°A reading of President Buchanan's mes sage above mentioned shows that he entirely confused the power of the United States to coerce a recalcitrant State—a power it surely possesses— with its right to enforce the laws of the United States wherever they are appli cable, and to use the armed force whenever it may be necessary to accomplish this end—a power which it undoubtedly possesses. Even the most strenuous opponent of secession would probably not have defended the right to apply coercion against a State as a corporate political entity. But the power to proceed against its citizens for violating the laws and to protect the public property was a very different thing, for the President is bound by oath to see that the laws are faithfully executed. President Lincoln in his inaugural address practically agreed with President Buchanan that the Fed eral government had no power to wage war against a State, as such, or to proceed ag.ainst it by way of Federal execution, but he denied that, because it could not coerce a State, it could not defend the public property against attack or compel. obedience to its laws by those subject to its jurisdiction. The Union, he said, was sovereign and it was intended to be perpetual, from which it followed that no State upon its mere motion could lawfully get out of the Union; that resolves and ordinances to that effect were legally void; and that acts of violence within any State or States against the authority of the United States were in surrectionary or revolutionary, according to circumstances. At the same time he announced his determination to hold, occupy and possess the property and places belonging to the gov ernment of the United States and to collect the duties and imposts everywhere. No attempt was to be made to coerce any State as such, but only to compel obedience to the laws; and in his call for the militia it was stated that their services were to be einployed in over corrung the resistance to the laws by combina tions of persons too powerful to be suppressed bi the ordinary course of judicial proceedings.* ( . W. Garner, in Wiley and Rines, (The nitcd States,' Vol. VIII, p. 8). For Lin coln's messages above mentioned, consult Rich ardson, (Messages,' (Vol. VI, pp. 5-14) ; Nicolay and Hay, (Life of Lincoln,' (Vol. III, pp. 327-344).
In his amnesty proclamation of 8 Dec. 1863 Lincoln offered to recognize the communities containing such combinations of individuals if they would again establish State governments in conformity with the Constitution. (Rich ardson, (Messages,' Vol. VI, pp. 213-15; Nicolay and Hay, (Complete Works of Abra ham Lincoln,' Vol. II, pp. 442-44). Lincoln and his supporters believed that the "loyal') element of the Southern States was large but that the functions of the State govertunents had been usurped by combinations of disloyal persons and that therefore the rights of the States had not been destroyed but simply sus pended temporarily by the acts of the Con federate officials, who were not recognized. Lincoln did not regard the acts of the Con federate authorities as legal or quasi-legal, and held that the existence of the States themselves was not affected by the disloyal acts of a por tion of their inhabitants. These States there fore were simply out of their 'proper practical relations" with the Federal government on ac count of the war. His plan was to restore to the people their former rights by pardon and amnesty upon promise of future loyalty, in order that they might begin the work of form ing new State and local governments; but he believed that the preponderance of power in such State governments should be in the hands of the loyal element of the population.
(Nicolay and Hay,
Individual Coercion.—It is necessary for the proper conduct of government that suf ficient physical force be provided to protect government officials in the exercise of their designated functions. Our laws define offenses that strike at the root of government; our judicial courts have authority to cause the arrest of offenders; and offenders should be tried and punished. If the regular processes be prevented by forcc the Federal and State courts have power to appoint temporary offi cers who may call for assistance on the 'posse comitatus*—that is, all able-bodied men within their jurisdiction. If these forces be impotent the governor of the State may be requested to send aid, his usual force being the militia. The purpose of the militia is not to arrest this or that individual but to break up organized re sistance, wherefore they may be ordered or compelled to fire into rioters or mohs which may only have the appearance of creating a disturbance but which may not have committed any other offense. Individuals in such in stances are regarded as outside the protection of the law and have no redress, being subject to dispersal so long as they maintain an atti tude of resistance. If the militia be insufficient to protect the State against domestic violence the State executive may request aid of the President of the United States (Constitution, Art. IV, Sec. IV), who may, if necessary, use the militia of other States or regular troops or sailors. Sometimes these local disturbances (like the Pollman strikes in Chicago in 1894) interfere with the execution of Federal laws, whereupon, without calling upon the States, the President may send militia or regulars on his own initiative If the disturbances be come especially violent, the habeas corpus may be suspended or martial law may be declared, in either of which cases a suspected person may be arrested and held without charge or trial for any length of time in the discretion of the proper authorities.
Bibhography.— Davis, Jefferson, (Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government' (New York 1881); Dodd, VV. E., 'Jefferson Davis' (Philadelphia 1907); Hart, A. B., (Actual Gov ernment' (New York 1908), and (National Ideals Historically Traced' (New York 1907); McPherson, Edward, (Political History of the United States during the Great Rebellion' (4th ed., Washington 1882); Rhodes, J. F., 'His tory of the United States' (New York 1893 '906); Stephens, A. H., (Constitutional View of the Late W r between the States' (Phila delphia 1868) ,• Von Hoist, Hermann, (Consti tutional and Political History of the United States) (Chicago 1892); Whiting, W., (War Powers of the President and the Legislative Powers of Congress in Relation to Rebellion, Treason and Slavery' (8th ed., Boston 1864) ; (The South in the Building of the Nation,' (esp. Vol. IV, Richmond, Va., 1909) ; (Federal Aid in Domestic Disturbances' (Senate Doc. 209, 51st Congress, 2d session); and the articles by Grover Cleveland entitled (The Govern ment in the Chicago Strike of 1894' (in Thc Fortnightly, N. S., Vol. LXXVI, pp. 1-19, London 1904; in McClure's Magazine, Vol. XXIII pp. 227-40, New York 1904) • and in ( P residential Problems,' (pp. 79-11'7, New York 1904).