The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1863-08-06

$3.50 'S"N f S
fined crime, g. when. in cases of rebellion or inva
sion, the public safety may require L." This Il
precisely our present case-a case of rebellion
wherein the public safety does require the suspen
sion. Indeed, arrests by process os courts, anc
arrests in cases of rebellion, do not proceed alto
gether upon the same basis. The former is direct
ed at the small percentage of ordinary and contin.
uous preparation of crime, while the latter is di
rected at sudden and extensive uprisings against
the Government, which, at most. will succeed OF
fail in no great length Of time. In the latter case,
arrests are made, not so much for what has been
done, IS for what probably would be done. The
latter is more for the preventive and less for the
yindictiye than the former. In such cases the pur-
poses OF men are much more easily understood than
in cases Of ordinary crime. The man who stands
by and says nothing when the peril of his govern
ment Is discussed, cannot be misunderstood. If
not hindered, he Is sure 10 help the enmev much
more, If he talks ambiguuusly-talks for his coun-
try with butts and : IFS" and lands" IF how
little value the constitutional provisions | have
quoted will be rendered, if arrests shall never be
made until defined crimes shall have been commit
ted, may be illustrated by a few notable examples.
Gen. John G Brekinridse, Gen. Robert f. Lee.
zen. Joseph Il. Johnston, Gen. John B. Magruder,
Gen. William B Preston, Gen. Simon B. Buck
ner and Com. franklin Buchanan, now occupying
the very highest places in the war service, Were all
within tie power OF the government since tho re-
be!lion began. and were nearly as we'll known to be
traitors then as now. Unquestionahly, it we had
seized and held them, the insurgent cause would
be much weaker. But no one of them had then
committed crime defined in the law. Every one of
them. II arrested, would have been discharged on
ha6c0S corpus We're the writ allowed 10 operate. In
view of these and similar cases. I think the time
not unlikely to come when | shall be blamed for
having made too few arrests rather than too many.
By the third resolutions the meeting indicate
their opinion that military arrests may be constitu-
tional in localities where rebellion actually exists,
but that such arrests are unconstitutional in locali-
ties where rebellion or insurrecsion does not actu-
ally exist. They insist that such arrests shall not
no mazda q. 70, e H. l,-.~ g H..
ry occupation and the scenes of instruction "
lnasmuch, however, as the Constitution itself
makes no such distinction, | am unable to believe
that there ls any snch constitutional distinction.
l cOncede that the class of arrests complained Of
can be constitutional only when, in cases of re-
bellion or invasion, the public safety may require
them and L insist that In such cases they are con-
stltutlonal wherever the public safety does require
them rs we'll in places to which they may prevent
the rebellion extending, as in those where 1T may
be already prevailing; as well where they may re-
train mischievOus inter ference with the raising and
supplying of armies to suppress the rebellion, as
where the rebellion may actually be; as well where
they may restrain the enticing men out of the
army. as where they would prevent mutiny in the
army equally constitutional at all places where
they will conduce to the public safety, as against
the dangers of rebellion or invasion. Take the
particular case mentioned by the meeting. 1t is
asserted, in substance, that Mr.. Vallandigham
was, by a military commander, seized and tried
- for no other reason than words addrested to il
public meeting, in criticism of the course of the
Administration, and in condemnation of the mill
thry orders Of the general" Now. if there be no
mistake about this if this assertion is the truth
and the whole truth if there was no other reason
for the arrest, then | concede that the arrest was
wrong. But the arrest, as | understand, was made
for a very different reason. Mr.. Nallandigham
avows his hostility to the war on the part Of the
Union and his arrest was made because he was
laboring, with some effect, to prevent the raising
of troops to encourage assertions from the army
81 e. lo@-o A. L. ..t~- IL J
itary force to suppress it. He was not arrested
because he was damaging the political prospects
Of the Administration or the personal interests of
the commanding general, but because he was dam
aging the army, upon the existence and vigor of
which the life of the nation depends. He was
warning upon the military, and this gave the mill
tary constitutional jurisdiction to lay hands upon
him. If Mr.. Vallandigham was not damaging the
power OF the country, then his arrest was
made on mistake of fact, which | would he glad to
correct on reasonably satisfactory evidence.
| understand the meeting, whose resolutions |
am considering. to be In favor of suppresslng the
by military forcc-by armies. Long ex-
perience has shown that armies cannot be main
unless desertiou shall be punished by the
severe penalty Of death. The case requires and
the law and the Constitution sanction. this punish
Inent. Must | shoot a simple minded soldier boy
deserts, while | must not touch a hair Of the
willy agitatnr VIII" induces him to desert! This Is
none the less injurious when effected by getting a
father, or brother, or friend, into n public meeting,
and there working upon his feelings till he is per-
suaded TO write the soldier boy that he is lighting
in a bad cause. for n wicked Administrator of q
contemplate Government. too weak to arrest and
punish him if he shall desert. L think that in
such a case. to silence the agitator and save the
boy is not only constitutional, but withal Il great
mercy.
If | be wrong on this question of constitutional
power, my error lies in believing that certain pro-
are constitutional when, In case of rebel
lion or invasion. the public safety requires them.
would not be constitutional when, In absence
Of rebellion or invasion, the public safety does not
require them in other words. that the COnstitu-
is not, in its application. in all respects the
same, in cases of rebellion or invasion involving
the public safety, as it is in times of profound
peace and public security. The Constitution itself
makes the distinction and | can no more be per-
suaded that the Government can constitutiOnally
no strong measures In time of rebellion, be-
cause it can be shown that the same could not be
awfully taken in time of peace than [ can be per-
:uAded that a particular drng is not good medicine
Tor Il sick man, because it can be shown to not he
good food for a we'll one. Nor am [ able to appre-
the danger apprehended by the meeting that
the American people will, by means OF military ar
during the rebellion, lose the right Of public
the libery of speech and the press, the
aw Of evidence, trial by jury, and h0be0s corpus,
the indefinite peaceful future, which L
rust lies before them, any more than | am able to
believe that a man could contract so strong an ap-
petite for emetics during temporary illness as to
persist in feeding upon them during the remainder
IF his healthful life.
In giving the resolutions that earnest considera-
,an h,ol un, acuaS nf mo nlnnnp nUnrlnnE