Cincinnati daily press. [volume] (Cincinnati [Ohio]) 1860-1862, 1861-05-30

ONhbhA8 AnHNAA0o VI W W AottoAt
whether, if he shall enlist for three years,
and the wal is over before the end of that
period, be win be obliged TO do garrison
duty. Unless the Government sees 6t to dis
charge him at the close Of the war, he viii,
Of course, be obliged to do any duty i'm
posed upon him by those in authority.
The Law Of Treason in the United States.
The Constitution provides that "treason
against the United States shall consist only
in levying war against them, or in adhering
to their enemies, giving them aid and COM
fort"
The first clause Of the definition, it Is ev-
ident, from the phraseology, was intended by
the trainers to apply to cases Of domestic in
suIreCtiOn; the latter TO cases Of foreign in
vasion. If we are correct in the foregoing
proposition, treason, in case Of an intestine
disturbance, can be committed only by such
as levy war against the United States.
In respect to the limitation of the crime Of
treason to the act of levying war, the United
States differs from all other countries. The
reason for this difference is to be found in
the circumstances of the time when the rule
was established. The United States had just
emerged from the Revolution. During the
whole of the revolutionary period, the people
had been accounted traitors to aGovernment
whose rules in respect to treason were 80
loose and contradictory that what did or did
not constitute the crime was practically a
mere matter Of judicial discretion. They
had learned by experience that judges could
be swayed by feelings of party excitement
or by the suggestions of the Government
under which they held Office, and that either
of these influences was inimical to Justice
opening the way to reigns of terror, and the
commission Of high crimes against humanity.
The trainers of the Constitution, therefore,
made the rule which we have quoted, and
which, whether or not the wisest that could
have been devised, is and must continue to
be, the law of judicial proceedings in cases
of treason, until it shall be annulled.
The decision Of Chief Justice Marshall, in
the case of The United States Us. aaron
Burr, is understood to be the leading author
ity, in the matter of insurrectionsry treason;
and, in conformity with its rulings, so far
as they are applicable, all subsequent ques-
tons have been decided. According to this
decision the species. of treason under con-
sideration consists in levying war against
the Government. There must be an actual
levyiDg of war, and the party charged must
be connected by testimony with ONE of the
wArlike operations. In order to levy war,
there must be some thing more than plots
and conspiraeies. A conspiracy to over
throw the Government however aitfully
contrived and extensively spread, is not a
leyyiDg of war. There must be an assem-
blage Of people, a collection of materials
some overt act which evineeS a hostile de-
sign, andsuch in character as naturally pre-
cedes a hostile act.
ITO constitute-says Justice Marshall, Dor.
rowing the language which had been used
in the previous case of Bollmsn aud Swart,
wout-that specific crime for which the
prisoners now before the Court have been
committed war must be actually levied
against the United States. However hagt-
cious may be the crime of conspiring to sub
vert by force the Government of our country
such conspiracy is not treason. To conspir'
to levy war, and actually to levy war arr
distinct offenses. The first must be brough
into operation by the assemblage of men fo
a purpose reasonable in itself; or the fact o
leVyiDg war can not have been committed.
Although the fact that war has been leviet
is necessary to constitute the crime of trea
son, it does not follow that none but thos
who have actually appeared in arms can b
convicted. On the contrary, if war be act
ually levied, that is to say, if a body of mel
be actually assembled for the purpose of Ell
fecting by force a reasonable object, all thos
who perform any part, however minute, o
however remote from the scene of action
and who are actually leagued in the genera
conspiracy, are traitors
"If, for example-said the Chief Justice
an army should be actually raised for tn
avowed purpose Of carrying on open wa
against the United States and subVertin
their government the point must be weighe
very deliberately before a Judge would ven
ture to decide that an overt act OF leVyin,
war bad not been committed by a commits
sary of purchases, who never saw the army
but who, knowing its object, and leaguein
himself with the rebels, supplied that arm
with provisions, or by a recruiting office
holding commission in the rebel servicI
who, though never in camp, executed th
particular duty assigned to him"
War being levied, therefore, all conspirI
tors, emissaries, spies and agitators in c.
operation with those in arms, and seekin
by their acts to promote the common en-
become traitors and liable to be dealt wit
accordingly.
Another clause of the Constitution pr
vides that "No person shall be convictC
oftresson unless on the testimony of ts
witnesses TO the same overt act, or on CO..
fession in open Court"
This has reference to the trial of persol
charged with the crime of treason, and rel
ders necessary, under the construction pv
upon it by the Court first: that the indie
ment set forth some specific act of levyiu
war, and Som act of the prisoner ~connectir
him with the same; and second that the
facts be proved as they are laid in the indie
ment-the guilt of the prisoner by two wi
Lesses to the same overt act.
fThe place in which q crime wa con
mitted Is essential to an indictment, were
only TO show the jurisdiction OF theiGourt.
is also essential for the purpose Of enablin
he prisoner to make his defense. . . . .
description Of the particular manner
which the war was levied seems also essel
tial 10 enable the accused TO make his d
fepse, The law does not expect a man to
prepared to defend every action Of his Iii
which may be suddenly, and without motto
alleged against him. In common iustiC
the particular fact with which he is charg,
ought 70 be stated, and stated in such
manner as 10 afford q reasonable certaint
of the nature of the accusation, and the CT
cumstances which will be adduced again
him.
Il Is not to be doubted that a man may
indicted and convicted for being connect
with q reasonable attach upon Fort Sumt
although he was no nearer the scene Of