The Portage County Democrat. [volume] (Ravenna, Ohio) 1854-1868, 1863-07-15
THE. CASE OF vAns.ANDseHaAm.
Reply of President Lincoln to IN
( III k-,,. Ohio Committee. Eu
.W.AsH1NoroN, D, c, june %, 1863.

aNess9s Bvchard and others : nj seel.s3
GENTLEMEN The resolutions of the
Ohio Democratic State Conve vention, which
you present me, together with your introduc-
ton and closing remark, being in position and
argument mainly the same as the resolutions
of the Democratic meeting at Albany, New
York,a frefer you to my response to the latter
as meeting most of the points in the former.
This response you evidently used in prepar-.
ing your remarks, and desire no more than.
that it be used with accuracy. In a Single
reading of your remarks, I only discovered
one inaccuracy in matter which suppose you
took from the paper. 1t is where YOU say
!" The undersigned are unable to agree with
you in the opinion you have expressed that
the Constitution is different in times Of insur-
rection or invasion from what it is in, time of
peace and public securitv.o A recurrence to
the paper will show youth have not ex-
pressed the opinion you suppose. I expressed
the opinion that the Constitution is different
IN its application in cases of rebellion or ilva-
sion, involving the public safety, from W hat it
Is IN time of profound peace and public secu-
rity; and this opinion adhere to, simply be-
cause by the Constitution ITSELF things may
be done in the one case which may not be
done in the other - iss3-is.l hfs's g5ai,
~ i dislike to waste word on a merely per
sonal point, but must respectfully 7 assure
you that you will find yourselves at fault
should you ever seek for evidence TO nrove
your assumption that "opposed in discus
sion before the people the policy Of the Mex
lean war" 12.i5 - hia.45-.1> 5tI ~ Tl
You say, Expunge from the Coz ss..itution
this limitation upon the power of Congress to
suspend the writ of Aa5eas corpus, and vet the
other guarantees of personal liberty would re-
main unehanged." Doubtless if this clause
of the Constitution, improperly called as Il
think Limitation upon,the power Of Con-
gress, We're expunged, the other guarantees
would remain the same; but the question is,
not how those guarantees would staud, with
that clause out of the Constitution, but how
they stand with that clause remaining in it.
In case of rebellion or invasion involving the
public safety If the liberty could be in
gdulged of expunging that clause, letter and
spirit, 1 really think the constitutional argu-
ment would bewith you My general view
on this question was stated in the Albany re-
ssponse, and hence | do not state it now. i
only add that, as seems to me, the benefit of
the writ of Aabeas corpus is the great means
through which the guarantees of personal lib
erty are poncprvod and mod a,,,;Iol,l. =. H.
last resort; and corroborative of this view is
the fact that Mr.. Vallandigham, IN the very
case in question, under the advice of able
lawyers, saw not where else to go but to the
-habeas corpus. But by the Constitution the
benefit of the writ of 1ba6eas corpvs itself may
be suspended when in cases of rebellion or
invasion the public safety may require it. q
-7 You ask in substance whether really
claim that may override all the guaranteed
rights of individuals, on the plea of consery-
ing the public safety-when may choose to
say the public safety requires it, This ques-
ton, divested of the phraseology calculated
to represent me as struggling for an arbitrary
personal prerogatiVe, is either simply ques-
ton 'cho shall decide or an affirmation that
nobody shall decide, what the public safety
does require in cases of rebellion or invasion.
The Constitution contemplates the question
as likely to occur for decision, but it does not
expressly declare who is to decide it. ByI
necessary implication, when rebellion or inva-
sion comes, the decision is to be made, from
time to time; and think the man whom.
for the time, the people have, under the Con-
stitution, made the COMMANDMENT Chief Of
their army and navy, is the man who holds
the power and bears the responsibility max
ing it.ssIf he. uses the poweriustly the same
people will probably justify him If he
abuses it. he is in their hands, to be dealt
with by all the modes they have reserved to
themselves in the Constitution ss6a &"
The earnestness with which you insist that
persons can only in time of rebellion be law
fully dealt with, in accordance with the rules
for criminal trials and punishments in time
of peece, induces me to add a word to what /
said on that point in the Albany response.-I
You claim that men may, if they choose,
embarrass those whose duty it is to combat
against rebellion, and then be dealt with on
ly, in turn as if there were no rebellion. The
Constitution itself rejects this view The
military arrests and detentions which. have1
been made, including those of Mr.. VaIlandig-
ham, which are not different in principle from
the other, have been for prevention and not
for for puntsb0ae1at--as iniunctions to STAY in
jury-as proceedings to keep the peaoe-and
hence, like proceedings in such cases, and for
like reasons, they have not been accompanied
with indictments, or trials by juries, nor, in
single case, by any punishment whatever be-
yond what is purely incidental to the preven-
ton. The original sentence of imprisonment
In Mr.. Vallandigham's case was to prevent in
jury to the military service only, and the mod
ifcation of it was made as less disagreeable
mode to him Of securing the same preyen-
ton.
am unable to perceive an insult to Ohio /
in the case of Mr.. Vallandigham. Quite sure
ly nothing of the sort was or is intended. 1
was wholly unaware that Mr.. vallandigham.
was, at the time of his arrest, candidate for
the Democratic nomination for. Governor, un-
til SO informed by your reading to me the res
olutions of the Convention. 1 am grateful
to the State of Ohio for many things, espe-
cially for the brave soldiers and officers she
has given in the present national trial to the
armies of the Union.
Vo,, olo;r, -