Indiana State sentinel. (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1862-03-24

and that il does reside there unless prohibited BY
the Constitution. Nor can any possible distinction
be drawn between one of these wrifs and another,
as TO the power of suspension. We do not pause
to discuss the extent of the power Of Congress
and of State Legislatures over these writs. Each
has jurisdiction over the respective courts Of the
United States and the States. and the Constitu-
ton OF the United States is supreme law to both.
The strongest argument that has been ad-
duced in support Of the power of the President
to suspend the privilege, is that which IS based on
the general power given to the President to take
care that the laws are faithfully executed In
this. and other general powers, i is argued that
the President IS authorized, when the laws can
not in his Judgment, be faithfully executed other
wise, 10 suspend the writ Of habegs corpus. The
argument is faulty, in that il holds that to exc
cute one law, the President may violate another
But, aside from this, the argument proves too
much, for it authorizes the President to do any
despotic act. If he could suspend the writ on
such plea, be could equally as well hang pris-
oner, on his own warrant. The same answer APP
plies to all the arguments which have been used
to justify the tftres-de- eaehef arrests. If any
power existed to make the arrests, it also existed
to execute the parties arrested without examina-
ton or trial; and every attempt to justify these
arrests, necessarily argues full power in the Pres
ident, or Secretary OF State, to decapitate any
suspected man in Vermont or Washington. lew
York or Minnesota. If one power exists, the
ether accompanies il; nor is il possible to show
where line is to be drawn between the power to
arrest without warrant, lin loyal State. where
there is no actual war; and the power to suspend
the writ of habeas corpus and the power to order
the summary execution of party who, in the
judgment of the President, was an obstacle to the
faithful prosecution of the war.
We do not dwell on This argument 1t is too
plain to need calculation or illustration. The
Justification of the assumption of any Of these ar
bitrary powers by the President, is an argument
for, and justification of, despotism unsurpassed
on the face of the earth.
In seeking for authorities on the subject it may
safely be affirmed that, until the last summer, no
lawyer doubted that the power to suspend the
privilege of the writ resided solely in Congress.
Ii was well settled law. We shall not now cite
the well known opinions of distinguished jurists,
which are indeetl but dicta, and yet entitled to
the highest respect. But there is an authority
which, for the purposes of citizens of New York
State, must be regarded as very high, il not con-
elusive On the point. When we, as a State, ac-
cepted and ratified the Constitution of the United
States, in convention held at Poughkeepsie in
l7eS, we deemed it necessary to express very full
ly our views of the Interpretation to be put on
the Constitution were ratifying. The act of
TIE convention Ihlu, iuuccu, DlIlulIH authority
as law, except to the extent Of the single act and
deed of ratifying the Constitution, that the de-
clared opinions of the convention are entitled TO
the highest respect by US, who are the descend
ants of the men that then placed on record, for
our instruction and direction, their views in re-
gard to the great American instum The
convention, in treating on the subject of the writ
of habeax corpus, declared:
THAT every person restrained of his liberty is
entitled to inquiry into the lawfulness of such
restraint. and to n removal thereof, if unlawful
and that such inquiry and removal ought not to
denied, or delayed, except when, on account of
public danger, Congress shall suspend the priui
lege of the tcrit of habeas corpus.
We do not now recur to these matters for the
sake of renewing complaints against the proceed
ings had last summer, because this not the time
for making such complaints, nor are they now
necessary. But we regard it as the duty of all
sound Constituencies TO meet and oppose the
recent attempt of ardent politicians. and impru-
dent professors OF law in New York and New
England, to engraft these errors, in favor of des
potism, on American law. Young men should
not be educated in this manner. The people
have shown self preserving character, and con-
servative ability, which will save the nation from
the disastrous effects that, in other countries,
would have followed such presidents. The char
acter of the liberty loving nation comes out of
such trial gOriousy, and the reaction is neith-
er CONFUSING nor passionate. But our sons must
not be taught to argue against the great defenses
of freedom.-N. Y. Journal Of Commerce.