Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1862-05-22
rCoNCLUpED.]

\ No,v Mr.. President, "ne' "'' "''' P''
lnos IN rem, where you 10 not have any
Er'''"s What is the form, what's the char
Pr Chem? They are 'rials before prize
ect o. admiralty comts. In what cases Z
b W. vhsr the thing is the instrument of
% @ that in legal estimation it is a
v ", hing. Then you may proceed with
A ,birp II man is trying to smuagle
a a., vow know be cannot be guilty of
" ,,rGo without goods. The goods are the
5ment of the wIong-and therefore
wv !. proceeding by which you may
and condemn the thing, for that is what
cans. believe. So, too, it a plrale's
4 - with which he marauds upon the seas
n', M, nations, is taken, 1t is a guilty
.-;. is the instrument of wrong, aud You
ID a alnsiIt So when men pursue the
w, ,Tade with ships, they are the insiru-
1 ". oI wrong, and you proceed against
IN rem. In proceedings an rem you do
!, awe the thing notice, because it cannot
D,Tsr YOU do not give it a trial by jury,
nS,p YOU proceed against the man.
Bpt sir, on this occasion there has been el-
and used the decision of the Supreme
amt in the case of Palmyra IN IL Wheaton,
<ndir is cited for the purpose of supporting
X doctrine that if crime is committed for
Inch the thing is liable to be forfeited, as
IN as the man subject to punishment, you
4. Az nroceed against the thing by itself with
4 ,t e6nyicting the man. That Is not so; that
ase was not so. =.
1 LET rs look at the case and see what it
has What the Judges talked about outside
IN the case is a matter of no consequence--it
4 sxtra-iudicial-wha the boys call 'slop-
kpo over We had statute OF 1919, which
Eas revised and enlarged and extended IN
IIS?O. which authorized the President 'to IN
Erct the commanders of public armed YES
HI of the U. S. TO seize, subdue and send IN
M spv Dol of the u. s.. any armed vessel or
|boat, the crew whereof shall be rmed, and
(which shall have attempted or committed any
|rratical aggression. search, restraint, depre-
|dation, or seizure upon any vessel OF the U.
KS. or of the citizens thereof, or upon any
4oher vessel A vessel of that kind was
seized and brought in and put on trlal-and
one point that was made before the court
was that they could not condemn that vessel
|by proceeding in rem, until the owners OF
Grew of the vessel had been themselves tired
and remarks were made about that. OBJ
Rserye, there was no law to punish the men
who we're engaged on board the vesSel-the
court say that--and therefore they say II
will not do to argue that we cannot condemn
| this vessel, she being the guilty instrument
EOf the wrong, because the men are not tried
1 Tor the crime and convicted, for there is nc
crime for them to be convicted Of; We can
not try ihem-it is not provided for. Hence
the thing was guilty thing, and it was pro
cseded with in that way as within the elias
that have already alluded to.
This proceeding in rem is spoken of in I
manner which would be rather ludicrous
we're not so serious an affair-but il is nj
nit thing to say that wher man has com
mued crime like that of treason, and
wthln the reach Of your process, you ma
proceed to strip him OF his property, or d
snything..you can do, as you say, and the
punish him afterwards. 1t is a rule that 20
must do on such occasions whatever 20
have physical means to do-and therefore
n you cannot reach him in any other way
1 he has gone out of the reach of your process
i you must take us property because you haV
nothing else to take I? II a man is guilty
fcounterfeiting your Treasury notes and yo
scannot catch him, il he is out OF the wa
why not, on the same principle, have la
\ to cut bis wife's throat if he has no proPert!
Sir, the whole idea, in my sstimShon' Is e.
hrely wrong, and an attempt to "a IN
which the provision of the Constitution ".
intended to guard against. 1t nowhere say
y that if you cannot punish the man becau:
he gets out of the reach of process, therefor
you may disregard the provisions of the Coz
stituion, and take some other way. Their
is nothing of that kind in the Constitution.
take it we have all our powers from the col
stitution, and that in itself inhibits to US b
ABSOLUTE abnegation that We shall exerci:
any powers but what are there granted, an
all the rest were reserved from US.
Mr.. President, this word 'confiscate' literal
means put into the Treasury and it can legit
nately be applied only to that out of which yt
can get something to put into the Treasury
That is truly the meaning of the term. BIT
sir, when we legislate for the people of Il
Southern seeded States we do it because TIT
are our people. We treat all this secession
void-and | take it that that which is void 9:
have no legal effect 1t can have no effect
eonfscate anybodys goods or annihilate 4
States; nor can it have any other legal efe
Ehateyei.
4 When we legislate for that people as our pc
pie in common with the rest of our citizens,
must allow to them all the rights and privilege
immunities and projections that the Constit
tlOn gives to citizens OF the Union. ha,
therefore, made the remarks which have ma
upon this question upon the basis that we ca
not take courses in relation to them by la
made by us over them as a people bound
nose laws, on any other grounds than the
snlch apply to all our people. five ma
Jaws by our power under the Constitution
must regard the prohibitions of the constitute
use rse we are lawless. And it makes very lit
umerence to what department of the Cove
Ment all this usurpation goes. If it is true Il
ne congress of the United States on an occ
aon Ike war of this kind can take to its
S Ma exercise all power, regardless of the pro
uliohs OF the Constitution, and further, c
mase itself ommander-in-chief of the arm
auu conduct the particulars and details of
nSf II all respects, do not know that TIL
rSs any usurpation by the House of Commc
u .ne time OF Cromwell. They said they l
psesented the people, and they took comma