that they are in harmony with our institutions, which favor the civil
rather than the military power.

In thus declaring an unhesitating preference for Congressional
governments, I am obviously sustained by reason. But there is positive
authority on this identical question. I refer to the recorded opinion of
Chancellor Kent, as follows:--

"Though the Constitution vests the executive power in the President, and
declares him Commander-in-Chief of the army and navy of the United
States, _these powers must necessarily be subordinate to the legislative
power in Congress_. It would appear to me to be the policy or true
construction of this simple and general grant of power to the President,
not to suffer it to interfere with those specific powers of Congress
which are more safely deposited in the legislative department, and that
_the powers thus assumed by the President do not belong to him, but to
Congress_."[13]

Such is the weighty testimony of this illustrious master with regard to
the assumption of power by the President, in 1847, over the Mexican
ports in our possession. It will be found in the latest edition of his
"Commentaries" published during the author's life. Of course, it is
equally applicable to the recent assumptions within our own territory.
His judgment is clear in favor of Congressional governments.

Of course, in ordinary times, and under ordinary circumstances, neither
system of government would be valid. A State, in the full enjoyment of
its rights, would spurn a military governor or a Congressional governor.
It would insist that its governor should be neither military nor
Congressional, but such as its own people chose to elect; and nobody
would question this right. The President does not think of sending a
military governor to New York; nor does Congress think of establishing a
provisional government in that State. It is only with regard to the
Rebel States that this question arises. The occasion, then, for the
exercise of this extraordinary power is found in the Rebellion. Without
the Rebellion, there would be no talk of any governor, whether military
or Congressional.

STATE RIGHTS.

And here it becomes important to consider the operation of the Rebellion
in opening the way to this question. To this end we must understand the
relations between the States and the National Government, under the
Constitution of the United States. As I approach this question of
singular delicacy, let me say o