The Nashville daily union. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1862-1866, 1862-06-28
NO. g.


erty, and not in consequence of convic-
ton Of the person.
vi. And the whole course of legisla-
ton of the country has sanctioned the
distinction by laws passed under the
auspicies of the fathers Of the Constitu-
! ton
If any one ask, VIZ prohibit conGsca-
| ton in pursuance Of conviction, and allow
| il without conviction?
! ! reply: The burden Of showing the
unconstitutionality of the law lies ON
those who affirm IT, They cannot defeat
il by showing that the Constitution has
forbidden il in cases not now eontempla-
ted. The question is what the Constitd-
ton says against conllscatiOn igiL5om con-
viction of the person and | say il is ST
lent IL limits COnllsCatiOn as the con
sequence Of conviction; and there it
stops
II is possible a reason may be found
for this limitation in connection with a
conviction, in the spirit which dictated
the definition Of treason while other
crimes were left TO the definition of Con
gross.
Treason had been tho pretext Of many
bloody judicial murders in English his
tory; constructive treasons were the con-
triyances of jealous tyrants or greedy
applicants or fierce opponents.
To limit the crime TO open war, TO re-
quire double proof, to remove the temp
tations of cupidity from among the mo-
tiyes Of prosecution of the PERSON, were
thought correctives TO the political or per
sonal passions which might prompt un-
just or reyengeful prosecutions to the
death The temptation of covetousness
was removed when conviction could in
yolve forfeiture only between Judgment
and execution
But a COnliscation enforced by other
process Of law than conviction Of the
person followed by bloody end, was
subject to no such objection; and IL was
justly left 10 the wisdom and moderation
of Congress-for emergencies like the
present.
IL is quite certain that the restriction
Of coniiscation in consequence Of con
viotion and attainder 10 the life Of the
person convicted, is not restricted TO lands
and still more certainly has no reference
TO estates tail They were liable at COM
mon law 10 forfeiture by attainder under
their form Of conditional fees though
singularly enough distinguished Sena-
tor assumes the contrary; they were ex-
empted for a while by the construction
of the statute, Ode donis conditional
ibus;" but lost their exemption in the
reign of Henry VIII.
Such attempts TO escape Constitute
tutional difficulty merely discredit all
defense of the conllscatiOn bills.
The Constitution means just what il
says and the opponents of conhscation
try to make itmean what il does not say.
Leave that style of argument 10 them, In
common with those strict construction
lists who have found the denial of powers
TO Congress the most cnectual way of
leaving the government disarmcd and
powerless in the face Of the rebellion in
arms
The real explanation of the restriction,
as well as OF the careful definition, of
treason, think / have above given. II
} indicates the desire 20 exclude political
prosecution, but not 10 deprive the govern
mcnt of any power essential 10 the main
tenanco of the government against the
temptation of ambition or the violence OF
insubOrdinate factions.
IT is quite certain that neither Of the
provisions respecting treason prevents the
; punishment 0f acts which amount &
treason under other names and free from
those restrictions. The traitors VIII,
burned the Maryland bridges and sho
; the Massachusetts, men on the 18th o.
April were guilty Of treason but they
were also guilty Of resisting the laws o.
the United States, and Of a riot, and OBJ
structing mail routes; and for any o.
those crimes any punishment, any coniis
cation may be Constitutionally imposed
as the consequence ~ He judgment, and ON
witness may prove them,
u Still, the Constitutional provision is
salutary admonition in favor Of modcra
: ton, especially suited TO these times.
Y Very sincerely your friend
llESW WNTER DAVIS
G Hon. Justin S. Morrill,, Washington