The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1863-07-03

ately upon his delivery into the custody of
the law, his case was acted on by grand
jury, and a fair, formal, legal trial speedily
followed his Indictment
In its issue of the 22d, the Press reas-
sumes that BURR's case is an authoritative
precedent for that of VALLAND1aHAM, and
that the justification by JEFFERSON of the
arrest of the former, is in itself justifca-
ton Of the system of military arrests, trials
and punishments, initiated and sustained
by President LINCOLN In that issue, the
Press says:
Burr was illegally sliced, in a time Of peace,
by Gen. Wilkinson, in the territory of Missis-
sippi, on the mere suspicion that he was en-
gagged in reasonable design. But this was
not ali. The written law gave him right to
trial in the territory where he was arrested.
Bnt this sorittes law aDas disregarded by General
Williamson, and Burr was carried to the seat of
government in another State for trial; and
and arbitrary arrest, but the illegal and arbi.
trary deportation of the prisoner to distant
State for trial.
The Press further says:
Here was not only an arbitrary arrest, but
an arbitrary removal of the prisoner from the
Court, to whose protection he was, by law,
entitled
Wilkinson, up to this point. denied Burr
just what and only what, Burnside denied
Vallandigham: a trial by the only tribunal
which had technical jurisdiction over the
case; &C., &c.
1t may be a little humiliating to the
Press TO be informed, that, taken as a
sample, the above extracts show that it
entirely nisconceives the facts in BURR's
case, and that tits, therefore, utterly wrong
in the deductions which it draws from
them. BURR was arrested by WILKINSON,
not for treason committed within the linn
its of Mississippi Territory, but for trea-
sonable acts committed within the State
of Virginia. The orders of the Govern
ment were out, and had been for months,
for his arrest and delivery to the Federal
courts in Virginia; and when it was
made he was a fugitive, travelling under
an assumed name, and attempting to flee
the country. Prior to his arrest by Will
KINsoN, he had been discharged from GUS
tody by the courts in Kentucky, for alleged
acts of treason there Afterwards grand
jury in Mississippi Territory, before whom
his case was brought, acquitted him of
reasonable acts or intentions within that
Territory. There was no good ground,
therefore, for OBTAINING BURR in Mississippi.
Either he had committed no offence there,
or the Government had become satisfied
that it would be useless to prosecute him
there. But, he was charged with crime
in Virginia. And be was carried from
Mississippi Territory to Virginia, not to be
tried for ofenses committed within the
jurisdiction Of the former, but of the lat
ter, place. The Indictment against BURR
was for treason against the United States;
and, as will be seen on page s52 of the
first volume of Burrs Trials, such indict-
ment "specifes the place of the overt act
to be at Blennerhasset's Island" Blen-
nerhassets Island was within the jurisdic-
ton of Virginia, being located in Wood
County, of that State.
1t cannot be, therefore, as the Press
states, that "the written law gave him a
right to trial in the Territory where he
was arrested" His alleged crime was
committed in Virginia, and his transfer
there was not, as the Press states, an
"illegal and arbitrary deportation of the
prisoner to distant State for trial" On
the contrary, it may be justly said, that,
in respect to BURR's arrest, deportation,
and trial, no case was ever more fairly
conducted, from first to last, OR with {.
stricter regard to the forms and proprie-
ties of legal proceedings. BURR was him
self an eminent lawyer, and his counsel
were among the ablest at the American
bar. But, we cannot find that either he
or they sought to procure his discharge On
grounds, which had they existed as the
Press alleges, would have procured
it instantaneously. 1t is not true,
then, as the Press declares, that
BURRs "was rot only an arbitrary
arrest, brt an arbitrary removal of the
prisoner from the jurisdiction Of the court
to whose protection he was, by law, en-
titled" Nor, consequently, is it true, as
the Press further states. that 'WILKIN-
son, up to this point, denied to BURR just
what, and only what, BURNSIDE denied to
VALLAND1GHAM trial by the only tri-
bunal which had technical jurisdiction
over the case" Instead of denying, VIII
KINsoN secured to BURR "a trial by the
only tribunal which had technical juris-
diction over the case;" while BURNSIDE
forced VALLAND1GHAM before tribunal
which had neither technical nor other jul
risdiction, and, in awful contempt of law,
liberty, and justice, proceeded to trial,
conviction and Punishment.
1t is useless, of course, to occupy space