The Nashville daily union. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1862-1866, 1862-08-14

Many persoas have fallen into the
singular error Of suPposing that treason
can he committed by any other process
than acting, and that our liberal form Of
government, a. well as natural right,
allows a man to talk and write ss be
pleases, without making himself liable TO
punishment. A great many newspapers
opposed TO the Administration profess To
regard it as a great outrage that their
right to assert anything they please
should be denied. To such persons we
commend the common.sen remarks Of
the Cincinnati Gazette.
The Eaguira denies that treason can be
committed by speech or writing, and as
sumes that the constitutional protection
Of freedom Of speech and of the pen
covers everything that may be said or
written. Then furnishing information
10 the enemy, melting soldiers 10 desert,
enlistinc men 70 join the enemy, and
conspiring TO raise sedition against the
Government in time Of war, are not
treason, but only constitutional freedom
Of speech. This We suppose, is the re-
organized Democratic construction Of con-
stitutionRl liberty, Doubtless it knows
its own necessities.
II is the habit Of the resurrected Bu-
chanan Democracy TO talk as il treason
could not be committed in = free cOun-
try, and as if it was entirely despotic TO
mention such a crime. But such was not
the idea Of the founders Of the Govern
meut. The same men, generally, that
made the Constitution, prescribed the
penalty of death for treason and civil
lized society has always held il to be the
most heniOus of crimes. The reorgan-
lied Democracy has already II mar VI
70 this covert virtue" iu Senator Bright
who recommended 10 His Excellency
JEFF. Davis, President Of the Southern
~Confederacy, as he called him, a friend
as the inventor OF an improved lire-arm,
and was expelled from the Senate there
for. lie is the head Of the revised and
improved Democracy in Indiana.
In fact, Democracy has so refined the
crime of treason, aud 50 enla ged consti-
t]utional liberty, hat it regards the re.
belliun as only the exercise of the con.
stituiiOnal right to bear arms. The
Enquirer makes a cons ,itutiOnal argument
of the same sort by quoting the provisO
that Two witnesses to an overt act shall
be requisite to a conviction of treason
From this it argues, mot wisely but TOT
well, that Treason must consist 10 sOmI
act, and that neither opinions nor word,
are sufficient to expose a person TO The
penalties prescribed The able writeI
labors under The impression that an over
act Of treason must consist Of violence
and that speech or writing is not an act
IL he keeps on we shall have him ably
arguing that n deed is not a deed because
it is only a piece Of writing, whereas
deed is n thing done.
The Enquirer says that "a large numbe.
of decisions by the highest constitutions
tribunal have settled the question that i
is only acts-overt acts-that are pun
ishable according to the statute" WI
have the highest respect for the %intellec
tual power of assertion, but the highes
tribunal in the land has decided tina.
when war is LEVIED against the Govern
ment, all who have conspired TO levy OF
promote il, no matter how remote iron
the scene of violence, are guilty oflovy
ing war. Yet the overt acts of those VIII
did not actually participate in the VIC
lence may have been only words, for
very nice conspiracy can be cOncoctel
by words. An overt act is an open &C
-One that can be proven.