The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1851-10-16
"IN TREASON THERE ARE NO ACCES,
SORIESr

ain treason all the pdrttcipes crtminiS ar
principals there are no accessories to this crime
| Every act, which in the case OF felony would
render O man an accessory will IN the case o.
treason make him principal"
Judge Kane reiterates this doctrine
at is not necessary to prove that the indi
vidual accused was direct personal actor IN
the violence If he was present directing, aid
ing abetting. cOunselling or countenancing IT.
he n in law guilty of the forcible act Nor Is
even his personal appearance indispensable
Though he be absent at the time OF its actual
preparation, yet if he directed the act devised
or klo,,,,s1efy iafnshed the means for carrying
it into effect instigated others to perform it, he
shafessMei2 g9ilt lnFIa@t sea there are no
ACCESSORIES"
This doctrine is not of American, but Eng
lish growth; not the offspring of Republican,
ism, but Absolutism 1t was invented in Eng
land when absolute powers were claimed for the
King and his person was held to be invested
with divine attributes, 80 that to utter lightly a
word against his sacred majesty, was adjudged
treason, and punished with death Parla-
mentary statutes in the reigns of Henry V and
Henry vi confirmed this doctrine making the
aiders cOunseers, cOnsenters abettOrs, main
tanners, procurers, comforters receivers, reliev-
ers, &c, of persons guilty of treason, principal
traitors also.
OF course the decisions of English courts
were not binding in this country, any more
than the statutes Of Parliament Such de-
cisions might be entitled to respectful consider
alton. in the construction of a similar law ex-
listing in both countries where the reason Of
the decisions would equally apply to both. But
how could the reason of these decisions respect
ing constructive treason apply to this country
We had repudiated the divine right of Kings
We had declared war against AbsOlutism. The
omnpOtence of Parliament we had denied. We
had asserted that Governments had theirright-
full origin with the People that to the People
belonged the real sovereignty; and we had
formed Government, on a written Constitu-
ton prescribing its metes and bounds. No di-
vinity, no sacred majesty, no divine right, was
claimed tor 1t and the idea Of charging its
powers by construction, securing IMMUNITY
for its abuscs--the ruling idea under the Eng
hsh Monarchy before the Revolution-was ut
war with our Constitution and the genius of the
People Besdes-our institutions, being founded
on a declaration of the rights of man, as man,
they ELECTED all ideas ofcruelty, inhumanity, and
severity. Their policy was to regard and treat
the People with benignity, eschewing all ex-
cessiye or unusual punishments.
The reason of the decisions of the English
courts, which were made in the spirit of intol-
Grant despotism, in disregard of the rights OF
the People, and with n view TO bulwark the
usurpations of the Royal Power, could not
hold in this country. And yet we find the Fed
eral Judges in 1904, although disowning the
authority of the judicial decisions of England as
precedents, borrowing from those same deci-
siOns the villanous doctrine that an treason
there are no accessories IN What law author
lied such declaration What reason could
justify, what analogy suggest or excuse it 1t
was anti-Democratic, anti-American anti-Chris-
tian Hear what the most eloquent historian
of England says of this doctrine, which has just
received the sanction of Democratic Judge in
Republican America
Speaking of the act of the Lady Alice, after
the Monmouth rebellion, in giving food and
shelter to Hickes and Nelthorpe, says
"If Lady Alice knew her guests to have been
concerned in the insurrection, she was undOubt-
eddy guilty of what in strictness is a capital
crime; for the law of principal and accessory,
as respects high treason then was, and is to
this day, in state disgraeefui 10 Esgl,sh juris-
prudence In cases of felony, q distinction,
founded on Justice and reason, is made between
the principal and accessory after the fact He
who conceals from justice one whom he knows
to be murderer though liable to punishment,
~ not liable to the punishment of murder; but
he who shelters one whom he knows to be "A
traitor is, according to all our .jurists, guilty of
high treason. 1t is unnecessary to point out
the absurdity and cruelty of law which in
cludes under the same definition and visits
with the same penalty, offences lying at the OPP
posite extremes Of the scale of guilt The feel.
ing which makes the most loyal subject shrink
from the thought OF giving up to a shameful
death the rebel who, vanqushed, hunted down,
and, in mortal agony, begs for morsel OF
bread and cup of water, may be weakness
but it il surely "a weakness very nearly allied
to virtue n weakness which. constituted rs hui
man beings are, We can hardly eradicate from
the mind, without Graduating many noble and
benevolent sentiments. A wise and good ruler
may not think it right to sanction this weak
ness, but he will generally connive at it. or
punish it very tenderly. In no case will he
| treat it rs crime of the blacklist dye Wheth-
er Flora Mcdonald was justified in concealing
the attainted heir of the Stuarts, whether n
brave soldier of our own time was justified in
assisting the escape Of Lavalette. are questions
on which casuists may differ but to class such
actions with the crimes of Guy Faux and
Fieschi, is an outrage to humanity and COM
mon sense. Such, however is the classification
of our law. IL is evident that nothing but a
lenient administration could make such state
of the law cndurable And it is Just to say
that during many generations no English Gov.
ernment save one has treated with rigor per-
sons guilty merely of harboring defeated and
flying insurgents
This doctrine, thus denounced by Macaulay
and practically renounccd to n great extent by
the Moderated Monarchy of England, is I'M
ported into this country, and now sought to
he enforced in all its bloody rigor by the tx
ecutive and Judiciary of the United States
Gin TREASON THERE ARE No ACCESSORIES y
Were We not restrained by the precepts of Him
whose word we recognise reverentIy rs our
"higher law" we would invoke Heavens curses
upon the heads Of those traitors to Republican,
ism and Humanity who dare, from the press
and from the bench, avow and advocate doc