Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1863-04-01

II necessity Of which ia to be Judged of by him
Q self, assume supreme, overbearing, unbound
Q cd power! The idea is not only Pepugnant &
q the principles Of any free government, but sub
q versive of the very foundations of our own"
/ Under our Constitution Congress has powe
f; to declare war. The power to declare war i'm
plies, of course, the power to resort 10 the usu
( al and necessary means Of carrying IL on. By
! virtue of this the commander of any force, OF
. we'll as the Commander 10 Chief, may do what.
, ever Ia necessary and is In accordance with the
laWs of civilized warfarerto accomplish the pur.
pose Sf his command. ALI this, it is evident
! Ia fair deduction Of power from the Constitn-
ton and laws, and 10 In no way antagonistic To
them or subversive of them. Such commander
may also proclaim martial law aud assume con-
troll of citizens as we'll as soldiers. But for
what time, over what extent of territory, and
to what degree may he do this? / answer, only
80 far forth @, is absolutely necessary to the
accomplishment OF his purpose; and II he over
steps these limits he does 30 at bis peril. He
may proclaim martial law over such space as
then and there is the scene Of Warlike opera
tlons.> When battle ia imminent, he may rule
by such authority camp, besieged city, the
space between two hostile armies, or other ter
Iritory within tbs sphere or his acSual opera
lions ia the field. At such time aud within
such limits ho may disregard the civil rights of
the citizen just so far as s absolutely necessa-
ry, and no farther. He may institute martial
Law within the lines of his army and appoint
military commissions to try offendora against
civil rights when in foreign country or other
place where there are neither courts of justice
nor civil officers. But no sane man will pretend
that the Commander Chief, or apy OF ell
other commanders combined, can therefore in-
stitute martial law In States and territories re-
mote from Warlike operations, where the courts
| are open, where the judicial officers are unim-
|peded in the discharge Of their duties, and
where consequently all ofenders may be trie1
aud punished In the manner prescribed by the
Constitution aud by the laws of Congress and
of the States. The only martial law our Con :
stitution and the genius Of cur Government
| will tolerate under such circumstances, is that
which have heretofore discussed, namely, the
suspension by Congress of the privilege of the
writ of habess corpus for limited time and
within such districts as the public safety may
require, authorizing, however, neither military
arrests nor military impriaonments. This is
not martial law az ALL aud am able to make
the same boast for my own country that Lord
Lougborough, whom have already quoted, did
for England: that outside of these exceptional
emergencies connected with actual military op-
erstions in the field, sit is totally insccurste to
state martial law as having any place Bhstev-
er Within" the Republic OF the United States.
As there is no precedent 10 the history of
England for two hundred years for the procla
nation of martial law, 80 is there none what
ever in the history of this couutry, Washing
ton did not proclaim Ii, as Is sometimes falsely
asserted, ct the time of the Whisky insuvrec.
tion in Pennsylvania, but issued to bic soldiers
theae instructions:
That every officer and soldier will constantly bear in
mind that he comes to support the laws, and that it
would be peculiarly unbecoming in him to be, 10 any
tne inracor of them; that the essential principles
Of free government conhne the province Of the mill
tary when called forth such occasions to objects
hrst to combat and subdue all who may bs found IN
ARMS In opposition to the national will and authority;
secondly to aid and support the civil magistrates in
bringing offenders to justice The dispensaiion Of this
belongs to the civil magstrates and let i ever
there invoalae. QrviDgs Life Of Washington, vol. S,
| chap. 25. F q
The example of Jefferson has been appealed
to By those who would here apologize for Mr..
Lincoln, but it will not bear them out. When
the whole country was filled with alarm BY
| reason of Burr's conspiracy, and certain infor.
nation concerning it was cent to Congress, the
Senate unanimously passed bill suspsndiDg
| the privileges Of the writ of habeas corpus for
three months, which the House almost as uuani-
mously rejected. President Jefferson did not
attempt its suspension of his own power, as no
other President but Mr.. Lincoln ever did, Mr.
Jefferson did not even recommend the measure
to Congress nor did he authorize the arrest of
Bollman and Swartwous. As soon as the pris-
oners reached Washington they were taken be-
fore the Circuit Court, examined, and there
committed for trial. Shortly after, they were
taken from prison on writ Of habeas corpus,
and discharged. Let not the apologsts OF mill
tary power attempt to array upon their side the
man who in his Inaugural address, March 4:h, ,
1901, announced among others, these two as
Essential principles OF our government: First.
I"THE SUPREMACY OF THE CIVIL OVER THE MILL
TARY AUTHORITY" and second, "Freedom OF per.
son, under the protection of the habeas corpus !"
But the honorable member from Logan tells
US that " General Jackaon exercised martial
! authority at New Orleans when the invading
tarmy Of Packenham was marching against the
CITY," That 10 true; but it ia BY no means
true that the conclusion at which he arrives
follows as logical sequence-s proposition
that might be generalized "a to the honorable
genlleman's conclusions without doing much
violence to truth, General Jackson did indeed
pIoclsim martial law iOithin the limits OF a be-
sieged city at time tOhen, as the member from
Logan Gays, The inuadiHs army of Packenham
,Oas marching against it. Does it follow as a
logical sequence from this that the President.
a. Commander-in-C Chief, may proclaim martial
Law throughout the length and breadth of the
land, in States and Territories where there is
neither invasion nor insurreotion2 Moreover.
the Government expressly disapproyed even of
this exercise of martial authority by General
Jackson, and, limited and seemingly necessary
as it Was, the District Court of Louisiana de-
cided that he ba1 overstepped the bounds OF
legitimate power, and had violated the Consti-
tuition and the Laws. Then il was that the
military hero uindicafed the majestv of the cipiL
lao BY submitting TO the punishment Il chose 10
infict. The defender Of New Orleans, the de-
liyerer of his country from foreign invasion, at
the head of victorious army, followed by an
excited multitude, and sustained by thousands
of muni6cent and devoted friends, bowing Ia
humble submission to the AUTHORITY of an ,,n-.
armed court, can hardly be plead as a precedent
for usurpatien Of judicial power and disregard
Of judicial processes.
The venerable member from Montgomery
has attempted to find precedent for the es.
tabiishment of martial law throughout the
country in tie condition Of affairs in Rhode Is.
land during the Dorr rebellion, and authority
for it In the decision Of Chief Justice Taney
IN the case OF Luther v. Borden, occurring 10
that connection. Bot the authority cited by
the honorable member by no meAna ustains
his proposition. Theqnestion before the court
IN this case was not question of executive
authority under the Constitution of the United
States, nor Was IL question of Executive au
khnrilv M all h,e vvtathn. ~. I --..-