The Cadiz Democratic sentinel. [volume] (Cadiz, Ohio) 1854-1864, 1862-02-12

natural right to unite Church and State; It ]
not contrary 10 natural right to found order
OF nobility; and yet can all these monstrou
things be done TO provide for the general vel
4 fare and the common defense, whether yol
base the argument upon the preamble Of the
! Constitution or upon the eighth section oar
ticle one-to which, suppose, the gentle
man refers--whch declares that "the Con
gress shall have the power 10 lay and collec
1 taxes, duties, imposts, and excfses, TO pay IN,
deb,s, and provide i0r the common, defense
and general welfare of the United Siaiesf'
Can il be con'ended for moment that su-t
vast ard lltnitahlc powers belong 10 Con
gress? No, sit; Congress can provide for The
common defense only in the manner that m,
{ Constitution points out, and by the exercise
\ Of the powers granted by ihas instrument, =
Congress can exercise all those great. powers
1 which are conferred upon il by this Consti
tuition Tor the common de 'ense; it cannot ex
ercise one solitary power not granted by tha,
Constitution for the common de- fense, it can
I not exercise one solitary power not granted
! by this instrument, or necessarily inierable
/ from its language 1t overthrows our whole
theory Of government to say that Congress
can exerci'e any power not expressly grant.
ed by the Constitution or necessarily implied
from the language Of hat instrument; all
other powers are Unnecessary, so determined
by that gr at work. aAaFtiEa ''R7H s'es3
Where then do you find in this Constitu-
tioh, lin the authority gwen ID suppress re
bellion or insurrection, any such power as
that claimed by the gentleman from Ohio
the power TO emancipate slaves, or The powe r
TO conf~ca'e property by act OF Congress.
usurping Judicial powers, as many OF the bills
before lhls House propose TO do? Where do
these powers exist inthe Constitution? They
exist only in the enthused brains Of honest,
would lain hope, bu. dreadfully wisgdided
men 'aA .ti-l-1 iat t''t5-1 .G" 2
Sir, I was struck with the continual effort
Of the gentleman from Ohio, in arguing this
question, to give to Congress. in its admitted
authority 70 suppress insurrectiod, the pow
ers that might be exercised in accordance
with the law OF nations in war with an
alien enemy. The power that is claimed by
the gentleman from Ohio in an effort to put
down rebellion on the part Of our own citi
zens, was claimed the other day with TAR
more correctness and logical force by the
gentleman from Kansas Mr.. Conway in o
war with foreign nation. The gentleman
from Ohio il disposed to treat this as rebel
lion-to treat it as a war-Cf it can be call
ed a war at all l-.agaInst insurgent citizens
whose duties and whose rights are bounded
blythe Constitution, and not as war against
alien enemies, who owe no allegiance to the
Constitution, and can claim no protection
from it. The gentleman from Kansas pro.
posed with far more correctness to treat it as
a war against qusi independent nation, TO
recognize the fact that the revolted States
were an. alien beligerent Power, and to treat
them as an alien nation--to suhiugate them,
and then do what it pleased US to do with
them as conquered provinces. Such posi-.
tioD as that can be defended. An argument
can be made in favor it. A lawyer can stand
up andlquote this Constitution and the law
OF nations, and defend it, admitting them to
be aliens. But no lawyer can stand here
and defend the conclusion at which the gen.
tleman from Kansas arrived onthat occasion,
that we have The right to seize the private
property of non combatants AID confiscate it,
The law Of nations expressly forbids it. Pri-
Vate property upon land is exempt from cap
ture even 10 o war with a foreign nation, and
if you take the gentleman's position, youare
at once bound by natural right, the law of
nations, to respect private property on land.
But sir, did not rise to go into discus,
sion OF that subject. lose to enter my
protest on the instant in an unprepa
red and hurried manner, against the do;
trines proclaimed by the gentleman from
Ohio, and 10 declare that stand here oppo-
sed to both the power ella amed and the pol
icy proposed IL IS argued that, because a
court. .martial can take the life of a, citizen OF
this country without an indictment by a
grand jury, or a trial by petit jury, Con-
gress, in providing Tor the common defense,
is not restricted by any such imita ions, -
The worth OF bis whole argument may be
shown by this illustrai ion, made use of by
the gentleman. Iheye is an express excep-
tion in the fifth article of the amendments
of the Constitution of the right to take life
by court martial. 1t is as follows: s.
''No person shall be held to answer for cap-
ital or Otner infamous crime, unless on pre-.
sentiment of grand jnry, except In cases ari-
sing in the land anil naval forces, or in the mi.
liln when IN actual service IN time OF war or
pGhc danger "
And it is gravely argued that, because this
nation is in the habit of putting citizens to
death on the sentence of court martial with
out indictment and trial BY jury. that fact Of
itself ove!throws this Limitation which is i'm.
posed upon the power of Congress, to take
lie or property without due process Of Law,
and except in the manner pointed out in the
Constitution. ss
Sir, we never would have heard such an
argument from o lawyer Of the emnence Of
the chairman or acting chairman Of the Ju
dietary Committee, but for the fact that there
was foregone conclusion in his mind which
had to be sustained by arguments, however
fallacious. ! have seen men put to desperate
straits 10 maintain favorite theories OF their
own, and the gentleman from Ohio is in thar
condition. There is no clearer principle, con.
ceding the policy OF contiscation. (Which
deny, than that Congress, for the crime Of
treason or its cognates cannot confscate the
property Of ony citiz n beyond the term oi
his life. There is no clearer proposition than
that the only attaint for tire ison allowed by
the Constitution is judicial attaint, and that
Congress has no power whatever to fix and
apply punishment or ascertain guilt. There-
lore the fourth section Of the cohfiscation bin
reported by the gentleman Mr.. Bingham at
the extra session is clearly unconstitutional;
and the courts ofthe country willso declare,
the moment a case is brought before them
underit. It's a proposal that Congress shall
exercise Judicial powers; IL ascertains guilt
and depriveso Of property without the inter
vention OF court OF Justice. The language
Of the Constitution is clear --'' Congress- shall
pass no bill Of attainder.nl That certainly
includes all bills Of pains and penalties =
"And no attsint ef treason shall work cor
ruption Of blood, or forfeiture, beyond the
life oi the ofender.o What attaintg a ju.
dicial attaint. Congress cannot attaint at
all, and forfeiture for treason only follows .
judicial attaint, and that for lFe That clause
was put in the Constitution In the light Of
the history Of legislative atlantis. We had
the large and ample experience OF the mo
ther1 country on that subject The enlight-
ened men who framed the Constitution de
srised hatwhole course Of judicial murder
and Judicial robbery. IL was odiops TO those
good mon who Ind tha VI ia Mof a..