Newspaper Page Text
P??tE???X. DAILY PAPER $10 A YEAR. "LET OUR JUST CENSURE ATTEND THE TRUE EVENT: TRI-WEEKLY $7 A YEAR? BY J. A. SELBY. COLUMBIA, S. C., TUESDAY MORNING, AUGUST 8, 1865. VOL. 1.-NO. llfc THE PHONIX IS PUBLISHED DAILY AND TR I- WEE KL Y AND THE WEEKtV GtE&NEfc EVERY WEDNESDAY. BY JULIAN A. SELBV. TERMS-IN A D VA NOE. SUBSCRIPTION. Dailv Paper, six months.* .. .$5 00 Tri-Weekly, " " .3 50 Weekly, " " .2 00 Single"copies of the Dailv and Tri-Weekly, 10 conts; or the Weekly, l? cents. ADVERTISEMENTS . Insertad in either the Daily or Tri-Weeklv at $1 per squaro for the first insertion, and 75 cents for each subsequent insertion. In thc Weekly, $1 a square. JC3"Spocial notices 15 cents a line. Captured Property. Wo print below the opinion of the Attorney-General of the United States relative to tho status of captured or abandoned, rebel property taken into military possession and transferred to the agents of the United States Trea- j sury for sale. As it involves very large interests both North and South, it is important. Much of this pro? perty, since it came into possession of the United States, appears to have been designed to pay off debts eon- j trac ted before the war with Northern merchants, many of whom now hold assignments of claims ostensibly for that purpose. And there has been a good deal of speculation in these claims also, certain parties in the North having purchased them at a very nominal figure. To all concerned, j tire only recourse, according to the ? Attorney-General, is the Court of ! Claims: ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S OFFICE, July 5, 1865. Hon. Hugh McCulloch, Ssc/'etcoy of :Jit \ Trcuswy. Sn:: I have the honor to acknow- ! ledge the receipt of your letter of the I 17th ult., submitting for my opinion the questions that have arisen in your department in the case of the Savan? nah cotton. The circumstances under which the property in question carno into the possession of the Government are stated in your letter substantially as follows : On the occupation of the city of Savannah, in December last, by the United States forces, under Maj. Gen. Sherman, some 38,000 bales of cotton were found stored there. This pro? perty was seized and taken possession of by the military authorities, and by ! them turned over to agents of the Treasury Department as "captured property," pursuant to the provisions of the Acts of Congress of March 12, 1803, and July 2, 18C4, (12 Stat, at Liarge, S20; 13 id. 375.) After it was tims received by the appropriate agents, the property was forwarded to New York, and there sold at auction as provided by law. You state that a number of claims for the proceeds of the sales are now being presented to your department, some of the claim? ants being residents of Savannah, who aver that they have bpon loyal to the Government during the rebellion; others being subjects of foreign Go? vernments resident in Savannnah, or abroad, averring that they were neu? tral during the late conflict; others, again, being Northern merchants, stating that they came into possession of the cotton claimed by them inpay? ment of, or as security for, debts con? tracted prior to the rebellion; and still others, claiming restitution of their property, or its proceeds, on the ground that the cotton in question was not cnpturable, or properly "cap? tured property," and should'not be held and treated as such. Thc first question arising on thf* state?of facts that you syibmit is, whe? ther the property to which reference has been made, should or should not be regarded as "captured," under the Acts of Congress of March 12, 18G3, and July 2. 1864. I do not perceive that either of Hie statutes provides what property shall be regarded as "captured property," within the meaning of the law. A de finition of "abandoned" property, however, is contained in the first see tion of the Act of 18H4. That statut l provides^that "property, real or per I gonai, shall be regardod as abandoned I when the lawful owner shall be volun? tarily absout therefrom, and engaged either in arms or otherwise, in aiding or encouraging tilt? rebellion." (13 Stat, at Large, 376.) Hut I apprehend that there need be no .difficulty in de? termining, for our present purposes, what property ia comprehended by the phrase "captured property" as used in these statutes, tor the phrase i is its own suffieieut explanation. 1 ? suppose that all movable property, j other than that species described by the proviso to the first section of the ! Act of 1863, actually and hostilely seiz 1 ed and taken on lund, by a military officer or soldier of the United States, in a State, or any portion of a State, i designated aa in insurrection against I the United States, moy be regarded as I "captured" within tho meaning of the I statutes of 1863 and 1864. I do not in? tend to say that no other property than that I have thus emdeavorod to de? scribe, may be denominated and" treib? en as "captured property" under these statutes. It would seem by the 7th 1 section of the Act ol' 1804, that certain property seized and taken by naval j iorees, viz: "projieaty seized by the navy upon any of tho inland waters of ? thc UnitedIStates, " may be dealt with in the manner provided by the laws under consideration, (13* Stat, at Large, 377;) whether this section talles a^ay the prize: jurisdiction ol th?* Courts in ali cases of seizure ol water-borne property on the inland waters of the United States, effected there by naval commissioned captors, and commits ail jurisdiction over such eases to the Court of Claims and te Congress, must remain for judicial determination. Hut the Supremt Court has recently decided that pri? vate property seized by a naval fort? on land bordering upon one of thc inlaud waters of the insurrectionary South, was not the subject of prizt jurisdiction, and was receivable by tin Tre.vsury agents undwr tho statute o 1863, (U. S. 72 Bales ol'Cotton, Dec 7, 1864, No. 360.) Tins decision wa: rendered in a. eas*' to which the Act o 136-1 did not apply, the-capture then considered having been made prior ti the 2>assage of that statute. I refer ti it for the purpose of showing tha certain cases ol purely naval captur* must pursue tho course indicated ii thc statute for UH; collection of aban doned and captured property. I hav said that property seized or taken l>t any military person iu the insuma ti?nary territory is denominated a "oaptured;" but thc 6th section 0 tile Act of 1863 would seem to allix thu character to "cotton, sugar, rice alu tobacco" received by any Unitei States ofliccr or soldier within instil rectionary districts. The section pro vides that it shall bo thc duty of ever officer or privat?? "soldier, who ma take or receive abandoned property or any cotton, sugar, rice or tobacco, from persons in insurrectionary dh tricts, or have such property undi his control, to turn the same over t an agent of the Treasury Department and it further pros ides that the refus: or neglect to do so shall subject sue an ollicer or soldier to trial and punisl mont. (12 ?tat. at Large, 321.) Property of the foregoing eharucti thus turned over to a Tre asury agen and in that manner "received" 1 him, must be dealt with us the 2d sc tion of the Act provides: that is, must be sold, alni its prece.Is pai into the Treasury, there to await tl action of-the Court of Claims, win duly invoked. Thus it appears that all cotton r ceived by, or that may have coi: under the control of, any militai officer or soldier, whether it was a tually seized or captured by him i not, must be dealt with as "abundo ed or captured property." I ms have, occasion hereafter to comme: upon the effect of this provision. The statute, it may bc said, th affixes to all cotton, as well as all t other articles above stated, that ni, be under the control of a military naval ollicer in the insurrections districts, the dc jun1 character "captured" property, and when sn property is received by a Treasu officer appointed to execute the pi visions of thV. Acts of 1803 and I8t it becomes, it may be said, de fut ft j "captured" property, and must be disposed of accordingly. 1 am of opinion, therefore, that the cotton found by our army at Savan I nail, taken possession of there by tho military authorities, and receive^ from ? them by the agents of the Treasury Department, is and shouhl be regard j ed as de facto and dc jure "captured'' property, under the statutes of li>(53 i i and 18(54. The second question which you pro ; pose is, whether, it' this property be j of the character that 1 am bf opinion j it is, the power rests with the Secre j tarj of thc Treasury, or the President, j I to appoint a Commission to examine ? I the claims, and restore to loynl claim-1 ants, the proceeds of so much of the property in question as they can show to have been legally theirs. I am of opinion that neither the President nor any other Executive officer can restore or "authorize such a commission as you suggest, to make reiteration of the proceeds of their captured property to these loyal claim? ants. Congress, by the legislation under consideration, has reserved to itself tho power of finally dispos? ing of the claims of thc alleged! owners of this property; and, so long as that legislation exists, the claimants must pursue the remedy which it indicates for the establish? ment and enforcement of their rights. By the Constitution, Congress has ex? clusive power "to make ltdesconcern? ing captures on Lind and water." The present legislation, I apprehend, is clearly an exercise of that power. This is a general and comprehensive sovereign prerogative. Under other systems of Government the authority to mn ko such rules may be exorcised bythe political department. Butin this country the legislative depart? ment of tjie Government possesses exclusive authority both to establish rules for thc regulation of tl ie light ol capture in time,of war, and also te provide the method by which al questions touching captures may bi determined The present .legislator is not so much a regulation of tin "the right of capture-though tin sixth section of the Act of 18(5: may bo-interpreted as authorizing, if not commanding, the seizure o certain kinds of propertv found by om military forces within thc hostile dis triets of the South-as it is a provi sion for the judicial ascertainment o the rights of persons affected by cap tures that may have been, or may he made in the progress of our heiliger ont operations, sot on foot for the re duction of the rebellious Souther: country. Congress took notice of tin fjfc't that captures of property on lam Had been made, and would continu to be made, by tho armies operatinj in and against that territory, as : necessary and proper means of dimi nishing the wealth, and thus reducin; the power, of the insurgent rulers. I was not expected that such capture had lucen, or would be, itt all case? well and wisely made, or that in th course of snell predatory hostility, th innocent would not suffer sometime as well as the guilty. Xor was i thought well that the Administrator so u?speak, if so much of tho propert within the enemy's territory ns mig! be reduced into the possession of th military forces, should be controlle by or under executive authority. I this view of existing facts, and of ju> policy, the system provided by thc Ac ot INC.:' was devised for the acljudici tion and decision of thc cases conten plated by the statute. The Secretar of the Treasury was authorized to a} point agents to "collect all abandone or captured property" in tile enemy country. To secure faithful ann hoi est performance of their duty, tl: Secretan' was authorized to requh such agents t-> give bunds in sue amounts as he might deem necessar The duty of the agents was po receii all property in the insurgent Stab which was in fact captured or seize out. of the enemy's possession by tl military authorities. They had i duty or power to inquire whether < not such property natl boen rightful captured; whether tho generals wi reported it to thom for collection hi observed, in etlocting tho capture what are called "the recognized usa^ of war," or had violated all the pri cipk'S of writers on what is styleel t law ot' nations, supposed to tend against the right of seizing private property on land; tait it was the duty of the Treasury agents simply to re? ceive all property reported to them as having been captured, irrespective of any considerations touching the legal exemption of any of il from seizure, and to dispose of ii in the manner provided by the law. After the con? version of the property into money, the pi'oceeds were directed to be 'paid into the. Treasury." Thc words of the statute are: "The proceeds thereof sholl he p?dd into the Treasury of the United -States." lint these proceeds do not pass into tho Treasury as pro? ceeds of property sold under n judicial sentence1 of confiscation. They are not sequestered or condemned, but simply held by the United States, so to speak, i? trust for those who may, in thc manner provided, and in the time limited by law, ultimately esta? blish a legal right to receive them af ter pacification. When thc insurrection has been suppressed, the owners aire authorized to invoke the jurisdiction of the -Court of Claims, and obtain there ana djudication of their respec? tive claims, The proceeds of the pro? perty are thus in the possession of the United States, subject to the adjudi? cation of that Court; and when it shall have passed upon the claimants' rights, and d< cree in their favor, Congress has solemnly declared that they shall receive restitution of their property. In the presence of such legislation covering as it does the entire subject matter, providing for the safe custody of the property in question pending hostilities, and for the final judicial determination of thc .rights of the parties interested-I cannot see that the Executive has power to make a different disposition of.; tbfe property from that provided by . Congress, ur authorize any one to (ttwtjrmine the questions which Congress hus entrust* ed to the decision oi another forum. I am, therefore, of opinion, in reply to your inquiry, that jurisdiction can? not be conferred upon a commission appointed either by the President or the Secretary of thc Trcnsury to exa? mine the claims in question, and to make restoration of thc proceeds of so ? much of this cotton as may belong to j loyal claimants. The third and last question you pro- j pose is, what disposition should be made of the proceeds of the sales of tho property? I think it is your duty to see that the direction of the Act of Congress is | obeyed by those in whose hands the | proceeds may be. The statute says that after the sale of any abandoned or captured property, "the proceeds thereof shrill be paid into the Treasury of the United States. " I am of opinion, therefore, that the proceeds of the property in question should be paid into the Treasury of the United States, there to awaifefthe action of the Court of Claims and of Congress. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, (Signed) , JAMES SPEED, Attorney-General. Fire Insurance. TIPPER & LANE, AGENTS, CU A Ti L ESTO y, S. C. REPRESENT tho following first-class and : undoubted companies of Now York atv, viz: SECURITY INSURANCE COMPANY, PHOENIX FIRE INSURANCE COMP'NT, MANHATTAN FIRE INSURANCE CO., With an aggregate cash capital of over FOUR MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. Risks taken on liberal terms, and losses aroxnntly paid in Charleston. Applications from thc interior must be Lccompatiicd by a plat, ami fall descrintion >f the property to be insured, ?howiig all jxterna* exposures to lire. S. Y. TUPPER. A. A. LANE. Au? 3 26 i; vu^Auii vv miu .11.1.1 ; Suc'sors to Hotchkiss, Fenner &, Bennett,) COM. WERCH?MTSt 40 VESSEY STREET, NEW YOEE, MEMPHIS,AT?NNESSEE. # "HOS. FENNER, H. UEN??ETT, D. W. BOA "MAN. E TR. T. A. TOBIN, who was for a le?th i\JL of tune^onnocted with the old firflof lotchkisa, Fernier ?V Bennett, has an ratter .nt in the present firm, and will devote hi*} itt cation principally to tho State of Soutb karolina. His adorent? wiTJ be Clinton, Laurens District. Aup 4 Imo A GREAT WANT SLTPLIED ! NEWS FROM ALL QUARTERS! . PUBLISHED At the Capital of South Caroline., OOIitJ IRdC 23 DC ?b. - 1863. 196:*. THE&AH.Y PHOENIX. ISSUED cverv morning except Sundav, is filled with th* LATEST NEWS, (by tele? graph, mails, etc.,) EDITORIAL, CORRES? PONDENCE, MISCELLANY, POETRY? STORIES, etc. This is tho only daily paper in the State outside of the city of Charleston. . The Tri-Weekly *Phcenix, For country circulation, is published every Tnesday, Thursday aria Saturday, and has all the reading mutter of interest contained in the dady issues of the week. WEBKtV GtEANE?t ' A HOME COMPANION. As its name indicates, h> intended as a. FAMILY JOURNAL, and is published evory Wednesday. It will contain Eij<ht Pages, of Forty Columns. The cream of the News, Miscellany. Tales, ?.tc, oi the Daily and Tri-weeklv will be found iu its columns. TERMS -IN VARIABLY IN ADVANCE. Dailv, (me year. $10 00 " " three months. 3 00 Tri-Weekly, ono year . 7 00 " three months. 2 Q0 Weekly, ?me year. ...'. 4 00 " * three months. ' 1 25 Advertisements inserted in the Dailv or I"ri-Weekly at ?1 a square for the first in? sertion, and 75 conts for each subsequent nsertion. Weekly advertisements $1 a square every insertion. JOB WOBK, Such as HAND-BI?LS, CARD?, CIRCtT LARS, SHIN-PLASTERS, .etc., oxocutei promptly and at reason0ble ratea. J'TuIA-V A. SELBY. July 31 Publisher and Proprietor.