The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1847-04-23


cernng captures on land aud uatsr and that this power
is, by the constitution given expressly to Congress
Surely this proposition cannot stand In legal parlance,
military contributions not captures The terms and
the things sgafed in the two quite distinct
The regulation of captures is made by our constitution
Legislature act The levyng of military contributions
the contrary made bypio lac military act to be
done by military authority an the direction and conduit
Of The uar, and The application Of the public force
against the enemy The regulation of captures on the
water opens the whole subject of the law of prise, in
far that law may be left under the law OF nations, TO
municipal regulation. The regulation OF captures on
land opens the whole subject Of legislation for territories
permanently acquired by conquest. This permanent
legislation is not part of the direction of war. of
the application of the public force against the enemy
This legislation, indeed does not necessarily contem-
plate state of eristing These rules concerning
captures may, with all proprety be made before the war
breaks out Such rules may properly form part of the
public policy OF any nation in the anticipation of a
war afterwards to arise. Surely, them the power 10
make such rules concerning captures has nothing what
ever to do with the power 10 Levy military contributions,
iveh arises only time of ,car, and only be
eised by military authority part Of the operations of
toar.
We pass the first of the quotations made by the
nelgencer from the letters of Helvdus because we do
perceive its relevancy to the question. The right of
the President to direct military contributions to be levied
not founded by him upon any vague ''residuary"
executive power conferred upon him by the constitution.
On the contrary that right is exercised in virtue of his
authority the executive military head Of the army and
navy in time of This character is expressly con-
erred upon him by the constitution.
As the second passage cited from those letters few
words will suffice to answer the argument, which
monomanta pronounces to be "unanswerable The
right levy military contributions is not strictly speak
ing cIded in the "right 10 declare war" 1t is 'sin-
cuded" rather in the right and duty to carry on
10 conduct to execute the war; after it has been decla
ed, has oterwlse iawfuHy arisen Surely the power
"to declare waythat is to transfer the nation from
state OF peace to state of hostlityis very different
thing from the right 10 conduct he operations of the tcar
after exists The one is by our constitution legisla
tive power belonging to Congress; the other is ALSO by
the express language of the constitution, an Executive
power belonging TO the President commander chief
Mr. Madison HIMSELF in the very same letters from which
the Inelgencer has made its citations recognises and
emphasizes Mis division Of the car porer between Con-
gress and the President He thus quotes and comments
upon ts constitution:
The President shall be commander-inchef of the ar
my and navy Of the United Stas and of the militia
when called into the actual service of the United States
" There can be reationiworth examining between this
power and the general power of making treaties. Ind IN
stead Of beng analogous 70 the yore Of declaring ,ar, a
tords striking illustration 9L The inconpatbay Of he to
oe4e parought Be commenced, continued o. eomciSd
Cd They are barred from the latter functions by great
principle IN Tree government analogous 10 that which sep
aate the sword from the purse or the power of executing
This shows that the Intellirpncers oyyn
answeabe" authority, held, FIRST that the President is by
the constitution, commander charged with
the conduct Of the ar; and secondly, that this power to
conduct the far from being analogous to the power
odeclae war; should for imperative reasons be lodged
wholly in different hands. Now the lcvying of military
contributions is in srcness OF the operations of the
1t is part, and oentmes very essential part of
The plan Of campaign. 1t belongs then to the soon
duct OF the war;" and thus, by the Intelligencer's
authority it belongs to the Executive 1t is, per-
haps, unnecessary TO inform readers that the pas
sages above cited, by the Tnteigencer from Mr. Madi
sons letters part Of his Argument against the right
of President Washington to issue his Proclamation of
Neutralityin 1893 That argument neither had nor pro-
fessed to have the slightest bearing against the power Of
the Executive in the conduct OF war.
But since the Inelligenccr chooses to rely upon the
authority OF Mr. Madison against Mr. Hamilton in that
famous controversy, will now cite passage from the
same series of letters, which gives the oonering opinion
of these two great opponents, and comes home to the
question with the vast weight of their combined author
IT, Mr.. Madison cites from Hamons letter the fol-
lowing sentence, and says of it, he cites it. Iais
tence is truth" The sentence thus endorsed COM
mend to the ntelligencer 1t is
The erseutipsi charged wh the execution Of all as,
the la,c of nell the municipal law chich rscog
,ses aud adopts those h,cs." j as8 oseu
This wofold authority, regarded even when single, by
the Intelligencer as unanswebe, brings the issue be-
tween us and that journal down to compass.
Is the right of our government to levy military contrl
buttons upon its enemy in time of part oft aw
of nations iii be so, then say Madison and Hamilton
its exercise belongs 10 the President for he is "cargsd
by the constitution "wTTH THE EXECUTION THE LAWS
OF NATIONS"
We thus take leave. for the present. of the Intelligent
GERS last amentable monOmania.
Prediction contracted with Reality.
The Portland Argus allows much credit to the inan-
cia talents of Mr. Senator Evans of Maine who has been
STYLED the 'modern Hamilton But it calls in question