f Secretary Holt's Rejoinder. dent as having assumed a most unusual form. He has, however, investigated the claim on which it professes to be based, apart from the declaration that accompanies it. And be it here remarked, that much stress has been laid upon the employment of the words 'property' and public property,' by the President, in his several messages. Those are the most comprehensive terms which can be used in such a connection; and, surely, when referring to a fort, or any other public establishment, they embrace the entire and undivided interest of the Government therein. The title of the United States to Fort Sumter is complete and incontestable. Were its interests in the property proprietary, in the ordinary acceptation of the term, it might probably be subjected to the exercise of the right of eminent domain. But, it has also political relations to it, of much higher and more imposing character than those of mere proprietorship. It has absolute jurisdiction over the fort and the soil on which it stands. This jurisdiction consists in the authority to exercise exclusive legislation over the property referred to, and is therefore clearly incompatible with the claims of eminent domain now insisted on by South Carolina. This authority was not derived from any questionable revolutionary source, but from the peaceful cession of South Carolina herself, acting through her Legislature, under a provision of the United States. South Carolina can no more assert the right of eminent domain over Fort Sumter than Maryland can assert it over the District of Columbia. The political and proprietary rights of the United States, in either case, rest upon precisely the same grounds. The President, however, is relieved from the necessity of further pursuing this inquiry, by the fact that, whatever may be the claim of South Carolina to this Fort, he has not constitutional power to cede or surrender it. The property title in the State has been acquired by the force of public law, and can only be disposed of under the same solemn sanctions. The President, as the head of the Executive branch of the Government only, can no more sell and transfer Fort Sumter to South Carolina, than he can sell and convey the Capital of the United States to Maryland, or to any other State or individual seeking to possess it. His Excellency, the Governor, is too familiar with the Constitution of the United States, and with the limitations upon the powers of the Chief Magistrate of the Government it has established, not to appreciate at once the soundness of this legal proposition. 293 Secretary Holt's Rejoinder. discussion will not be renewed. I then said: At the present moment it is not deemed necessary to reenforce Major Anderson, because he makes no such request. Should his safety, however, require reenforcements, every effort will be made to supply them.' I can add nothing to the explicitness of this language, which still applies to the existing status. The right to send forward reenforcements, when, in the judgment of the President, the safety of the garrison requires them, rests on the same unquestionable foundation as the right to occupy the fortress itself. In the letter of Senator Davis and others to yourself, under date of the 15th ult., they say: We therefore think it due from South Carolina to our States, to say nothing of the other Slaveholding States, that she should, as far as she can consistently with her honor, avoid initiating hostilities between her and the United States or any other power;' and you now, yourself, give the President the gratifying assurance that South Carolina has every disposition to preserve the public peace, and since he is, himself, sincerely animated by the same desire, it would seem that this common and patriotic object must be of certain attainment. It is difficult, however, to reconcile with this assurance the declaration on your part that it is 'a consideration of her (South Carolina's) own dignity as a sovereignty, and the safety of her people, prompts her to demand that this property should not longer be used as a military post by a Government she no longer acknowledges.' The thought you so constantly present is, that this occupation must lead to a collision of arms and the prevalence of civil war. Fort Sumter is, in itself, a military post and nothing else, and it would seem that not so much the fact, as the purpose of its use, should give to it a hostile or a friendly character. This fortress is now held by the Government of the United States for the same objects for which it has been held from the completion of its construction. These are national and defensive, and were a public enemy now to attempt the capture of Charleston, or the destruction of the commerce of its harbor, the whole force of the batteries of this fortress would be exerted for their protection. How the presence of a small garrison, actuated by such a spirit as this, can compromise the dignity or honor of South Carolina, or become a source of irritation to her people, the President is at a loss to understand. The attitude of that garrison, as has been often declared, is neither menacing, nor defiant, nor unfriendly. It is acting under orders to stand strictly on the defensive, and the Government and people of South Carolina must well know that they can never receive aught but shelter from its guns, unless, in the ab "The intent with which this fortress is held by the President is truthfully stated by Senator Davis, and others, in their letter to yourself of the 15th of January, in which they say: It is not held with any unfriendly or hostile purpose toward your State, but merely as property of the United States, which the President deems it his duty to protect and preserve. If the announcement so repeatedly made, of the President's pacific purposes in continuing the occupation of Fort Sumter, until the question shall have been settled by competent authority, has failed to impress the Government of South Carolina, the for bearing conduct of his Administration, for the last few months, should be received as conclusive evidence of his sincerity; and if this forbearance, in view of the circumstances which have so severely January 27th, the Kentucky Legislature adopted, almost unanimously, the Virginia resolutions, guaranteeing the right of transit of Slaves through Free States. January 29th, the Missouri Legislature adopted resolutions, reported from the House Committee on Federal Relations. January 30th, the Grand Jury of Washing ton City found true bills of indictment against Godard Bailey, Wm. H. Russell, and John B. Floyd, as follows: Three cases against Bailey for larceny, in abstracting the bonds intrusted to his custody; one joint indictment against Bailey and Russell, for ab tried it, be not accepted as a satisfactory pledge of the peaceful policy of this Administration toward South Carolina, then it may be safely affirmed, that neither language nor conduct can possibly furnish one. If, with all the multiplied proofs which exist of the President's anxiety for peace, and of the earnestness with which he has pursued it, the autho-stracting the missing bonds; three indictrities of South Carolina shall assault Fort Sumter and peril the lives of the handful of brave and loyal men shut up within its walls, and thus plunge our country into the horrors of civil war, then upon them and those they represent must rest the respon-ernment.* sibility. Your obdient servant, Col. Hayne's answer to Col. Hayne's Reply. this able document was not sent in by the President to Congress along with his message of Feb. 8th, as it came too late for transmission. The position assumed by Mr.Holt only made Gov. Pickens too glad to turn over the question of occupancy to the Southern Confederacy. No apprehensions existed in Washington of an assault by the Governor's orders. The only danger was in the rashness of the war faction, which, led by the fiery Mercury, fairly chafed under the Governor's refusal to precipitate matters. It was considered "humiliating that that offensive rag (the Stars and Stripes) should be flaunted in their faces, and that a handful of men should be permitted to insult the dignity of the State by their presence." Nevertheless, the Governor did not order the ments against Russell, for receiving the stolen bonds, and one joint indictment against Bailey, Russell and Floyd, for conspiring together to defraud the United States Gov January 30th, the North Carolina Legisla ture, after many days of debate, decided to call a State Convention. * A dispatch from Washington, February 1st, thus stated the matter: It is ascertained that Mr. Floyd's whole acceptances were $6,900,000. Of these, Mr. Russell and partners retired about $3,000,000, first and last, and can account for half a million more. It therefore appears that at least $3,000,000 are still floating about, held by innocent parties, or were discounted by banks and individuals. Mr. Bailey, who abstracted the bonds from the Interior Department, has never been examined before the Committee of Investigation, and for legal reasons, which may appear hereafter. The act of 1857, which is supposed to relieve witnesses of Congressional Committees from prosecution, will doubtless be pleaded for the benefit of some of the parties to this mammoth robbery. Lawyers already maintain that the indictment against Messrs. Russell, Floyd and Bailey for a con spiracy to defraud the Government, is for a crime not known in the criminal statutes. They will all probably escape punishment." |