Efforts of the Enemy to obtain our Cotton.--Demands of European
Manufacturers.--Thousands of Operatives resorting to the
Poor-Rates.--Complaint of her Majesty's Secretary of State.--Letter
of Mr. Seward.--Promise to open all the Channels of Commerce.--
Series of measures adopted by the United States.--Act of Congress.--
Its Provisions.--Its Operation.--Unconstitutional Measures.--
President Lincoln an Accomplice.--Not authorized by a State of
War.--Case before Chief-Justice Taney.--His Decision.--Expeditions
sent by the United States Government to seize Localities.--An Act
providing for the Appointment of Special Agents to seize Abandoned or
Captured Property.--The Views of General Grant.--Weakening his
Strength One Third.--Our Country divided into Districts, and Federal
Agents Appointed.--Continued to the Close of the War.
A class of measures was adopted by the Government of the United
States, the object of which was practically and effectually to
plunder us of a large portion of our crop of cotton, and secure its
transportation, to the manufacturers of Europe. The foreign necessity
for our cotton is represented in these words of her Majesty's
Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, on May 6, 1862, when speaking
of the blockade of our ports:
"Thousands are now obliged to resort to the poor-rates for
subsistence, owing to this blockade, yet her Majesty's Government
have not sought to take advantage of the obvious imperfections of
this blockade, in order to declare it ineffective. They have, to the
loss and detriment of the British nation, scrupulously observed the
duties of Great Britain to a friendly state."
The severity of the distress thus alluded to was such, both in Great
Britain and France, as to produce an intervention of the Governments
of those countries to alleviate it. Instead, however, of adopting
those measures required in the exercise of justice to the
Confederacy, and which would have been sustained by the law of
nations, by declaring the blockade "ineffective," as it really was,
they sought, through informal applications to Mr. Seward, the
Secretary of State for the United States, to obtain opportunities for
an increased exportation of cotton from the Confederacy. This is
explained by Mr. Seward in a letter to Mr. Adams, the Minister at
London, dated July 28, 1862, in which he writes as follows:
"The President has given respectful consideration to the desire
informally expressed to me by the Governments of Great Britain and
France for some farther relaxation of the blockade in favor of that
trade. They are not rejected, but are yet held under consideration,
with a view to ascertain more satisfactorily whether they are really
necessary, and whether they can be adopted without such serious
detriment to our military operations as would render them injurious
rather than beneficial to the interests of all concerned."
In the same letter Mr. Seward had previously said:
"We shall speedily open all the channels of commerce, and free them
from military embarrassments; and cotton, so much desired by all
nations, will flow forth as freely as heretofore. We have ascertained
that there are three and a half millions of bales yet remaining in the
region where it was produced, though large quantities of it are yet
unginned and otherwise unprepared for market. We have instructed the
military authorities to favor, so far as they can consistently with
the public safety, its preparation for and dispatch to the markets
where it is so much wanted."
It has been stated elsewhere in these pages that "it became apparent
that by some understanding, express or tacit, Europe had decided to
leave the initiative in all actions touching the contest on this
continent to the two powers just named (Great Britain and France),
who were recognized to have the largest interest involved." By the
preceding extracts the demands of the Governments of Great Britain
and France for increased facilities, by which to obtain a greater
supply of cotton, are evident; at the same time the determination of
the Government of the United States to fulfill those demands is
apparent, although it placed itself under the necessity of fitting
out some military expeditions against those portions of our territory
where it was supposed the foraging for cotton would be likely to meet
with the greatest success.
By reference to the series of measures adopted by the Government of
the United States to secure possession of our cotton, it will be seen
that it was inaugurated as early as July 13, 1861. This was within
ten days after the commencement of the first and extra session of
Congress, under the Administration of President Lincoln. It is
scarcely credible that that Government, at so early a day, foresaw
the pressing demand from Europe for cotton which would ensue a year
later. Yet it would seem that we must suppose such to have been its
foresight, or else conclude that the first of these measures was the
inauguration of a grand scheme for the plunder of our cotton-crop, to
enrich whomsoever it might concern.
The act of the United States Congress of July 13, 1861, above
mentioned, was entitled "An act to provide for the collection of
duties on imports, and for other purposes." Under the "other
purposes" the important features of the act are contained. Section 5
provides that--
"when said insurgents claim to act under the authority of any State
or States, and such claim is not disclaimed or repudiated by the
persons exercising the functions of government in such State or
States, or in the part or parts thereof in which said combination
exists, or such insurrection suppressed by said State or States, then
and in such case it may and shall be lawful for the President, by
proclamation, to declare that the inhabitants of such State, or any
section or part thereof, where such insurrection exists, are in a
state of insurrection against the United States, and thereupon all
commercial intercourse by and between the same and the citizens
thereof and the citizens of the rest of the United States shall
cease, and be unlawful, so long as such condition of hostility shall
continue; and all goods and chattels, wares and merchandise, coming
from said State or section into the other parts of the United States,
and all proceeding to such State or section, by land or water, shall,
together with the vessel or vehicle conveying the same, or conveying
persons to or from such State or section, be forfeited to the United
States: _Provided, however_, That the President may, in his
discretion, license and permit commercial intercourse with any such
part of said State or section, the inhabitants of which are so
declared in a state of insurrection, in such articles, and for such
time, and by such persons, as he, in his discretion, may think most
conducive to the public interest; and such intercourse, so far as by
him licensed, shall be conducted and carried on only in pursuance of
rules and regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury.
And the Secretary of the Treasury may appoint such officers at places
where officers of the customs are not now authorized by law, as may
be needed to carry into effect such licenses, rules, and regulations."
It was provided in Section 9 as follows:
"Proceedings on seizures for forfeitures, under this act, may be
pursued in the courts of the United States in any district into which
the property so seized may be taken, and proceedings instituted."
It will be seen, by reference to the provisions of this section, that
the President of the United States was authorized to issue his
proclamation, declaring the inhabitants of any of our States, or of a
portion of any one of them, to be in insurrection, and thereupon all
commercial intercourse became unlawful, and was required to cease,
and all goods and chattels, wares and merchandise, on the way to, or
from, the State or part of a State, were forfeited to the United
States, together with the vessel, or vehicle, in which they were
conveyed. Two effects follow this proclamation: first, the cessation
of all commercial intercourse with the citizens of the United States;
second, the forfeiture of all goods _in transitu_. When this
condition has been reached, the act then authorizes the President, in
his discretion, by license, to reopen the trade in such articles, and
for such time, and by such persons, as he may think most conducive to
the public interest. The articles of trade were to be chiefly cotton
and tobacco; the time during which it might be continued was
evidently so long as it could be used for the purpose in view; the
persons were those who would most skillfully advance the end to be
accomplished; and the public interest was the collection and
transportation of the cotton to the European manufacturers.
One may search the Constitution of the United States in vain to find
any grant of power to Congress, by which it could be authorized to
pass this act; much less to find any authority conferred upon the
President to approve the act, or to justify him in a violation of the
oath he had taken to support and maintain the provisions of the
Constitution. Congress was guilty of a most flagrant usurpation by
the passage of the act, and the President, instead of being a check
upon their unconstitutional measures, for which object the veto power
was granted to him, became, by his approval, an accomplice in their
usurpation. For nothing is more evident than that it is one of the
powers reserved to the States to regulate the commercial intercourse
between their citizens, to the extent even of the establishment of
inspection and quarantine regulations. The former of these is a
benefit to commerce, and the latter, in some special cases, only
retards it temporarily, to secure the health of a community.
Neither did a state of war authorize the Government of the United
States to interfere with the commercial intercourse between the
citizens of the States, although under the law of nations it might be
so justified with regard to foreign enemies. But this relation it
persistently refused to concede to the Confederate States or to their
citizens. It constantly asserted that they were its subjects, in a
state of insurrection; and, if so, they were equally entitled to the
provisions of the Constitution for their protection as well as to its
penalties. Still less could the Government make an absolute
forfeiture of the goods seized, as has already been shown when
treating of the Confiscation Act.
But that a state of war did not enlarge the powers of the Government,
as was assumed by this act, was expressly decided by Chief-Justice
Taney, in a case that arose under this act. The Secretary of the
Treasury issued the regulations for trade, as the act assumed the
power to authorize him to do, in the section presented on a previous
page. One Carpenter neglected or refused to obtain the permit
required, and his goods were seized. He contested the right of seizure,
and the Chief-Justice gave a decision at Baltimore, in May, 1863.
He said:
"If these regulations had been made directly by Congress, they could
not be sustained by a court of justice, whose duty it is to
administer the law according to the Constitution of the United
States. For from the commencement of the Government to this day it
has been admitted on all hands, and repeatedly decided by the Supreme
Court, that the United States have no right to interfere with the
internal and domestic trade of a State. They have no right to compel
it to pass through their custom-houses, nor to tax it. This is so
plainly set forth in the Constitution, that it has never been
supposed to be open to controversy or question. Undoubtedly, the
United States authorities may take proper measures to prevent trade
or intercourse with the enemy. But it does not by any means follow
that they disregard the limits of all their own powers as prescribed
by the Constitution, or the rights and powers reserved to the States
and the people.
"A civil war, or any other, does not enlarge the powers of the
Federal Government over the States or the people beyond what the
compact has given to it in time of war. A state of war does not annul
the tenth article of the amendment to the Constitution, which
declares that 'the powers not delegated to the United States by the
Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the
States respectively, or to the people.' Nor does a civil war, or any
other war, absolve the judicial department from the duty of
maintaining with an even and firm hand the rights and powers of the
Federal Government, and of the States, and of the citizens, as they
are written in the Constitution, which every judge is sworn to
support. Upon the whole the Court is of opinion that the regulations
in question are illegal and void, and that the seizure of the goods
of Carpenter, because he refused to comply with them, can not be
sustained. The judgment of the District Court must, therefore, be
reversed, and the goods delivered to the claimant, his agent, or
proctor."
The proclamation of the President required by the act was issued on
August 16, 1861, declaring certain States and parts of States to be
in insurrection, etc. Under it some licenses were issued to places in
Kentucky and Missouri where the United States forces were located,
without any fruitful results. Some strong military and naval
expeditions were fitted out to invade us and occupy the ports where
cotton and other valuable products were usually shipped. An advance
was made up the Cumberland and Tennessee Rivers and down the
Mississippi, as has been stated elsewhere. The ports of Beaufort,
North Carolina, Port Royal, South Carolina, and New Orleans,
Louisiana, were declared by proclamation of the President of the
United States to be open for trade under the new system. Licenses
were granted to foreign vessels by United States consuls and to
coasting vessels by the Treasury Department, and the blockade was
relaxed so far as related to those ports, except as "to persons,
property, and information contraband of war." Collectors were
appointed at the above-mentioned ports, and a circular was addressed
to the foreign Ministers at Washington announcing the reopening of
communication with conquered Southern localities.
Again, on March 3, 1863, an act was passed which authorized the
Secretary of the Treasury to appoint special agents to receive and
collect all abandoned or captured property in any State or portion of
a State designated as in insurrection. Under this act a paper
division of the whole of our territory was made into five special
districts, and to each a special agent was appointed with numerous
assistants. Abandoned property was defined to be that which had been
deserted by the owners, or that which had been voluntarily abandoned
by them to the civil or military authorities of the United States.
Property which had been seized or taken from hostile possession by
the military or naval forces was also to be turned over to the
special agents to be sold. All property not transported in accordance
with the Treasury regulations was forfeitable. All expenses incurred
in relation to the property were charged upon it.
The views of General Grant on the operation of this system of
measures, as tending to retard the success of subjugation, which was
the object of the war, were presented to the Secretary of the United
States Treasury in a letter dated at Vicksburg on July 21, 1863. He
writes:
"My experience in West Tennessee has convinced me that any trade
whatever with the rebellious States is weakening to us at least
thirty-three per cent. of our force. No matter what restrictions are
thrown around trade, if any whatever is allowed, it will be made the
means of supplying to the enemy what they want. Restrictions, if
lived up to, make trade unprofitable, and hence none but dishonest
men go into it. I will venture to say that no honest man has made
money in West Tennessee in the last year, while many fortunes have
been made there during the time. The people in the Mississippi Valley
are now nearly subjugated. Keep trade out for a few months, and I
doubt not but that the work of subjugation will be so complete that
trade can be opened freely with the States of Arkansas, Louisiana,
and Mississippi."
On September 11, 1863, revised regulations were issued by the
Secretary which divided the country into thirteen districts, from
Wheeling, West Virginia, to Natchez, on the Mississippi, and a
complete system of trade and transportation was organized. In
December, 1864, new regulations were issued, which authorized the
purchase of our products at certain points from any person with bonds
furnished by the Treasury. The products were sold, transportation was
allowed, and the proceeds were made to constitute a fund for further
purchases. A vigorous traffic sprang up under these regulations,
which were suspended by an order of General Grant, issued on March
10, 1865, and revoked on April 11th by himself. On April 29, 1865,
all restrictions upon internal, domestic, and coastwise commercial
intercourse with all the country east of the Mississippi River were
discontinued.