Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1863-06-02

perl, hae the Federal Legislature, alter tw
years OF war, failed 10 provide for all it9 emer
gencles2 and, II 1t has failed, can the Execu
tive act Instantly and beyond the limits of th
law, - hs discretion? In pursuing these queh
tons, hold.
]. That Congress has provided for tho OF
fenBe alleged against Mr.. Vallandigham. II
the specifications he is charged with various
. expressions, "alI of which opinions and senti
mcute no well knew did aid, comfort end en-
courage those in AIMS against The Government
and could but induce ia his heArers distrust o.
their own Government, sympathy for thoso ID
arms againet II, Ond disposition to resist the
laws of tho land"
In tho lave passed. by the last CfngrC5a, such
an offenee is made punishable. BY an acl an
proved July II, 1862. to "Suppross insutrcc
ton" otc. (U. s. Statutes, page 589) known Of
the Confiscation act, it ia provided Sec 81 thai
II any person "shall give aid or comfort to the
rebellion or insurrectiOn, and be convicted
thereof, such pereon shall be punished" by fine
and imprisonment and disqualification for Of
| tioe. In the 18th section, the Courts o. the
United States arc given "full yOWer" to insli-
tute oil proceedings under the law,
This would bo sufficient as to the crime az
alleged aud tho tribunal to Try it; but Congress
did not stop there. By an aet approved March
Sd, 1863. known as the act relating to tho habsaS
corpus u. s. Statutes, page 755, etc. from which
| now read, the President ~ authorized to sus-
pend the writ Of habeSs corpus "in any case
thrOughOuL the United States, or any part of IT,"
Whenever and wherever the writ ID suspended,
no military or other officer ia h0und to answer
the writ by the production of the body; but the
Judge shall, on notice that the prisoner ia held
under tho Prealdent'a order suspend all pro-
Ill.,, nd ~ Ii.
law the departments Of State and Of War are
to furnish to tic judges OF the Districts, the
names Of political prisoners who ago arrested
therein, for civil trial. If the sccueed are not
indicted, tho judge is to order discharge and
the custodian Is to execute the order. In case
the departments fail to send such list to the
judges, any citizen may do il aud obtain the
discharge OF the prisoner.
Tbese laws are in force. They Wero made By
O Republican Congress-. They were made for
this very exigency This civil war was 10 con-
temptation when they were passed. 1t was in
tended by these laws to prevent arbitrary arrests
and inquiaiteriAl tribunals of military meu. Il
was intended by them to guarantee an accusato.
rial trial; openly, with indictment by jury,
selected mpartially and who should return an
absolute verdict Ii will be remembered that
two days after the emancipation proclamation,
10 wit, September "a 1869, The President issued
another proclamation suojeCting all persons "to
trial by court-martals, aud military com mig
sions" who were found "affording aid aud COM
fort To the rebels" The same procIama-
ton suspended the habeGs corpus l0r all such
peraouR.
If shen you would understand the Law of March
8, 1868, remember 10 was intended expressly Co
ignore the right OF the President 10 issue thss
proclamation, without. authority from Congress.
The first section substantially dsavows The right
OF the President to 1usoeOd the writ, without the
assent of Congress thereto, The other section
quoted provides civil trial for those arrested. o.
Would you knog he motive which DromDt.
ell the law Of MGrch7 Read the debates of the
Iast session. The arbitrary arrest, OF last sum-
mer were condemned at tho last fall elections.
In Vermont, in Maasschusests, IN New York,
In New Jerfey, ia Iowa, in Ohio-sveryWhere
far aud aloof from military precincts, such al
rests were made. The names Of tho victims are
familiar. Inc election operated, as the miracle
OF old dlu, TO open the prison doors. When, on
the first dsy OF the lass session. | offered res
0int0n denolnolng SBeso arrssLa, aud calling on
the President 30 ssop them, il vas voted down
by tho Republicans; yst many o. their beat "a en
refused to sanction such proceedings. COGan,
B owning, KellUgg AID OLheEs, lelt the uocessi
81 OF providing tor the relief Of ell civilians
from military arrest and trial. They digested
this plan of turning them over to the civil au-
thoritiea fcr Indictment, trial OF punishment, or
discharge.
Thus was secured, by The las: Republican
Congress, that penal trial upon whca Montes-
quieu thought "that ohehy tho lbeFsy of the
citizen depended" Thus was secured that "key
stone of a nations public l.R "a fair penal
trial, without which liberty is but q snunding
name.
In Ohio, there had been no suspension of the
writ OF haosas corpus. IL ras, therefore, the
duty OF Judge Lesvlts 60 see TO it thas NJ. VAL
landigham had the benefit OF the writ
The implication of the Law have quoted, to
say nothing of the constitutional right OF eveFy
one Imprisoned, as of course, 30 have the writ,
required the judgo Co iasuo it. What hlsjnesa
was it OF his whether General Burnside would
or would not execute IL? lie must have known
the hstOrY OF th5 writ of frcedom-of this
glorious result of the long struggle between
law aud power He must have learned that the
laU had tt'nmphed in the atrnggls, and that
however IL might he in France, where an iron
rod WAS the staff of justice, in America and
England. at common law, individual liberty and
public Justice we're not empty words to make
''eurth sick and heaven weary" hut practical
realities, made 80 by the Independence of the
judiciary snd tue majesty OF Law.
so long as the Trit had rot been susnended
ia Ohio, nor mRrHai Law declared, he had no
right to refuse is, even to the meanest criminal.
Had he allowed il, how do we knoz but that
Gen. Burnside would have taken counsel of the
Attorney General, Mr.. Bates, who, as an honest
officer, would have advised that Cen Burnside
should either have returned tho body, or have
complied with the law OF March 3, 1863 and
have at once notified the judge that no could
not return the body, by reason of tho auspen-
sion Of habeas corpus in Ohio; or, perhaps, the
Secretary OF War might have handed In the
name OF Mr.. Vallandigham TO tho jndee for
educ process OF laU," by indictment and trial
In obedience to tho law OF March 81, 1863.
by the failure or neglecL OF Mr.. Stanton TO
comply with hia part Of tho law of March 3
1863, it is now impossible to comply with ita
provisions, since Mr.. Vallandgham ia removed,
by tho act of our military, outside of ito linea
II Mr.. Vallandigh gham's name we're plIcsd upon
the Lat sent 10 Judge Leavitt, il 10 now too Into
to afford MIN the civil trial, provided By the
Republican Congress.
When such Republican papers as the Epenino
Poat and tue New York Tribune condemn such
proceedings; when such moderate and hIetoric
journal as tho National Iatclliqsncsr protests
when tho New York World, never friendly to
Vailandighsm'a peace notions, utters its indig.
nAnt ana noble emonstrances-ahall Wo, tho
party which has ever been Jealous of tho on
croachments OF power, fail to sneakq As vour
r. Eat a H..