"The colonel has also referred to the act passed by the Confederate Congress, on the 30th of August last, known as the 'Sequestration Act,' and thinks the passage of that act justifies Union men in appropriating to their own use any property that may have been abandoned by the enemy. That act was passed about three weeks after the 'Confiscation Act' by the United States Congress, and shows upon its face that it was altogether retaliatory. Indeed, one section of the act says this in so many words. That section, which really gives the animus of the whole act, reads as follows: "'Be it enacted by the Congress of the Confederate States, that all lands, goods, rights, and credits within these Confederate States owned by any alien enemy since the 21st of May, 1861, be sequestrated by the Confederate States of America, and shall be held for the full indemnity of any citizen and resident of these Confederate States, or other person aiding said Confederate States in the prosecution of the present war, and for which' he may suffer any loss or injury under the act of the United States to which this act is retaliatory, authorizing the seizure or confiscation of the property of citizens or residents of the Confederate States; and the same shall be seized and disposed of as provided for in this act' Even this act, emanating from a spirit of revenge and retaliation, gives no authority, in any part of it, to private individuals to seize for their own use and benefit any property belonging to a Union man; but expressly declares in the section just quoted, that 'the same shall be seized and disposed of as provided for in this act; and the provisions referred to are quite as stringent and precise as those in the United States 'Confiscation Act.' heretofore quoted. "The reason why all governments are thus particular in pointing out the exact mode by which an enemy's property may be seized and appropriated, is plain enough, if one will but stop and consider it. Without such particularity of procedure, an army going into an enemy's country would soon become a rabble or mob--war would soon become rapine--officers would soon lose all control of their men, and from thenceforth plundering, spoliation, and pillage would become the order of the day. Yea, more, it would have the effect to set an army to warring among themselves, for each officer and each soldier would want the 'lion's share,' and it would only be a question of strength and endurance as to which should have it.