Tri-Weekly Telegraph (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 33, No. 26, Ed. 1 Friday, May 17, 1867 Page: 2 of 8
eight pages : ill. ; page 20 x 15 in.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Mil
♦ •
HWUM
to-day than
Hi old maxim Im been forgotten la
the bat eavenyeara at military
«Un*A
W1
p™
«rasa
X
on this antyeet, or the/ will
at U> wield the yw«t which
w«S5r5wS?&li*y arm
; from over them will leave ia their
MW: Wtl V** ■«
Ki
KisAfsaa
m for
are the
i of its very Itfj
. of time and of
m
Hi
Wl.™
> nrtlda
to him aader the juror's
to
we bare forbooe to meddle—f<
lag. npon a single careful raadiag oi
these strangeljrinvolved and at odious
npon
•ever*!
hare made
and that the
TBI " M0QKUT " AUaVMMNT.
r 0 kfa ^ ■ .. ' . * •
Those who Argue that our civil of-
fleet* should resign, and make way
iftthe offices of the State to be
by military appointees, seem
to looae sight of several important
considerations. One is, that this vol-
untary removal is precisely what those
wU|b who seek to obtain the fulj^con-
trol of the administration of the civil
affairs of the State. . This "wish most
have some speclll designs, and those
designs cannot be entirely friendly to
the interests of the people. Shall we
favor those designs by urging our
State officers to resign f
Much as our present system may
be denounced ash ' mockery" and a
"farce." it is fact more so than the
whole administration of Southern af-
fairs has been since tbe-cloae of the
^•♦farce"
office,
toeaf'
n Jadieial
of ftHfte
doinghere-
of the war, in
and legisla-
and, tutare
of the Sadie
re, we must
even assisMu,
to reject one *act
pected toshoi
vice in
be soon,,
Sonth
sol
tlie part*
ild be
local
the
stood that the
generals and
and individuals
inquiry of the President,
e Attorney
"taken an oath to support the Con-
futation of the United States," this
must to taken to mean when that
oath was a qualification for efllee by
bfca the National Constitution.
But t^Better requires the oath only
m Wlslative. enecu■ ive and judi-
m'w the States, and when
taken by any official of a State uot
of one of these three classes, or by an
officer of a private corporation, it
was no part of his qualification, and
thtrefore could with no propriety be
wottldlika to jtf'?f-frart|'tr 'lift mk aaid to be taken Mr him 'msa offi-
tiKJwm nftMMUa to nee, as his cer." Congress mui
attorney General ia ex-
hisad
woo
*<0pj
. s
or a
P.whj
What we
. matters is
lb
•da
w-v
I*.
of li t"
V 5 : 'X
*1 V
any thoughtful
mm&mm
9
HikstaMPr* W J* "■■■%• m
KfiHB
wmmfmm
mm
mmm
nib
equally,
intent, liable
*ten*
Tr?tnini«-
to military
I justice is
ever much
ere the
both letter
'gene. Military
most trivial at-
limft to its e'xer-
It h nothing but the will of a
soldier iu power
Moreover, we .constantly hear from
Washington that,the interpretation of
the Attorney General upon the recon-
struction law, with rales <br the gui-
danoe of the military commandsis,
will soon be pushed. Let w« wait
for them. ■■■ i-.t 'i " <•....
1s v^\ . : • ! ■'——*
BHiNlJH RAII.HOtO.
por
* above ion
we have an
WBRmt
r civil cause
| Itt Ar
■
OTM
Ngftt
'.any
this
rn oath of
m^eve,fttr-
mwm
Col. Camp and Gen. Barnes were
in our town yesterday on business
oonnecrted with thin road. Among
all the railroad cotup4 niea, this is an
organised, livi&g, working company,
having ISO eonviets engaged from the
State, and 60 or 70 actually at work,
and that, too, on tie shortest practi
eal route to Eastern Texas, to-wit:
from Navasota to Anderson, 0 or 10
to Huntsville, (by «Ur
#, and with 10 or IS miles,
in tbe direction at Crockett, it crosses
the Trinity and opens the country of
Eastern Itactt by * road of 48 or 50
i^kilesv The shor tness of the route and
the importance of the country this
read penetrates, makes it practical
and important.
The city t'.Galveston, the counties
. Walker and Houston, are
I their atoek, we understand,
this road. Why should not Hons
Jltk tl m in thU im
t enterprise t We are glad to
learn that the Central Road shows fa-
vor and substantial aid to this road
About fl20,000 stock has been sub-
scribed, and it will soon be doubled
11 fe i,*-*" ■■ '
We wish vgain to call attention to
tlM Landholders' Con
eigbers, gangers, and
and incoaee-
munity areas
n in No:
Gei
ve
e
is perversions were practiced.
Who is this Deweeaf "Cbiurman of
the Republican State Committee" is
the response- If the friends ef Gen
regard "
end Sheridan
his bono*, they
the
on tbe
luct on
;ry that
pain
fnl to witness intelligent freemen nt
the mercy of unscrupulous blunder-
era But chiefly to respond to the
numerous and importunate interroga-
tories of private correspondents, we
cannot longer forbear some express-
ion of opinion on this subject, since,
"in utter absence of any uniformity «f
sense, tbe statutes are being carried
into effect in some places. A rapid
survey will more than flU our allotted
space.
The prescribed classes are(l) per-
sons who onee held office, Federal or
State, and afterwards engaged, &c.;
(2) persona who have been disfran-
chised for felony or for participation
in the iebfeliion. We carfnlly avoid
a uiore precise citation of the statute
at present, as a multitude of doubt*
and surmises must give place heie to
some blunt remarks upon that prim-
ary and unquestionable classification
only, in which alone, however, there
is room enough for the perversions of
a degraded partisanship.
The '•MBee'' must have been mem-
bership of Congress, or of a State le
i pslature, an executive office, or a
, udieial office of a State; or tbe per-
son must have been "an officer of the
United ^Statesor he must, as an
officer. State or Federal, have taken
an oath to support the Constitution
of the United States. But none of
these conditions (except disfran-
chisement fur felony at common law,
or against the laws of the United
States or a State) works any disquali-
fication whatever, uuless the person
was subssqutotly "engaged in insur-
rection or rebellion against tlio Uni-
ted States, or gave aiu or comfort to
the enemies thereof." or unless he
was "disfranchised for participation
iu" the rebellion. '
The questions then are: What Is
an executive or judicial officef What
is an officer of the United States f
Whatla engaging in tlijp rebellion f
What is giving aid or comfort to the
enemies of the United States f and
what is die meaping of tbe words
'•not been disfranchised ft* partici-
pation iu the rebellion," etc. T
It is remarkable, by the way, that
tlie memb<rs of the sece^ion con-
ventions of 1800-'tU, are not pro
scribed. Tlie.v were not members of
the legislature of auy Stab*, for.*
State can have, in the Federal sense,
but one ''legislature" at a time—that,
for example, which may choose Sena-
tors, eU.—nor could they, by possi-
bility, be construed as "executive"
or ''judicial" officers. But to go on.
Now, what is the character of these
questions f On what principles ate
tney to be decided f Shall thev be
the sport oi idle caprice, the tools of
stnpid arrogance, or the disguise of
artful knavery ? Do they stand on
the statute book, in the grave words
of law, to be bandied like slang on
the tongue of ignorance, or attaned
like a fiddle to a partisan song f Or
is tbe voice of the National Legisla-
ture, heard in language of settled and
tore, heard in language of settled and
solemn import, to be hearkened to by
petty agents and officials, and l>y
those who command them, in the
sense the terms bear to jr.dges and
jurists, for whose interpretation
words are chosen by legislatures and
lawgivers f Take, for example,
chance extract from a New Orleans
papers
Any person who at an/ time pre-
vious, pr in 1801, held any elective
office in tbe city of New Orleans, any
one who has been street commissioner
or deputy, who has been on the po-
lice. Now, these registrars are
by tjhp instructions of D. S.
i, chairman of the Republican
Executive Committee. By the same
interpretation, Dewees himself can-
not register, three-fourths of the
Union men in th d city cannot regis-
ter, and the Board of Registry them-
selves are not voters. Members of
the Legislature of 1864, justices of
the peace in the same year, consta-
bles have their registry refused, as
well ac ta* collectors and any quan-
tity or policemen. A gentleman was
excluded because he drilled the mili-
tia thirty-five yes«s ago in the State
of Indiana. To all Remonstrances in
the Fourth District tbe instructions
of D. 8. Dewees are thrust upon the
applicant.
One who was a native bora Amer-
ican applied ia this district to be
registered. Mr, Davie read the oath,
he aiaoate#[t^" > •«
yonew* ^heMUsny office.
Assistant Deputy Street
er In 1854," answered die
the InatntetMme that we
35H9
the wish
&eConvei^
♦•Have
sir. yen cannot
are to
$
said Mr. Davie, and
by D. 8. Deweee
enemies, doubtless. Would be glad to
bear he bad abused, the very large
powers with which he has been
charged, in indulging, or else in au-
thorizing. the managing agent of a
partisan organization to invest him-
self with the acta of CongreHS, and
presume to execute them as instru
meuts of political gambling. We de-
mand to know whether General
Sheridan finds any warrant iu tUo
acts of Congress for tolerating such a
practice. If it is truly charged in
the extract above, General Shetiduu
owes it to his |>ersonal reputation,
and a public opinion not yet besotted
to un indulgence of abuses so bald
and grew* requiren it of him, to drive
from public agency the vile impostors
who have corrupted the registry, to
charge their successors to spurn par-
tisan suggestion, and to revise tiie
lists thai nave l eeu made upon sonic*
just and reasonable Ut-is.
We need not dwell upon proof that
legal interpretation alone is admissi-
ble iu this matter, and that uo person
is fit to have aught to do with the
execution of these anomalous and ex-
traordinary prescriptions, whether
they nre just or urjust, who presumes
to impute uny but the juridical sense,
of which, if he is ignorant, he must
be content to be advised. We hope
authoritative interpretation* will not
long be delayed.
Who are executive and judicial of-
ficers 1
All legislative officers are excluded
from the phraseof course, and so mnst
be all military officers, because "ex
ecutive and judicial" are words never
applied to auy but civil functions.
Takiug from all officers legislative
and military officers, and there remain
an innumerable miscellany of public
agents.* Are all these '"executive" or
else ' judicial" officers f Let us see.
A sub-assistant teacher iu a public
school performs au official function,
prescribed and paid by law. The of-
ficers of the national banks, of var-
ious corporations, etc., also perform a
pnblic function. So does a minister
of the Gospel, who is an officer iu the
capacity of a soleninizer ot lawful
narriages. Lawyers, in a specific
sense, ate well defined officer^ In
many cities, standing provi^Mgi is
made for special police. A bystiilider
at afire may be nominated such, and
a refractory person arrested by him
on the spot may be prosecuted for
'-resutiug an officer." Where are w§
to stop t Must these officers be con-
strained into a classification of cxesua
tiveand judicial officersf Is there
the remotest analogy between a teach-
er of the alphabet to little children
and the Judges of the Supreme Court
or the Executive of the Uuiou or of a
Suite. Yet tlijis extreme contrast is
inevitable if we abandon a fair con-
struction of the words. No latitudi-
nouB interpretation can find ground
to walk on short of the confines of
absurdity. A governor is the type of
an "executive officer." Therefore, an
'■executive officer" is oue whose offic-
ial functions resemble those of the
governor. A judga is the type ot a
judicial officer; therefore, a ''judicial
officer" is one whose functions resem-
ble those of a judge. This resem-
blauce must not be in the manner, but
iu the "matter," for it is substance,
and not color, that we are concerned
about. A practical rule consistent
with this plain proposition ought not
to be difficult to au honest minister
of the statutes in question, acquainted
with the varions and peculiarly mixed
offices of-the State in which he acts.
But the officers to be excluded are
Federal or State officers. A county
officer, a city officer, a township offi-
cer, a district officer, a precinct offi-
cer, etc., as distinguished from a Slate
officer, no man reared ic an American
State conld well confound. The reg-
ular judiciary of a State are usually
located io districts, but the responsi-
bility of all of them is d'rectly to the
State Legislature. The judges, there-
fore, are State officers; but the courts
of special jurisdiction, where the res-
ponsibility of the judges is local, and
especially where their judicial func-
tions, (as those of mayor, recorder,
etc.,) are ex officio of municipal offices,
and of course, alt justices and other
magistrates and officers of tbe peace,
cannot, with the least consistency, be
called "State officers." Less still the
multitude of official^ whose functions
emanate from and are served under
the quasi political corporations, as
counties, cities, towns, townships,
school districts, mad districts, etc.,
etc.—in a word, officers of the State
are to be discriminated from officers
of auy chartered municipality within
and under the State, whether the
charter be general or special—i. e., by
way of a State faw erecting counties,
&c.. With vested powers, or of a spe-
cial franchise vested in the people of
a particular locality or for a particu-
lar public purpose. On the opposite;
and there seems to, be no middle
principle, tbe transient MethodUt
clergyman io n iemote circuit, and
the circuit and the governor at the
capital are alike officers of tbe State.
4 What are " officers of the United
States," and officers of States who
have " taken en oath to support tbe
Constitution of the United States f"
The vnriona officials who have held
Office under the chartered city corpo-
rations of the District of Columbia,
and all thoae who have held offices
nM* the organic acts of the Terri-
tories of the United States, ate
clearly withont the tame '•officer of
the United States,"
* above.
"officer" ie used
As to nfllean of
principles
officers
the word
qualification,
who have
must be presumed to
have meant in these sets to use, in
the same connection, the term
"officer" in tbe same sense as Con-
gress did in the first act ever passed
under the existing Constitution, iu
which this qualification of an oath to
support the latter was prescribed for
legislative, executive aud judicial
officers ol States. Congress,'there-
fore, did not mean to exclude a man
who had happened to take au oath ti
support the Constitution, whether lie
waH or was uot in office, but only such
as had held ail office which required
an oath of fidelity to the National
Government. Indeed, a departure
from this Is already sufficiently eon-
denined ii) the gross example men-
tioned by a correspondent, of dis-
franchising a naturalized Irishman
because lie had fallen so much into
the disqualification, ex officio, that in
getting naturalized lie had sworn to
support the Constitution ! This oath,
like that, of a petty State office not
within the act. of 1761). was simply
the equivalent of na;ural allegiance,
which, necessary iu the fine case, un-
necessary in the otlier, niust have
been intended, in these statutes of
reconstruction, to b.' entirely iucon
sequent in both cases.
3 What is 'engagiug iu the re
bellion ?"
Fighting for it, legislating for it,
executing its laws, aud conducting
its foreign agencies were engaging iu
it; but common humanity, common
hospitality, common friendship and
good neighborhood were uot. No
political duty cnu require a man to
unmake common affection, promote
morbid feeliug, or practice ill will.—
On the contrary, where loyalty
clashes with other virtues it ceases to
be a virtue; for virtues are all har-
monious if they are real, aud when
they disagree there is a vice amoiig
them. Nevertheless, between these
extremes there is somewhere a divi-
ding line. It canuot be trusted to the
least latitude, for it is a criterion of
crime, and no people emerged from
barbarism have ever been insensible
to the absolute civil necessity of a
strict definition of every crime. But
it is, in the abstract, clearly drawn.
Whatever acts of participation are in-
dictable under the several statutes of
the United States—whether of trea-
son. or aiding or abetting. &c.—fall
within the term "engaging iu," &c..
and certainly no others. \JTor Con-
gress mu*t be presumed not\to have
iuteuded to violate the Constitution,
by passing an ex post facto law, and
otherwise, especially iu view of the
then recent decision of the Siipremti
Court iu the Missouri test oath cases,
as long as their words admit auy
other rational interpretation.
We say the line is clearly draw n —
not that there is, or conld possibly
be, a simple; practical rule for the
various caseg. But that is the fault
of an an attempt to puuisli crime by
proscription, withoi.it judge or jury.
The most that is possible is for each
class of cases and each peculiar case
to be considered in the light of crimi-
nal law by persons competent to judge
whether or not a party could be con-
victed, if the confessed or proved facts
were adduced in a criminal court. But
the oath of the party is conclusive
evidence, and if falsely taken, the
punishment is not refusal to register,
but the stern punishment of perjury.
Iu this deplorable innovation upon
the sacred and ancient methods of
justice, it iB bad enough that a man
should meet the condition; but when
he supplies it, (the oath,; it is the very
proof the statute requires.
4. What is giving aid and comfort
to the enemies of t!.e United States?
Here we will cite some authorities, for
so strangely prevalent is the mistake
on this point that few would believe
us when we say that these words in
the Constitution, and consequently in
any law of Congress, have no mean-
ing whatever where tlie enemies are
rebels, but apply exclusively in for-
eign wars and to alien public enemies;
and that all authority, English and
American, without exception, is to that
effect. Unless, therefore, there are
persons who, in 1812, to the British,
or later, to the Mexicans, gave "aid
or comfort," only a monstrous perver-
sion of these words in the statutes
could occasion any disfranchisement
in the South under this head. We
cite:
The 4th Book of Blackstone, au-
thor's page 83; 1 Hale's l'leas of the
CroWn, 159; 1 Hawkins' ditto, 55;
Foster's Discourse of High Treason,
chap. 2, sections 8,10,11 ; 3 Greenleaf's
Evidence, § 244 ; Chenowith's case,
before Mr. Justice Swa\'ne, in 18G1,
at Cincinnati citedin Vallandingham's
trial, page 73; 4 Tucker's Blackstone,
appendix B, p. 33; 2 Wharton's Crim-
inal Law,§ 2737; 1 Opinions Attor-
neys General, 8(1,(1765;) Coombs,
Recent Edition and notes of Burr's
Tiial, etc., etc. Those who are curi-
ous to see the original words, as first
used in tbe ancient statute ol the 25tli
year of Edward 111., will find them in
2d volume of the British Statutes at
Large, page 50,and following.
5; What is the meaning of these
words, " not been disfranchised for
participation in the rebellion T"
This expression, which has occa-
sioned such general perplexity, seems
to.us the least obscure of its kindred.
The States of Missouri. Tennesse,
West-VirginiHj and oilier States,
passed rets disfranchising for par-
ticipation in the rebellion. So did
Easterc, Virginia, by the Alexandria
constitution, subject, however, to the
will of the Legislature, and the latter
has long since repealed the ptovisioa
i v aooordance with its own terms.
This disfranchisement, of course, is
now the Bame as if it never had been.
But in theotherStates, such a disfran-
chisement operates still to proscribe
a class of their own citisens from par-
ticipating in their State franchises.
It is well known that many such have
gone South| and it appears to us that
Congress intended that citizens who
stood proBcrilied at home should not
voteabroad. We can conceive no other
meaning without manifest absurdity,
and this seems a reasonable and con-
sistent scense of the passage.
We eoeelnde with another legal
principle, enclosed with the gravest
remark to be found in these hurried
paragraphs :
Every doubt must go in favor of
the citizen. These unprecedented
proscriptions, be they right or wrong,
be they constitutional or revolution-
ary, are iu derogation of our political
faith as a people, aud the utmost par-
tiality for them could ouly claim that
they are ultimately for the sake of
their opposite*. They are, then, to he
" strictly coin trued an in degradation
of common right" and must make their
way, while law is a principle in the
land, against every presumption in fa-
vor of the person affected by them.
We cite no authority for this—though
no book could be opened in a law of-
fice without finding it—save the con-
science ami thediguity of every Amer-
ican. lie that does not find the war-
runt of this great principle in his
boM>m will see it no where but in the
scorn of nobler freemen.
llev. l r. Minnegerode was the pas-
tor of Mr. Davis and family during his
residence iu Richmond, and it was
during service in his church that Mr.
Davis received notice from Gen. Lee
that, his lines were broken, and that
Richmond must be .evacuated. It
was beautifully appropriate that Dr.
Minnegerode should be present to of-
fer up the first prayer ol gratitude for
his release.
We have to say to the Galveston
Keics that when debtors, Northern or
Southern, seek to defraud their credi-
tors, we are as much in favor as it
can be that attorneys employed
should do their whole duty. But a
system of espionage, for professional
benefit more than anything else, is
quite a different thing. Can the
News make the distinction? If not,
we shall take a little pains to en-
lighten it.
Gen. Burton, who is mentioned in
the dispatches as having charge of
Mr. Davis, and as producing him in
Court in obedience to the writ of ha-
beas corpus, was in command of Fort
Delaware when many from this State
were held prisoners ot war there. He
treated his prisoners with the high-
bred courtesy of a true soldier aud
gentleman.
\ We publish in to-daj's Tele-
GUAi'ti a very interesting letter from
Mexico, by John Heury Brown, Esq.
It tfill be seen that Mr. Brown has
written a work for the information of
persons wishing to go to Mexico. We
shall look for its publication with no
small degiee of interest.
Jeiferson Davis and family have
gone to Canada. Where they will
(Tetiide* is not stated. His "beloved
Ififeisa ippi" is his old home, aud we
iv • k, 17 k ' n
presume lie will return there. Texas
^opld receive liim with arms as wide
as her territory, and with heart, as
generous as her climate aud soil.
The Transcript, which has notori-
ously indulged in "personalities," ac-
cuses the TeleQRaph of being guilty
of the same offence against editorial
ethics. We ask our neighbor to
specify a single case.
Peace seems to be pretty well as-
sured in Europe, for the present. But
the whole of the Old World seems on
the point of war and revolution.
Hurrah for the
with the Turks!
Cretans! Down
The Local of the Transcript under-
stands the courtesies of journalism.
"Lost in London," is the title of
an Original story, by " Tom Vapid."
the publication of which will be
commenced in next Sunday's Tele-
graph. We are glad to observe that
our neighbor is determined to main-
tain his well earned fame for the pro-
duction of original stories.—Houston
Transcript.
Construing the above as a compli-
ment, we thank our neighbor for his
friendly notice. We shall aim to
constantly add to the attractions ot
the Telegraph by the employment
of tlio best writers-
n
Headq'rs Dist. of Texas, <
Galveston, May 13, '67.
Circular No. 15.
There appearing to be a general
opinion throughout the State of
Texas that the operation of th<> Mili
tary Government Bill, passed March
2d, 1607, relieves the citi/ens thereof
from the payment of their usual
taxes; and it appearing further that
certain citisens holding io this opin-
ion have refused payment of said
taxes, it is hereby ordered that all
taxes now due, or to become due, be
paid as heretofore, to the proper civil
officer.
By command of
B'vt Maj. Gen. Griffin.
A. H. M. Tatlob,
2d Lieut. 17th U. S. I..
A. A. A. G.
• 7 a
* 8 "•
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Gillespie, C. C. Tri-Weekly Telegraph (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 33, No. 26, Ed. 1 Friday, May 17, 1867, newspaper, May 17, 1867; Houston, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth236358/m1/2/: accessed June 3, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting The Dolph Briscoe Center for American History.