Indiana State sentinel. (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1862-01-27


folly-it was criminal stupidity-to have enacted
such tariff at such a time, and we do not know
but that Congress would be doing wise action
now to restore the tariff to the old rates that ex
isted prior to lS57.-CAiea9a Post.
From the Louisville Democrat, JanuaryIs.
senator Trum BULBS Confiscation RiIi
HOW il is Regarded i'm the border
Slave States.
The bill to confscate the property of all those
in arms against the United States, which is before
Congress, we do not suppose will pass; but it
shows the ansmus OF part of that body. They
have not learned wisdom by hard experience
To begin with. the measure is unconstitutional,
in our judgment. That instrument says, after
defining what shall be counted treason:
"Congress shall have power to declare the
punishment of treason; but no attainder of trea-
son shall work corruption of blood, or forfeit
ure, except during the life of the person at
tainted"
According to the old doctrine of England.
from which the phrase ssattander of treason" is
derived, the guilty forfeited his life and all his
property forever to the crown. His children
could not inherit from him, is meant by the
But now what is the meaning of this interdc-
ton in the Constitutionf
Congress shall have the power 20 declare the
punishment of treason, with restriction. The
forfeiture of property can be only during the
lifetime of the person attainted, nor can his
children be rendered incapable of inheritance.
Has Congress then power, in declaring the pun
shment OF treason, to confscate forever property
of the rebel? If that be possible, what is the
meaning of this restriction upon the power 10 de
clare the punishment Shall we hold that the
restriction applies to the mere form of the law?
Recollect that the law fixing the punishment is
at the discretion of Congress and the limitation
is upon that discretion.
Now. if the law fixed the penalty of death, and
then proceeded to con6scate property forever.
would it not be in the very face of this provision
of the Constitution
You may punish treason, says the Constitu-
ton, but in that punishment children shall not
be debaTed from inheritance, nor shall the guilty
forfeit his property, except during his own life
time.
Then, if mans property is confseated, it must
be for some other crime than treason.
The law now confscates property used in the
rebellion by the consent of the owner. That is
upon different principle entirely. Such proper
ty is public much so as camp equipage and
supplies, which are lawful prize in war. But pri-
vate property, not used in the rebellion by the
owners consent, can not be covered by that prin-
ciple.
The owner or his heirs, it appears to us, can,
under our Constitution, reclaim all private prop
erty confscated for treason; and, when the con-
stituton and the laws are restored, the Govern
ment will have il all to return, or persevere in
reckless and revolutionary act.
As a matter of policy this war has nothing to
commend it. Its operations would fill all hu-
name minds with disgust at the savage spectacle.
The calamity would fall on the wife and help
less children and reduce them to want and beg
gary for the guilt of the husband and father. If
it were possible to be executed, il would render
one section of the Union scene of suffering
and desolation.
But how is it to be executed, or why? 1t can
have no effect to put down the rebellion; for it
cannot be executed in any State until the rebel
lion is put down. 1t can only be law of retri-
button and revenge. 1t will stand on the statute
book a mere brutum fuinen, which will exasper-
ate those now in rebellion and enlist sympathy
for them by its savage terms. Such law
never can and never will be executed; butt will
be held up to the South to enlist all the energies
of despair.
Instead of any nducement to come back to
the Union it would cut off all inducement to lay
down their arms and render independence a ne
cessity. They could face no worse calamity out
of the Union than in it.
1t may be said that the law can, at least, be
executed where the forces of the Government
have possession; but in such localities what is the
use of it? Not to put down rebellion, for in
such cases the rebellion is powerless.
The very proposition of such law is ad-
vertisement of weakness and desperation, not of
strength and confidence 1t is empty threat
that in the nature of things can't be put in exc
cuton.
Let the Union armies defeat and overthrow the
rebels in arms, and proclaim the restoration of
the Constitution and laws and guarantee the pro-
lection Of all Constitutional and legal rights to
the whole people, no matter how, in the hour of
madness, they may have felt, and talked, and
acted.
Intolerance aud vindictiveness never saved a
government, and will certainly never save this
which feels itself justified in vengeance toward
the sinners; and it had better stop now before 1t
sows the seeds of disaffection where none is now.
Courage, magnanimity and strict adherence to
the Constitution are the strength and moral power
sion and the spirit of revenge only weaken its in
fuence
No one need refer us to examples of these reb
els. They con6scate property; they Danish their
citizens; they seize all the property they need; /;
They employ in war Indians and negroes. Such
deeds are TO be summed. spurned and despised.
JEFF Davis and Co., would sell themselves to Sa-
tan to accomplish their ambitions purposes. They
have no Constitution and no law but their own
higher law of ambition, hate and revenge. Let
them riot in their own abomination, and let US
whip their armies That will end them. Don't
misspend time and degrade yourselves passing
with disgust and contempt.