The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1851-02-14
From the Ne,o Orleans Pisayuns.
The Neutrality Law.
THE Arrest or GENERAL auIrMAi

slant, that General uitman has been arrested az
one of the parties to the Cuban invasion, and that
he will shortly be in this city TO answer 10 an in
dictment for the offence pending in the circuit
court of the United States. From the same source
we learn that his eIcellency is preparing protest
and proclamation upon the matter Of his arrest,
which, if we take the spirit of the Free Traders
correspondence q exemplar, will eectrfy the
public if the most ferocious words in the dicona-
ry may achieve that effect. We will not, however,
judge OF the protest or proclamation in anticipa-
ton of their appearance. We shall consider OF
them when they before us-confining our
marks for the present to the simple fact of the
rest, and to the temper in which it is announced in
the journal in question.
II would seem that in Mississippi it is mon
strous outrage upon the liberties of the people-a
violation of the sovereignty Of the State-a tramp
ling upon the franchise of frcemen, and an insult
to everybody aud every thing-to hold an execu-
tive officer to accountability which common folk
must respect. This doctrine finds no countenance
in the Constitution precedent in the history of
the palmy days Of the Republic. The founders Of
American liberties little dreamed that they were
establishing government for the purpose of con-
ferring upon ita officers an immunity from respon-
sibility to Jaw; and we doubt il, in creating the
executive office, they regarded the work of their
hands as prcrogative Of crime. Such theory
shocks the common sense II is repugnant to the
idea Of all men being equal before the law. How
that construction of the constitutional obligations
of the citizen which holds the high and the low
equally bound to respect the law, which all par
ticipatc in making, is an infringement upon the
rights of any one only be cyphered out in the
school where the value of the Union has been 80
often submitted to arthmetcai processes that the
slate and pencil have suppanted Constitution and
common law.
II is by the same reasoning that the arrest of one
citizen charged with violation Of law is construed
into an insult upon everybody residing in the same
State with him. This susceptibility to vicarious in
dignity might be accounted for if the of the
new theory held every man in the State individually
responsible for breach of law committed by one OF
them.
We apprehend that constitution which SUBJ
ected the whole body of citizens to criminal prose-
cution for what of them did, although that one
held exalted Office, would find few supporters,
even in Mississippi There is not then that degree
of responsibility and connexion between the guilty
and innocent parties to create emotion in the latter
because the former is brought to to the law.
If there be any insult in the case is in the breach
of the law, and not in The atonement. A whole
people may be excused little chagrin, if one who
is honorcd by their SURFACES with the highest office
within their gift so far forgets his position and
their kindness to abandon his duty for a season,
enter another State, and there participate in
ganizcd violation of law. We do not charge that
General Qutman is guilty; but grand jury, upon
probable showing, have, upon their oaths, found
true bill against him, and to this he should be
held to respond, like any other man.
1t is very apt inquiry, in this connexiop, to
slider whether it is not quite respectable in the
Governor of State to go into another State to
make amends for breach of law to go there for
the purpose of breaking it. Would the executive
function suffer any more by his being absent to
plead TO an indictment than it did on account of
his absence whilst giving grounds for 70 be laid
against him. And furthermore, if General Quit
could leave his constituents, to dabblc in in
tcrdicted practices, might they not spare him for
awhile that the law be indicated?
We think that the doctrine Of State sovereignty
in the present is impressed into the service of
General Quitman by his friends very gratutously,
not to say unwisely. Admitting, for the moment,
that there any merit in the doctrine at any
time, screening offender, it is of doubtful APP
plication here. If Mississippi be sovereign State,
Louisiana is no less 30; and it, on account of Mis-
sssippi sovereignty, the Governor might set at de-
fance the law of the United States there it does not
follow that he may come into another sovereign
State and defy the law here. Here we have set
off Of sovereignties
Without designing the slightest comparison be-
tween the cases, suppose the Governor of an ad
acent State should take it into his head to stop the
mails, forestal the revenue or lay waste the land
offices in Louisiana, could he wrap himself up in
his official robes and claim immunity from punish
ment He would have just much right to do
these things to come here and violate the law Of
1918, under which General Quiman has been in
dicted. We disclaim drawing parallel in respect
to the degree and quality of the guilt in these cases.
yet, tell what crotchets may enter
the heads of those who hold themselves above the
law, if the immunity of the Governor is made
good in the matter before the courts Of the
United States. all the rights enjoy under the laws
of Congress are exposed to like infrngements and
assault
The question, as it now stands, has nothing to do
with the natural sympathies which men have in be-
half Of any people laboring under oppression
These will, no doubt, be effectively employed by
the defence, if the case is brought to trial Nor
docs a desire to see the laws indicated and
spected imply wish to have any one found guilty by
ajury. The simple inquiry is, can Governor Of
one State enter the territory of another State and
there violate with mpunity the law of all the Sates
The affirmative of this question not only exposes
the rights held under the laws Of the Union by
other States to depreciation and outrage, but it is
creating gigantic irresponsibity to law and JUS
tce in every State Of the Union II reverses the fun
damental principle of representative government,
which inculcates the idea that the higher men rise
in the State the stricter should be their accounta-
bility. The law loving, aw-abiding instincts Of
the people would no longer be refreshed by official
example. What deplorabe condition of public
morals would result from recognised right Of cx-
ccutives to set all law at defiance Imagine this
immunity improved. We would violence and
corruption in high places shedding their baeful in
fuences upon all below. There would be little
spect Snowman Executive authority which held the
law, which it would make others obey, in contempt
The escutcheon Of the States would be begrimed
and BACKED by deeds of violence; and the current
of reributivo justice mudded at its source, would
overflow the land in stagnant pools, corrupting
thcr than purifying the body polite.