Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1815-05-17

supply was distant and uOccr,aln oar utter
ruin, if we failed, at hand and inevitable. G.
very thing depended on the prompt and en-
ergetic use of the rseans we possessed-On
calling the whole force IF the community in.
TO action twas contest FOR the very exist
ence Of the state. x every means in our pow
er, were to be snairc6 in It's defence. The
physical force Of every individu7l, his moral
faculties, HI, property. and the energy of his
example, were to be called into action, and
into instant action. No delay, no hesitation,
10 inquiry abou, rishls. or all was los. aud
c,cry thing dear 20 ,Den. his property, his
life. the honor Of bis family, his country, its
constitution and laws, were swept away. by
the avnwcd principles. the open practices of
the enemy, with whom we were 20 contend
Fortifcatcns were TO be erected. supp!its
. procured arms to be sought fuy, rcquisilious
to be made, tie emissares of,be enemy TO
be watched, barking treason TO be over aw
ed, insubordina,on TO be punished, and the
cont3gion ofc1watdly example to be stopped
In this crisis ADD under firm uersua
sion thar more nf these objects could be ef.
iected by theexcrcise cfthe ordinary powers
confided to him. under solemn conviction.
,ha. the country committed to his care could
be saved. by that measure only, from utter
ruin--undeY a religious belief, that he was
pecfoTrliag the most inpureant and sacred
duty, the respondent proclaimed martial
law. He intended by that mcasure, TO su
percede such civil powers. Us in their CD
GRAFTON iuterfsred with those he was q.
bliged to exercise. He thought, that in
such moment. constitutional forms, must
be suspended for the per~ anent prescrva-,I
ton al constitutional rights. and that there
could be no question, whether it were best
30 depart for ii moment, from the exercise
al onr dearest privileges, Or have them
rvreSfed from u forever He knew that If
the civil magi.uate were permitted to ex
ercise his usual functions, none Gf the mea.
sures, necessary to avert the y fuj fate that
threatened us, could be expected. PERSONAL
liberty csnnot exist at a time, when everv--
man is requred 20 become = soldier, Pri
waite properly canuot be secured when it's
use is Indispensable tor the public ssFety--
Unlimited Liberty OF speech is inCompatable
with the discipline of a camp and that Of
tie press is tie more dangerous, when it !,
made the vehicle of conveying intelligence
TO the enemy, er exciting ~ mu'i1Y an ong
the soldier. To have suffered he unc0n-
trou.ed enjoyment OF any one pf those rights,
have been to s5sndon n the %fs"ce Of go ,he
country tue civil magistrate is the guar.
dian of those rights and the proclamation
OF marital law was therefore intended, to
supersede he exercise Of his authority, so
far as It ntetiered with the necessary re-
sttic'ions ofthose rights /; OK no. further.
The respondent states, theSe principles
explicitly, because they are the basis of his
deienc1, aud because n mistaken notion has
been circulated. that the deciaFa,ion,o of mar
tie, law ong suhjeci.d he militia in SER
vice Co its opertnon This would. indeed,
have been q very useless ceCemonY. as such
yersons. were already sosubjrci Ell without
the addition 0s any other ac, and besides
re believes that il the proclamation of
martial law we're measure ofneces sjty, by
whlch he means measure, without whciIt
TIE cnontry must have been conquered and
the Consultation lost, then It forIas a iusti
hcatien of he act. Ifit does not. in what
rraUper will me proceeding by attachment
FOR contempt be justified ? II is undoubted.
ly aud strictly . ccimipai prosecution and
the cons ution declares, thAt 10 all crimi
nal prosecutions, the accused shall have the
benehs Of a trial by Jury ;yet proseca
tion IS even now going ON IN this court
where no such benefit is allowed. Why is
this? Fram ne aledged necessity Of the
case. because courts could not, it is said.
subsist withou, power TO punish promptly
by their own act and not by the inte ven.
ton of jury. Necessity then, may. in
some cases, Justify the b each cf the consi-
'tulINil SIX ~ VI lde uDuD'lut VI dFOlu
ing couiusien in a court, shall il b. denied
IN the serious enc or preSeryirg a G. uEtry
from conquest y ruin? The respondent begS
leave 20 explain, that in HSipg th, argu'
ment, he Goes not mean 90 admit tine ne
oeSsity in the case of attachments b6 to
shew that he principles of Jurisdiction
from necessity isadni.ted'even 10 lha, wea
ker case. That The Legislature 81 The u.
States, have given to courts the power to
punish copiempts, is 40 answer TO this head
OF defence, for ;wo reasons--6rst, bccau IL
thc words of the law, do not necessarily tx~
Guide the Intervention Of jury /; and Sc
condly, it they DE- ;tnst the law itselt, con,
trary E the W d. o, the consti uios, and
can only be supported on &c pea If neoessi-
~ TO Uhich head 1t IS referred 0y the En-.
g.ish writer's on me subj ct.
The only responsibility, which It is thought
has been ncnrred III the pre- sent case, is, THAI
which arises from necessity. This thc re4pOn
dent argues, must not be doubtful IL must be
APPARENT from The circumstances Of the case or
IL oIms no Qualification. lie su5miis. there
tore. all MS acts to be tested by this rule.
To The orcibie reasons, which he has detail
Cd 80 inpsljpg him to t1.s meaaure, he ought
90 add tst h. has since, by the confession OF
die cicm. hmsef received confirmation oi
tlc iasi, which be had tht good reason to bee
ieyc thst u zoe were men among " SO de
PRAYED, 20 give daily and ex e. information
cl our movements aud osr forces tat the
number a -ifsc persons was considerable, and
tler &C witty r0astsntly increasing. The uame 3
OF these wretohes viii probably be discovered ;
and the spoudeut persuade bmsclf, that this