The Impressment question.
report of the Commissioners committee — the design of the act as it Relates to wheat — official order.
We have already published the proceedings of the Confederate Board of Impressment Commissioners which have just adjourned at Augusta, Ga. The subject of its deliberations is of such vital interest to the country that we give in full the report of the committee upon "the interpretation of the act," which is for the guidance of impressment officers throughout the Confederacy. The committee report:
That they have considered the subject matter referred to them, and are of opinion that the phraseology of the law itself defines with the greatest accuracy the cases in which the owners of property impressed by the Government agents are entitled to have the value thereof determined by local assessment or arbitration. The law provides, in explicit terms, that in cases where property of the owner impressed by the Government and the impressing officer cannot agree upon the value thereof, it shall be the duty of such impressing officer "upon an affidavit in writing of the owner of such property or his agent that such property was grown raised, or produced by said owner, or is held or has been purchased by him, not for sale or speculation, but for his own base and consumption, to cause the same to be ascertained and determined" by the process designated in the foregoing resolution as "local assessment."
The enumeration of the cases in which the owners of property impressed are entitled to the benefit of local arbitration, it is believed, includes every conceivable case but the one in which the owner cannot, or will not, prove by his own affidavit, or that of his agent, that such property was grown, raised, or produced by him, or is held, or has been purchased by him, not for sale or consumption, but for his own use or consumption.--The intention of the law, it in most manifest, was to make those who purchased for trade or speculation one class, and all other persons another class; this latter class, however, may in practice be augmented by the refusal of persons intended to be embraced in the first class to make the affidavit in the first section of the law specified. Those who make this affidavit are entitled to have the value of their property, or what will be a just compensation therefore, determined by local arbitration — all other persons can only demand for their compensation according to the schedule of prices agreed upon and published by the Commissioners in pursuance of 5th section of the impressment Act.
The second question referred to the committee for its consideration is stated in these terms: "And when an appeal is made to the Commissioners, whether it is not their duty to affirm the award of the local arbitrators as being just compensation, if the impressing officer cannot furnish evidence to the contrary."
The act of Congress concerning impressments was passed as well for the protection of the citizen as for that of the Government. The rights of the citizen were so often violated by the arbitrary and unjust proceedings of Government agents charged with the duty of furnishing supplies for our armies that a public clamor was raised upon this subject, which reaching the ears of Congress, led to the introduction and enactment of the original Impressment law. In the original law no provision is made for appeals from the decision or the award of the local arbitration for which the first section of the act provides; but this decision or award was declared to be final, as the schedule prices agreed upon and published by the Commissioner were made final in all cases to which they were applicable. Soon after the passage of the original act, however, in the immediate vicinity of Congress a ease occurred in which, by local arbitration, twenty dollars per hundred weight was allowed by a farmer for day, when the owner of the article had offered it to the agent of the Government for less than half that price.
This occurrence was made public notoriety, and immediately led to the passage of the act by Congress entitled "An act to amend an act entitled 'An act to regulate impressments by officers of the army.'" This act declares that in all cases of appraisement provided for in said act, the officers impressing the property shall, if he believes the appraisement to be fair and just, endorse upon it his reasons for refusing, and deliver the same, with a receipt for the property impressed, to the owner, his agent, or attorney, and as soon as practicable forward a copy of the receipt and appraisement, and his endorsement thereon, to the Board of Appraisers appointed by the President and Governor of the State, who shall revise the same, and make final valuation, so as to give just compensation for the property taken, which valuation shall he paid by the proper department." From this brief history of this appellate jurisdiction of the Board of Commissioners, it will be seen that it was conferred alone for the protection of the Government; and this is even yet more strongly manifested by the fact that the right of appeal is denied to the citizen, whist it is given as a right to the Government. To this appeal on the part of the Government, the only condition president is that the officer impressing shall endorse upon the appraisement his reasons for disapproving, and thereupon the case comes before the Board of Appraisers for their revision and final valuation. This appellate jurisdiction was obviously given to the Commissioners as a remedial measure.
The law conferring it is therefore a remedial law, and upon well-settled principles of construction should be construed in the light of the evil which led to its enactment, and so as to suppress the mischief and advance the remedy. Now, to do this it must be held that the powers of the Board of Commissioners in the exercise of appellate jurisdiction are to be held as unrestricted and general as are their powers in cases of which they have original jurisdiction. It is the duty of the Commissioners to fix upon the prices to be paid by the Government for every article of property which can become the subject of a local arbitration, and this they are required to do so as to afford just compensation to the owners thereof, and these prices, it is insisted, should be regarded as fair and right until by competent proof the contrary is shown. To illustrate, the Commissioners are required to fix the price to be paid by the Government-say for the article of wheat. The Commissioners of Georgia in the discharge of this duty agree upon and publish five dollars per bushel as the price to be paid for wheat in the city of Augusta; this, then, is the judgment of the Commissioners as to the value of wheat in this place, and as to the price that will afford just compensation therefore. At this price the Government agents in Augusta impress and appropriate large quantities of wheat for the use of the Government. They make an impressment, however, and the owner of the wheat so impressed makes the affidavit which will entitle him to the benefit of an appraisement by local arbitration.
This appraisement, is made and eight dollars per bushel is allowed; this case is now brought before the Commissioners by appeal, and it now becomes their duty to revise the said local arbitration and make final valuation of the wheat in question so as to give just compensation therefore. In making this final valuation, it will be seen, they will only be required to decide a question which they have previously solemnly adjudicated, and upon which their judgments are known to be fully made up. Now, under these circumstances, shall it be said that judgment of the inferior jurisdiction shall be regarded as prima facie right, though in conflict with the judgment and decision of the appellate jurisdiction, or should not the very reverse of this be held to be the sound rule upon the subject? What is just compensation to one citizen in Augusta for his wheat will, also, as a general rule, be just compensation to his neighbor for the same article, and surely in the absence of all proof authorizing or requiring a difference to be made, it can scarcely be expected that a Board of Commissioners will say to one citizen of Augusta that five dollars per bushel is the full value and just compensation for his wheat, and at the very same time, because his neighbor's case comes before him by appeal, declare that the latter is entitled to eight dollars per bushel, and that less will not be just compensation.
It is obvious that it was intended that the original impressment Act, and the law by which it was amended, were to be construed as one law, and thereby introduce, as far as practicable in each State uniformly of prices; it must also have been intended that the Commissioners, in assessing vaines, should, in their original and appellate jurisdiction, adopt and apply the same principles and standard, and, this being done, it will follow that in all eases brought before the board by appeal, schedule prices must be enforced, unless the owner of the pressed testimony make out an exceptional case, in which event it would be competent and proper for a higher price to be allowed; but, in considering appeals, it should be borne in mind that the assessment of local arbitrators is not by the law made testimony, and should not, there fore, when above the schedule prices, be regarded as prima facis right, but as erroneous, unless by competent proof the contrary is shown.
This report was adopted by the board. In connection with this subject, we publish an order which has been reissued from the Adjutant General's office:
C. S. Of America, War Department, Adjutant and Insp'r General's office, Richmond, Va., Nov. 6, 1863.
General Orders, No. 144.To relieve prevalent misconceptions in regard to the poliey and practice of this Department on the subject of impressment, the following, being extracts of General Order of March 29th, is reprinted:
Adj. And Insp'r General's office, Richmond, Va., March 29, 1863.
General Orders, No. 31.In consequence of numerous applications made by various persons to the War Department, it is obvious that some misconception in regard to the instructions of the Secretary of War in relation to the impressment of supplies must exist on the part of the people, or that the agents of the Government have violated their instructions: Now, therefore, for the purpose of removing such misconception, and to prevent any violation of those instructions, it is hereby ordered:
- I. That no officer of the Government shall, under any circumstances whatever, impress the supplies which a party has for his own consumption, or that of his family, employees, or slaves.
- II. That no officer shall at any time, unless specially ordered so to do by a General commanding in a case of exigency, impress supplies which are on their way to market for sale on arrival.
- III. These orders were included in the instructions originally issued in relation to impressment by the Secretary of War; and the officers exercising such authority are again notified that "any one acting without or beyond" the authority given in those instructions will be held strictly responsible.
