1. A proper and formal application to the President of the United States by

(a) The legislature of the State in which the insurrection or disturbances exist, or

(b) By the executive of such State, in cases where the legislature is not in session, or can not reasonably be convened in time to meet the emergency.

2. A decision upon the part of the President that the case is one in which the Government of the United States is bound to interfere.

3. A proclamation of the President reciting the situation and the law provided in such cases, and commanding the insurgents to disperse and retire peaceably to their respective abodes within a specified time.

4. A formal call of the President upon the executive of the State wherein the disturbance exists, or a requisition upon the executive of neighboring or other States for such number of their militia as he (the President) may judge sufficient to suppress such insurrection or disturbance, or orders to the Secretary of War, the commanding general of the Army, or of a geographical divison or department of the Army, for such number of regular troops as he may deem necessary for the purpose.

5. Proper and formal instructions from the President to the commanding officer of the troops for his guidance in responding to the call of the State authorities, and for his conduct during the period he is engaged in such service.

It has been shown that in the development of the incidents leading up to the furnishing of Federal troops for the suppression of domestic disturbances; in the demonstration of the various and varied situations that were likely to arise, and have naturally arisen, during the progress of the one hundred years and more since the foundation of the Government, and in the lessons drawn from the experiences of more recent years under changed social conditions, many important and interesting questions have arisen that have called for the exercise of the widest and wisest discretion. "It shall be lawful," say the statutes, for the President to employ the land and naval forces; to call out the militia; to suppress such insurrections and remove such obstructions and hindrances to the execution of the laws; but nowhere is it made imperative that he shall do so. The President is the sole judge of the exigency." To his judgment is left the deter

a It is the function of the President of the United States, indubitably, to decide in his discretion what facts existing constitute the case of insurrection contemplated by the statutes and by the Constitution. (Martin v. Mott, 12 Wheaton, 29, 31; Luther v. Borden, 7 Howard, 1; Attorney-General Cushing, 8 Opin., 8; Black, 9 Opin., 922; Williams, 14 Opin., 344.)

S. Doc. 209-17

mination of every possible doubt that may arise. He may furnish prompt and sufficient assistance upon the first sign of disorder; he may await the slow movement of every piece of the legal machinery necessary to put the troops in motion, or he may refuse to render any aid whatever. He is to judge whether a legislature or a governor has not overestimated the danger; whether the State has or has not exhausted its own resources; whether the opposition to the State government is one that justifies the term "insurrection." There may be two contesting executives of a State, or two disputing legislatures, and the President must determine which is the legal one before he can perform the duty imposed upon him by the law. An insurrection may exist within a State - palpable and indisputable according to the opinion of the ordinary observer--and the executive, who may be a party to the insurrection or in sympathy with it, may refuse to make the constitutional demand upon the Federal Government; or a legislature, in the face of self-evident facts, may declare that no insurrection exists, or that the State is fully able to suppress it without Federal aid.a Nor are these the only questions that have grown out of domestic insurrections, such as are contemplated by the Constitution. The President being the sole judge of what steps are necessary to sup-. press such insurrection, and having called for militia, he may muster them into the service of the United States, and thus be in a position

a Insurrection (sedition, rebellion, revolt, mutiny, riot).-The first five conterminous words are distinguished from the last, in that they express action directed against government or authority, while riot has only this implication incidentally. They express actual and open resistance to authority; except sedition, which may be either secret or open, and often is only of a nature to lead to overt acts. An insurrection goes beyond sedition in that it is an actual uprising against the government, in discontent, in resistance to a law, or the like. Rebellion goes beyond insurrection in aim, being an attempt actually to overthrow the government, while an insurrection seeks only some change of a minor importance, and is generally on a larger scale than an insurrection. A revolt has generally the same aim as a rebellion, but is on a smaller scale. A revolt may be against military government, but is generally, like insurrection, sedition, and rebellion, against civil government. A mutiny is organized resistance to law in the army or navy, or perhaps a similar act by an individual. All these words have figurative uses. When literally used, only insurrection and revolt may be employed in a good sense. The success of a rebellion often dignifies it with the name of revolution, but insurrection, though it may be the beginning of what may subsequently develop into revolution, is not to be confounded with the larger word. A riot is generally a blind and misguided outburst of popular fury, with violence to property and persons, and may develop into insurrection. (Century Dictionary.) Insurrection is rebellion in its initial stage. (Standard Dictionary.)

Insurrection is the rising of people in arm against their government, or a portion of it; or against one or more of its laws, or against an officer or officers of the government. It may be confined to mere armed resistence, or it may have greater ends in view. (Glenn. International Law, St. Paul, 1895, p. 362.)

Insurrection against a government may or may not culminate in an organized rebellion, but a civil war always begins by insurrection against the lawful authority of the government. (Grier, J., in the Prize cases, 2 Black, 666.)

to arm and equip and supply them with food, clothing, and everything necessary to enable them to perform the duty he may require of them; or by retaining them as militia he may require the State to arm, equip, and supply them. It is a recognized principle of a republican form of government that the civil authority must be every where supreme; that the Federal troops, like all other citizens, must be always subject and subordinate to the civil powers. We have seen that every President has yielded to that doctrine during the past century so that in no single instance when a State has called for Federal assistance have other instructions been given to the troops than to report to and hold themselves at all times subject to the orders of the civil authorities of the State. At the same time it has been contended by most eminent authorities, and perhaps with reason, that the act of a State in calling for Federal aid is a confession. of failure upon its part and an acknowledgment of its inability to preserve order within its own dominion or to enforce its own laws, and that, as a consequence, the power that is called in under such circumstances is the one that should exercise control. Is it expedient and proper that the President should transfer the Federal troops to the command of State officials who have already failed to preserve order or to suppress insurrection? If so, when would the time arrive when this State control should cease and the President resume control? And of this, who is to be the judge? And if these questions present themselves as between the Federal Government and that of a State in insurrection, what complications are likely to grow out of a situation where the militia of other States are called in.

We have seen that since the adoption of the Constitution there have been fourteen well-defined instances of domestic violence against the established laws of State or Federal Government suf、 ficient to have warranted the President in proclaiming a state of insurrection. Many other occasions have arisen where Federal aid has been solicited, and in most cases has been furnished, but were not regarded as of sufficient importance to warrant the application of all the rules laid down by the statutes. This has been rather a narrative statement of these several insurrections, and of the events leading up to them, than an attempt to discuss the various questions that grew out of them. The latter have been so fully covered by writers on military law, by committees of Congress, and by the courts (to which authorities reference has been made in every instance) that their repetition in this connection is needless.

It is not to be understood that every occasion of domestic insurrection is herein reported, nor indeed every occasion in which the Federal troops were applied for or furnished. Whatever difficulty has been experienced in the handling of the voluminous mass of documentary material that has been consulted has been rather in the direction of

selecting, without needless repetition, those events that are of impor tance because of some principle involved, some particular phase of the subject, some complication or involution calling for particular treatment, and hence becoming for the time being, if not permanently, a precedent for future emergencies. At the same time, and in order that the continuity of historical record need not be broken, it has been thought best to omit no conspicuous insurrectionary occurrence for the sole reason that it presents phases of precisely the same or similar character as others that had been already noticed. The result is a continuous and reasonably complete narrative of the domestic insurrections, riots, revolts, and miscellaneous disturbances that have entered into the history of the United States since its beginning, and of the measures that have been taken by the Executive, by Congress, and by the courts to meet, to suppress, to punish them, or to prevent their

recurrence.

Aside from this, the record possesses a contemporary interest that is not wholly historical. When it is considered that there has been scarcely a year since the beginning of the Government that the Army has not been called upon to quell disturbances too great for the State authorities to handle; that since the reorganization of the militia on the national guard system, say during the past twenty-five years, the State troops, or some portion of them, have been called out more than five hundred times," the extent to which the civil authorities are dependent upon the military arm as a police force is brought into startling prominence. It is a favorite argument of the opponents of a military system, since the beginning of history, that the existence of organized troops is, in itself, a temptation to use them. In the face of our compilation, one can not but wonder what would have been the course of our history without them.

* The number is rather under than over stated. General Cutting, M. C., in his remarks on the militia bill in the House of Representatives January 12, 1893, inserted a schedule made up from incomplete reports of adjutants-general of States, in which the number of such calls for the twenty-five years ending with 1892 is something over 400. And more recently Major Alexander, D. C. N. G., in the Journal of the United Service Institution for July, 1896 (vol. 19, p. 1), gives a list of about 400 calls for the ten years ending with 1896, which he has since increased (per a revised list in possession of the writer) to 425 specific calls during the period between January, 1886, and September, 1897.

APPENDIX.

XIII. DOCUMENTS.

NEGRO INSURRECTIONS.

(1.)

FORTRESS MONROE, August 24, 1831. COLONEL: 1 send, inclosed, a copy of a communication which I received, by express, from the mayor of Norfolk at 3 a. m. this morning, and I have to report, for the information of the general in chief, that, from the serious nature of the circumstances stated and the pressing solicitation of the mayor, I have felt it my duty to afford the aid required; accordingly, I have detached three companies, under the command of Lieutenant-Colonel Worth, for the service required.

The detachment, with four days' provision, 1 field piece, 100 stands of spare arms with ammunition, etc., were embarked at 5 a. m., this morning, with orders to proceed to Suffolk, for the purpose of suppressing the disturbances in this district.

Colonel Worth has orders to consult with the civil authorities and to be governed in his movements (with a view to the object of the expedition) according to circumstances and his best judgment.

I have the honor to be, with the greatest respect, your obedient servant,

SIR: Information has been received by express from Suffolk, confirmed by other intelligence, that an insurrection of slaves commenced in the lower part of the county of Southampton on Sunday night; that about 50 persons were murdered; that some skirmishes have taken place between the militia and the insurgents, but without any decisive effect. It is believed to be of the utmost moment to crush this movement instantly to prevent the mischief of its extension. The imminent and pressing necessity of the occasion seems to justify on our part all formal scruples in applying to you for aid, and we trust that the same considerations will induce you to afford it promptly without regard to the informality of the measure. A steamboat is sent down, on board of which is Captain Capron, who will deliver you this letter. Our purpose is to obtain from the United States ships in Hampton Roads and Fortress Monroe a force from 150 to 200 men, to be conveyed immediately to Suffolk by the steamboat, with a supply of ammunition, and, if convenient, provisions for four or five days. The movement of the troops there will be directed to the point of danger according to the discretion of the officer in command.