO, East side Wayne st. KIHLt, S J. East side Wavnc st. MUNDAY. C B & CO, WeVt side of Wayne st. PITTMAN & PERRY. West side of Wayne st. SKINNER F. &. CO., Milledgeville Hotel. (P. O ) STETsON, W S & BROS, Granite Front. TEMPLES, If.. Hancock st., opposite Masonic Hall- WINDSOR, TT & CO-, 1st door south Drug Store. | WRIGHT & BROWN, West side Wayne st. Millinery; MRS. LEIKENS. N W cor. Wayne Sc Hancock sts. MRS. A. P. LIND RUM. Brown’s New Building. Jewelry: . SUPl’EK, JAMES, Waitzfelder’s Building. WEIDEXMAX, GT, Brown’s New Building. Warehouse: JONES, JNO Sc CO., Hancock st.,(near Jefferson st.) Bar Rooms: CALLAWAY. L X, Hancock st. HOLDER. J II, Washington Hall. LEWIS, E. G., Mitle igeville Hotel. TOLL & DOERFLIXGEK, Hancock st. Confectionery and Toys: CoXX.WT, Brown’s New Building. Buygy, Wagon and Furniture Shop. CAKAKER, W Sc J, Masonic HalL Shoes and Leather. TRICE, E, Washington Hall. Refreshment Saloon: LEIKENS, G, N W cor- Wayne and Hancock sts. Tin, Stoves and Honsc Furnishing’ Goods. STALEY, JOSEPH, West side of Wayne street. Bakery: DOERFLINGER, J K, in rearof MeComb’sold Hotel their individual character as States. 4iir. That being perfect States, the Southern States, renouncing the obli gations of the Federal Union, had recognition, the Southern Confederacy ! 9n inherent right to form, as they did, is riot a war, because it is an insuriiec- was invested with all the belligerent the Southern Confederacy. , tion.” rights and powers which belong unde- j 5th. That as perfect Stales, they had In this extract there are two maleri- rnahly to sovereign States or nations a right to engage in war, as other sov- al declarations ; 1st, it was a tear, arid engaged in public war,or in other words, ereign Slates could do. i 2nd, 1 hat lire citizens of the Southern the question is, whether the war be- If the proposition, then, he true, that Confederacy were the enemies of the tween the States was a public or a civil 1 they were States, then the war in which Federal Government. The war was, wtir. government, tlien,*could rightfully do, in carrying on the civil war and main taining its resistance, what a free and independent Stale could do—the meas ures of right and power and means be ing precisely the same in both belliger ents. It follows from this postulate, that in the administration of justice in the decision of questions before its Courts, indeed, in all matters touching its own defence or security, the actsot the several departments of a belliger ent power or de facto government, are as legal and unquestionable as are those of independent nations. It is insisted by the counsel for the C. R. II. & Banking Company that the Prize cases shew that nothing more was decided by them than the exist ence of war and of belligerent fights whilst the war continued. If by this they meant to say that the Supreme Court of the United Slates held that it was an insurrection only, and did not change the relations of the States engaged so as to make their citizens respectively enemies to each other, they have greatly misun derstood the extent ol the principles of public law upon which lhe cases were decided. The Prize cases admit that in organ izing the rebellion, the Stales acted as Stales claiming to be sovereign; that it was no loose organized insurrection, having no defined boundary or posses sion, it had a boundary marked by lines of bayonets, and south of this line is enemies ferritory, claimed and held in possession by an organized hostile belli gerent power. But counsel say that the belligerent rights belonged to the Southern Con federacy only whilst the war continued. It is certainly true, belligerent rights exist only whilst war continues, and it this truism was all that was meant iu be be asserted, it would not have challeng ed remark: but, if thereby, it was | meant to assert, or covertly to insinu ate, that the conquering Government could at iLs will or pleasure retract City Government. Mayor—Col. L. 11. Briscoe. Aldermen.—1. Josepli Staley; 2. Dr. S. G. White; 3 E. Trice; 4. Win. A. Williams; 5. P. T. Taylor, 6 Dr. W. H. Halt. Clerk.—Peter Fair. Marshal.—John B. Fair. Sexton.—Peter Ferrell. “Direct Trade with Europe.” J. II. ASHBRIDGE Of New Orleans. SJ. S. HUTTON, ^ Of Macon, Ga. J. H. ASHBRIDGE cfc CO., COMMISSION MERCHANTS AND General Purchasing Agents., LIVERPOOL.. ASUBKIDGE, SMITH A CO., NEW ORLEANS. Consignments solicited. Particular attention given to the sale of Southern lands to European capitalists and intending Immi grants. Orders for loreign goods executed on best possible terms. May 4, 1869. 40 ly* Dr. Tuffs Sarsaparilla and Queen’s Delight, The Great Alterative an«i l»!ood Purifier. Expectorant, A pleasautand sure enre for Coughs, Asthma, See Vegetable Liver Pills, For Dyapepbiti, liillioufliieK*, foe. Improved Liquid Hair Dye, Warranted the best in use. For sale in Milledgeville by L. *W. HUNT & CO. May 11, 1869.41 6m A CS- S3 XAT A \TT'I?TY f SAVE YOUR RAGS AND W AJM 1 till f l SEND THEM TO THIS OFFICE ! The highest market price paid for clean white cotton rags! Gather them up and send them in. Fed. Union OfEce, Dec. 29. UT ADKIFTt Or, Tin* Tide* of Fale.— This id a deeply interesting Novelet, hy Amanda M. Douglas,just begun in that first class Weekly, the Saturday Evening Post. Send for a Sample Number, containing the first por tion of the story, which will be furnished gratis. Do not delay, or they will be exhausted. Terms of Tlie A*»at, $5 50 a year (witli u beautiful Premium En graving), 6 copies for $8- Address II. PETERSON Sc CO., 3PJ Walnut SL, Philadelphia. 42 tf. »ry Hides Wanted. The highest market price will be paid for DRY HIDES at the Family Grocery Store of T. A. CARAKKE, Agent. Milledgeville, April 6th, 1869, 36 tf If the view that I have taken of our systems of government be founded in fact, (and I think il is confirmed b}’ all American history,) il must bo conced ed by all who reason, that when the ^Federal Constitution ofl7S9 was adopt ed by the conventions of the separate States then ratifying it, they were each sovereign and independent States, with an unquestionable right either to agree to or reject it. If they were then sov ereign and independent States, and could not have been coerced by their associates under the articles of confed eration, ’o agree tothe more perfect, union of the Federal Constitation, the im portant inquiry arises and demands a definite answer—when anti by what in strument was their sovereign and sepa rate existences as States lost or surren dered ? That sovereign powers, which were withheld by the Slates from the Confederate Congress, which preceded the adoption of the Federal Constitu tion, were by the latter instrument, delegated fo the departments of gov ernment under it, tor the exercise ol those powers for the benefit of the States thus united, is undeniable ; but upon the authority of what publicist can such delegation to a common agent of such sovereign powers be held to be a surrender of sovereignty i A complete answer to those who say that the sovereign characterofthe States w.is surrendered by the creation ofthe Federal Government, will be found in the following extract from Vattel; “Fi nally, sovereign or independent States may unite themselves together by a perpetual confederacy without ceasing to be each individually a, perfect State ; they wilt together constitute a Federal Re public ; their joint deliberations will not impair the sovereignly of each member, though they may in certain respects, put some restraint on the ex ercise of it in virt ue ol their voluntary engagements. A person does not cease to be tree and independent when he is obliged to fulfil engagements which he has voluntarily contracted.” The lat ter portico of this extract is conclusive that tfie States adopting the Federal Constitution did not cease to be free and independent, because they entered it,; -i;ennuis with each other, and could iu consequence thereof, be compelled to fulfil the engagements which they bad voluntarily contracted Thus it is apparent that the obligation to fulfil cove nants made by a sovereign or perfecL State is entirely compatible with continuing sovereignty and inde pendence. 1 may go a step further and concede that those Stales who suffer by a breach of such covenants, may, as in all cases of leagues, conventions, compacts and treaties, (for in principle they stand precisely on the same loot ing,) redress themselves as sovereign and independent States can do : but because such rights of redress have at tached, they can in no wise affect the char acler of the States, breaking their cove nants as Stales. Let it be borne con stantly in mind, that that character re mains unaltered and unalterable by any violation of their covenants. 'I here ts no fact more indisputable than that, it any prominent advocate of the Federal Constitution had in any one ofthe Stale Conventions, either directly or indi rectly, intimated an opinion, that by the ratification of the Federal Consti- tuion, the Stales surrendered their sep arate individuality and sovereignty as Slates, such was the extreme jealousy for the maintainance of State sovereign ty, such an opinion, or intimation of opinion would ha\e led to the prompt and overwhelming rejection of that in strument. This contemporary history ought, with every man seaking to understand the structure of American Govern ments, to be decisive of the great point, that the States were as sovereign after the ratification of the Federal Constitution, as they were under the articles of con federation. The inquiry is then, the States being they engaged with the other States re- j according to the Supreme Court of the maining in the Federal Union, was a j United States, a civil war. pub tic war. If the war was a public war, it can admit of no doubt, that in its prosecution, according to the rules and rights of war, whatever was done by them was legal, and is so regarded by the world. To the Slates, thus making public war, belong the rights of raising and maintaining armies, coining money, borrowing money, using the public credit, issuing treasury notes, employ ing all the instrumentalities necessary or appropriate to their defence, weak ening the power of the adversary, as by captures on sea or land, and also by confiscating enemies' property within theii limits. In Brown vs. The United States, S Crancfi, 143, it is said that as to en emies' property found within the terri tory of a belligerent power the right of confiscation is fully admitted by all ’tub- licist. War is not itself, an absolute confiscation. It simply confers the right to confiscation, which right is enforced by legislation. The enemy is not di vested of bis property by war. His ti tle remains in full vigor until a, hostile seizure and possession lias impaired his title. Whilst the practice of declining to confiscate debts and credits, and the private property of an enemy, will be found to be the wisest and most liberal policy, and which will, in progress of time, become the settled rule of all civ ilized nations, at this day, by the laws of war, the right of confiscation is an uncontrolled power, belonging to sover eign belligerents. From the foregoing line of argument, it must be apparent that I entertain the opinion that the recent war between the Slates, was a public war, and that, therefore, tite actual confiscation by the Courts ofthe Southern Confederacy, of the Railroad shares owned by North ern citizens, then the enemies of the Southern Confederacy, was authorized by the laws of war, and that the purchas er thereof, under a sale after its condemna tion, acquired a valid title, and further, that the note given in the other case, to the substitute, to take the place ofthe maker in the Confederate ranks, was founded on a legal consideration. inee delivering, orally, in June last, 1 have, before expressed tny own conviction that the war was a public war, as much so, indeed, as the recent war between Prussia and Austiia ; but as a tribunal, to which this Court is bound to conform its judgment, in such cases, has decided it to have been a civil war, my associates are constrained,by that judg ment, to ignore the idea that it was no more than an insurrection. They are bound to treat it as a civil war, drawing a/ter il all the consequences which jlow from such recognition. “A civil war,” savs Vattel, “breaks the bands of so ciety and goverment, or, at least, sus pends their force and effect. It pro duces, in the nation, two independent parties, who consider each other as en emies, and acknowledge no common judge. The two parties, therefore, must, necessarily, be considered, at least fora time, as constituting two sep arale bodies, or distinct societies.— Having no common superior to judge between them, they stand in precisely the same predicament as two nations who engage in a contest, and have re course to arms.” This being the case, it is very evident that the common taws of war, those maxims of moderation and honor, ought to be observed by both parties in every civil war. A civil war is never proclaimed eo nomine, against actual insurgents. Its actual existence is a fact which a Court is bound to notice and to know. Its true test is to be found in the fact that the regular course of justice is interrupted by revolt, rebel lion or insurrection, so that die Courts of justice cannot be kept open. A civil war exists,and hostilities may be prosecut ed on the same footing as if those opposing the Government weic foreign enemies in vading the land. Mr. Wheaton in bis treatise on the law of nations, says : “The general usage of nations regards such a war (civil war,) as entitling both the contending parties to all the rights of war against each other, and even as re spects neutral nations.” Mr. Justice Nelson, in delivering the dissenting opinion of the minority, in the Prize Cases, (the Judges differed only as to the point of time when the United Spates Government recognized the existence of civil war,) said : “In the case of a rebellion, or a that the Central Railroad and Banking Company should be decreed io cause appropriate entries of the ownership of \V ard and Owens to be made on the block-book of the Corporation. It must follow, also, in ihe other case, that the note given bv Bailey and Cleveland to Chaneely for his services as a sub stitute for Bailey in the Confederate armv is founded on a rainl consideration, and that judgment should have been rendered in favor of Chaneely The termination of the civil war in the conquest of the Southern Confed eracy as a belligerent power, produced consequences winch the necessities of this argument do not require me to consider further than to say, that, be yond all denial, the States composing it remained as States during that war with perfect organization, performing all their functions with the same regu larity as they had. previously to the war. Conquest dissolved the Confed erate Government, but the States com posing it remained. The conquest re stored the authority of the Federal Government where it had been dis placed by the Confederate Govern ment, and conferred the right onjy to change or alter (be political laws or in stitutions adverse to its own, accord ing to its policy or will; but conquest did not, could not give to the con quering Government any power over the executed, and past, so as to annul that, which, when done, was legal, and by its own concession, was a right be longing to a belligerent power. And here I may be pardoned for re ferriug to an opinion entertained in 186-5 by the highest functionary of the U. 6. Government, as 1 learned it from the then Provisional Governor of Geor gia, viz: “That all the acts done du ring the civil war by the Slate Govern ments were illegal; and that upon its termination, there was not within the State a single t iglitful functionary of her own creation, with authority to legis late, to interpret, or execute her laws.” I mention this fact, not directly with- N U M BEK 48. United Stales Government and of the States which have been con quered, with intelligence and fidelity— the multitude of questions which now vex, and- will probably for vears agitate our tribunals, and which, at every step, are embarrassing the in terpretation and validity-of contracts, could receive an ea8y and correct so lution. I file this dissentient opinion under lhe profound conviction that the time is not far distant when the legal mind of this country will be-found in entire unison with the views 1 have expressed, and that then the wonder will be, that reason had ever been so demented as to deny or ignore their conclusiveness. From the Atlanta New Era. Cau a Negro Hold Office in Georgia? DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE HIRAM WARNER. (The Opinion as printed from the Judge’s manuscript.) when the war was ended what it had i» the fine ofthe argument used to de granted during the war, and that it could ! monstrale the incorrectness of the treat as illegal acts which, during the j judgments of my associates, though it war were conceded, to he legal, it is a I springs from the same mistake of re- proposition so monstrous bom us un mitigated iniquity, as to shock the rea son and forbid its consideration. Com mon sense would revolt at such a pre tension by a conqueror, as it would be antagonistic to all those maxims of jus tice, honor and equality, which are sup posed to regulate the relations of Gov ernments in war and in peace. Conquest gives no right to undo what, during the war, was rightfully done. What ever acts were done by a bellig erent power, in the exercise iir enforce ment of belligerent rights, stands ajtcr- gardmg the late war as a mere insur rection, common to the reasoning of all of them, but to exhibit how terrible are the errors into which men of great abil ity, invested with immense power, do fall, from disregarding the clear and simple principles of public law, which I have endeavored to illustrate and *pp}y- . The existence of such a political chaos arising from civil war and con quest, as is so distinctly indicated by the opinion just mentioned, it is appre hended is without a type since the crea my disseutient opinion to the judgment 1 resistance of a portion of the people of f my associates, I have met with, and perused with care, the first volume of n work, by the Hon. Alexander H. Stephens,entitled, “The War Between tiie Slates.” I regret that 1 am preclud ed,, by the delay which has already oc curred, and the pressure to forward Lliis opinion for publication, that I can not make, from that great work, ex tracts that would support the train of thought which I have expressed. I re fer, therefore, to it generally, regard ing this volume as the most important- contribution ever made by an Ameri can Statesman, to political science.— It is destined to become a high author- a country against an established gov ernment, there is no doubt, if, in its progress and enlargement the govern ment thus sought to be overthrown, sees fit to recognize or declare the ex istence of a civil war, that lecognition or declaration will draw after it all the consequences and rights of war between the contending parties as in the case of public war.” These quotations establish, beyond dispute, that by the laws of nations, where a civil war exists, and it has been recognized by the government claiming paramount authority, that civ il war stands upon the same fooling, in ity, and will, doubtless, be made a text j all resjiecls, as does a public war be- book in our colleges. Bui it will probably be denied that it was a public war, a war between sov ereign States. As it is not necessary to lhe maintenance of the conclusions to which my mind has been conducted, to adhere to the position that it was a tween independent nations, and sucli recognition draws from it all the rigiits and consequences which belong to pub lic war. - The Act of Congress of the 13th July, 1S61, says Mr. Justice Nel son, recognized a stale of civil war be tween the Federal Government and wards as they stood when done—legal i lion of man. An opinion like this might and unimpeachable. Any other conclu- be viewed with a tolerant indulgence, sions would make the concession of if the principles of public law were un belligerent rights, if not sheer nonsense, settled, floating in the mind, vaguely a mere mockery, a fraudulent device apprehended, and casually drawn into to lull the fears of a belligerent adver- application fry statesmen ; but when sarv at the time, and to acquire sub- j for centuries they have been explored stantial and unequal advantages there- Ir) all their bearings, considered in all by, and upon the cessation of hostili- their force, pursued in all their conse- ties to re-assert ali the powers and ; quenees, and reduced to a code of deti- claims which had been waived. ; nite rules furnishing a just and cotn- It is not for the Federal Government, mon standard to which nations do ap- claiming sovereign rights and suprem- | peal with confidence in the adjustment acy over the Southern Confederacy, 1 of their controversies, ihere should be at with which it waged war, to reduce this day no excuse for ignorance or the latter to obedience—to treat, after j misapprehension of them. These prin- its recognition of the war as a civil war, ciples, when they come in conflict with the Southern States as in insurrection, the doctrines of the common or muni- or their citizens who took up arms al cipal law, are paramount and controll- the command of the Slates as rebels or ing. 1 esteem them of such surpassing traitors. 1 importance for the protection of the Its jurisdiction over them has passed South against the insolence and will of away by its consent and acts. They can those who claim unlimited power over be treated only ns foreign enemies, over 'he conquered, that with the design of whom the municipal laws of the con- deepening their impression on the quering Government cannot be extend- minds of those who have no other security ed. That Government cannot drag than in them, I cannot forego the ternp- the citizens of the conquered de facto tation of making a succinct summary Government now before its municipal of those irotn which my deductions are made. War being the force employed by a tribunals to answer to charges of <mt- sou. If theie was originally, in resort ing to arms, insurrection and treason, that Government has condoned it by re cognizing it as civil war; all its power over those in arms ceased by raising (hem to its level and terming them and treating ed in the Federal Union, were insur gents and rebels against the lawful sover eign authority of the United States Govern- perfect States "according to Vattel, not merit, and. that consequently, whatever acts public war, I propose, therefore, tocori- . the Southern Confederacy, and made skier the questions in the record, as j it territorial. In the recognition of civ- they.are affected by civil war. I il war by the Acts-cf 3 3th Julv, JS6L, My associates, when the judgments is involved, necessarily the recognition of the majority were announced, not ofthe Southern Confederacy as a bel- having preceded them by any exposi- ; ligerent power, or government de ftc- tion ofthe reasons upon which they ito ; for they are synonymous. Such were predicated, have left me without j recognition was a concession to the any means ol reply, but by conjeciure. , Southern Confederacy of the same bei- They are constrained, logically, I ligerent powers and rights which, the think, in order to maintain their judg- Federal Government claimed and could merits, to assume that the Southern exercise. It drew after it the acknowl- States, in attempting to throw off"the • edgment that it was a government, obligations ofthe Federal Constitution, with all the departments necessary to and forming new government and wag-; the exercise of the powers and rights ing war with the Slates which remain- ! belonging to government, and that they were legally invested with such pow ers and rights as instruments or means essential to its existence. Such belligerent power or de facto Nation or Stale for its defence, or the maintainance of its rights whenever it acquires the character of a civil war, the bel'igerent power or de facto Govern ment with whom it is waged is recog- them as enemies, and the epithets of Reb- nized during its continuance for every els and Traitors, applied to them so ! ~ freely, through ignorance or malice, are as inappropriate and untrue as they are insulting and devoid of magnanimity. Il is evident Irotn the premises, that the Federal Government has no right whatever to vacate the judgments ol the Prize and other Courts ot the Con federate Gover intent, in sequestering or confiscating enemies }4rope.riy within its limits, nor in any mode can it di vest the title of a buna fide purchaser of such properly actually confiscated, so as to restore if to the original owner, unaffected by what has transpired. Il should lie remembered that con quest gives no right to private proper ly not seized and appropriated as boo ty at the lime, and hence the Railroad shares in lhe hand3 of a bona fide pur chaser, under a judicial condemnation and sale, not having been re-seized or re captured by the arms ol the Federal Government, the doctrines of the jus postliminii could not obtain. Confiscated during the civil war as enemies property and sold, and not hav ing come again into the hands of the conquering Government, it is inca pable of being restored to its original owners. The claim of the original owners is against the Federal Govern ment for compensation or indemnity for the loss they sustained. If the reasoning employed in this opinion, or, rather so much of it as flows directly from the decisions ot the Prize cases, and the laws ot nations be sound, it necessarily follows that as Ward and Owens are bona fide pur chasers of the Railroad shares which were confiscated by the Laws of the Confederate Government, judicially condemned as enemies property in one of her Courts, and sold by a public offi cer of that Government, and thereby passed out of the possession and control of that Government, that their title under such sale, is good against the claim of property of the original owners, and purpose as an independent State with all the faculties and powers of govern ment which belong of right to inde pendent Slates. The recognition of the existence of civil war was an ac knowledgment that the Southern Con federacy was a belligerent power, or Je facto Government—such recog nition drew alter it, of necessity, ac cording to the laws of nations, the right of this belligerent power to prosecute the war; this involved the power to raise and support armies, employ mercena ries, make contracts for their service, prescribe conditions of enrolment and substitution ; it involved the right to command every citizen to defend the Government, de facto, as far as he was able. As tins duty was a legal one, as the citizen was bound Lo obey a power which he could neither resist or call in question; obedience to its will cannot subject ititn at any time thereafter lo punishment tor such obedience to the municipal laws of the Government a- gaiust which lie. has borne arms. By that Government be lias been recogniz-t—; . , r -,-r — , , ; 8 : also incorporeal hereditaments, ed as a foreign enemy: rie then, when |„. „ captured, or conquered, can be dealt with by the conqueror, only as an enemy. Again: As the belligerent power, or de Jacto Government has been invested with all the powers and rights of inde pendent States engaged in public war, it follows that lo il belongs all the rights and powers of Government, such as coining money, borrowing money, issuing its bonds or Treasurj' notes, using its credit, weakening the resourc es ot its adversary, and by legislation prescribing how eijemies property within its territorial limits may be cap tured or seized and confiscated and its proceeds appropiiated to public uses. 1 am persuaded that if the principles of public law, determining the rights and relations of States in peace and war, and the results of conqilest were thoroughly understood and applied by the municipal Courts of the Warner, J., Dissenting. The defendant is a person of color, having, as the record states, one-eighih of negro or African blood in his veins, who claims to be lawfully entitled to hold and exercise the duties of the office ot Clerk of the Superior Court of Chatham county, and the question presented for our consideration and judgment is, whether a person of col or of the description mentioned in the record, is legally entitled tt> hold office in this State, under the Constitution and laws thereof? The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States de clares that “All persons born or na turalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the die United States, and the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” The Constitution .of this State de clares that “All persons born or natur alized in the United States, and resi dent in this State, are hereby declared citizens of this State, and no laws shall be made or enforced which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States, or of this State." From the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the adoption and ratification of the Con stitution of this State in 1868, the de fendant became (notwithstanding his color and African blood) a citizen of the United States, and of this State, and is entitled to have all the privileges and immunities of a citizen. Does the fact that the Defendant was made a citizen of this State, with all the privileges or iinimmitum of a citizen thereof, confer upon him the le gal right to hold office iu this State as such citizen? When we take into con sideration the definition and object of creating an office, and by w’hat authority it is conferred upon a citizen, the dis tinction between the privileges and immunities of a citizen as such, aud his right to hold office, will be at once apparent. It will be seen that the privileges and immunities of a citizen, as such, is one thing, and that his legal right to hold office, as such citizen un der ihe authority ofthe State, is another and quite a different question. What is an office 1 “An office,” says Bacon, “is a right to exercise a public func tion, or employment, and to take the fees and emoluments belonging to it. An officer is one who is lawfully invest ed with an office. It is said that the word ojficium principally implies a du ty, and in the next place the charge of such duty; and that it is a rule that where one man hath to do with anoth er’s affairs against his will, and without his leave, that this is an office, and he who is in it is an officer. By the an cient coinmou law, officers ought to be honest men, legal aud sage, et qui meli us sci'int et possint ofiicis illi intendere; and this, says my Lord Coke, was the policy of prudent antiquity, that offi cers did even give grace to the place, and not the place only to grace the of ficer.” 7th Bacon’s Ab. 279 title of- ces and officers. Blackstoue says the King, in England, is the fountain of honor, auti of office, and the reason given is that the law supposes that no one can be so good a judge of an offi cer’s merits, and services, as the King who employs him. “ From tbe same principle also arises the prerogative of creating and dispos ing of offices; for houors and offices are in their nature convertable and synonymous. All officers under the Crown carry in the eye of the law an honor along with them ; because they imply a superiority of parts, and abil ities, being supposed to be always fill ed with those that are most able to execute them.” 1st BE Com. 271, 2. Offices, says Blackstone, are a right to exercise a public or private employ ment and to take the fees and emolu- y ments thereunto belonging, and are 2d Bl. Com. 36. All citizens of the State, whether white or colored, male or female, mi nors or adults, idiots or lunatics, are entitled to have all the privileges and immunities of citizens, but it does not follow that all of these different classes of citizens are entitled to hold office under the public authority of the State, because the privileges and im munities of citizens are secured to them. The State, in this country, as the Crown in England, is the fountain of honor, and of office, and she who de sires to employ any class of her citi zens in her service, is the best judge of their fitness and qualica- ations therefor. An officer of the State, as we have shown, “ hath to do with another’s affairs against his will and without his leave," and such officer must have the authority of the State