Indiana State sentinel. (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1863-06-22

~
pend the privilege of babeas corpus "swhen in
case of rebellion Orrinvasion the public safety
NAV require IT," This, he says, ~.'attests the
understanding Of those who made the Consti
tuition that ordinary courts OF justice are in
adequate to no cases of eebellion-attests their
purpose that<k~ such cases men may be held
in custody whom the courts would discharge"
This is. sound doctrine, but whence does he re-
ceive the power to er post, facto, or Otherwise to
create n new criminal ofiense aud punish az his
discretion, with or without the instrumentality OF
court martial of his appointingf The two things
are altogether different. The people are accus-
toned to seeing men arrested and held to
bail upon suspicion of mere unprovable crime,
and it is but a small stretch of the same policy
to allow their arrest and temporary detention
without privilege Of trial in time of public
danger. Public necessity may require, sound
policy NAV allow thus much, but nothing more.
1t i a wide stretch beyond this for tho military
to undertake to punish as we'll as arrest This
the Constitutions nowhere allows. but expressly
forbids. This clause referred to so far from sus-
tanning the detestable dogma. tends very strongly
to its disprOof, according to the sound rule of
construction that eTpressiO uHias est ~erclusiO
aIferius.
The Constitution having given Congress dis
erection to suspend the exercise in one particular
instance, no other. during war or rebellion, of
one OF the functions of the civil authority, is
! ItOOl VI WV thAt@oI ANANA VI
which utterly annihilates his whole argument.
First, that such suspension must not be carried
beyond that particular instance: second, that the
Constitution was made for time of war or rebel
lion, as we'll as for time Of peace, otherwise there
would have been no need fer the habeas corpus
clause, for without it, according TO the dogma,
the Executive would have had unstinted powe r
both to arrest and punish. The Constitution
gives the Government power to declare war, and
provides for its being carried ONT aed
rebellion and authorizes its suppression-yet. ac-
cording 10 the dogma, was not made for time of
war or rebellion I There are other instances in
which the Constitution trenches on the reserved
rights of the citizen during war or rebe. ion. and
going to show that its trainers had the concur
renee of those ~innctures full in view as likely to
fall under its sway: LIST, No soldier shall, in time
of peace, be q~uartered in any house without the
consent of the owner: nor in time of war but in
"A manner to be prescribed by law"
Now, according to Mr. Lincoln's logic, this
clause, ~attesting as 1t does the understanding that
the citizen was not entitled to the same perfect
immunity from arbitrary acquisitions during war
as in time of pelce, there was to be one nude of
law for war and another for peace. and therefore
the Government may during war make whatever
arbitrary requIsitions il pieases, that is, take a
farmers crops or horses without 'just compen-
sation." ID No person shall be held to an
swer, &c, except in cases arising in the land or
u lutCC>T " AL we iitit "htu III aCltdi scr
vice, in time of war or public danger" Here by
necessary implication the military are authorized
to take cognizance Of and punish offences By
specified persons in time of war or public danger,
which, according to the same logic. authorizes
them to punish all persons. That is. a clause
expressly introduced for the purpose of prevent
ing the military from Furnishing anybody, except
those engaged in the military service, is construed
to give power to punish everybody. whether so
engaged or not. This effectually runs the argu-
ment into absuriity, aud there II will be lett.
Mr. Lincoln saws that Mr.. Vallandigham "was
lObOring with some effect to prevent the raising
Of troops; to encourage deSertions from the army;
and 70 leave the rebellion without an adequate
force to suppress it; and furthermore, that if this
be not true, then he was improperly arrested and
punished Well. this is not true. So far from IL,
he in Congress did not vote against the men and
money the President asked, and said not one
word in the speech for which he was punished, to
prevent the raising of troops, or to encourage de-
ser'iOn from the army. If he had done both, or
e rher, then he would have come within the act Of
Congress defining and furnishing the offense, for
which he could and certainly would have been
adequately punished by the Courts: so that, ac-
cording to Mr., Lincoln's own worst showing,
there was not even the miserable pretext of pub
lie necessity for his punishment by the military.
IL, by a circuitous course of ratiocination, he
means to contend that every speech made in op-
position to the justice and policy of the war, in
some slight degree tends to discOurage enlistment
and encourage d~esertion, then to that extent there
IS a semblance OF truth in the affirmation, other
wise there is none. But such slight prejudice to
a vigorous prosecution of the war is but an una
vOidable incident TO the exercise OF free speech,
and is altogether of too p~roblematical and trivial
4 character TO induce the nation TO acquiesce in
the suppression of that inestimaole right. A
privilege which Chatham, Burke, Fox and others
Illustrated in trains of ever living eloquence,
whilst freely and repeatedly denouncing the war
against this country during our revolution, as
impolitic. unjust, cruel and unchristian. A priv
ilege which the noblest patriots of England have
freely exercised for the last hundred and fifty
year., during almost every war in which England
has been engaged. A privilege which the whole
Federal party. in and out Of Congress. exercised
with almost ferOcious license during the whole of
our last war with England. A privilege which
Mr.. lincoln himself. in company with very many
other Wings. freely exercised during our war
with Mexico. Ii President Polk had arrested
him and other Wing leaders, and kept them i'm
p~risoned during the war, in punishment for their
use of the privilege, he and rhev together with
/ the whole country would have deemed it a gross.
tyrannical violation Of their rights as American
ireemen.
Mr.. Lincoln wishes to make il a damaging
point against Mr.. Vallandigham because he has
always been opposed to a war of invasion against
the South for its subjugation into submission.
Whether viewed MS fault or error or both, IL is
one by no means peculiar TO him but equally
belongs to at least one distinguished Abolition
friend OF Mr. Lincoln, and with which he himself
and bis whole Cabinet were equally imbued so
late as April, 1861, when Mr.. Seward wrote to
our ministers in Europe that tho Administration
had definitely decided against the policy of such
Il war, and that there was no one in its favor
Now, though it is undoubtedly permissible for
Mr.. Lincoln and his Cabinet to ALLURE and change
so vital a policy, yet surely it is equally permissi
BILE for Mr.. Vallandigham to adhere to an opinion
which originally so ident:caily conceded with
theirs. Such coincidence should at least have
he effect of exempting him from all blamewor-
thiness in their estimation. Yet this is one of
the specified grounds of his punishment. IL is
so emphatically, because it presents the only
substantial grounds of distinction between him
and those distinguished Abolitionists who with
impunity have been allowed to. say and speak
more than ever he did in disparagement of the
capacity and trustworthiness of the Administra-
tiOn-more to bring it into odium aud disrespect.
Notwithstanding this Mr.. Lincoln solemnly af
firms that the punishment Of Mr.. Yaiiapdigham
was not at all F" because he was damaging the po-
litical prospects of the Administration" or in
other wonls, that his punishment was not at all
influenced by purity feeling. This affirmation
was much needed. aud will afford matter of gsat-
ulation and consolation to all those WIN can give
il full c-edence. Ii is not meant even to insinu-
ate here that it is not entitled to the fullest ere
dence. but it is Il fact of great importance that a
large part of the ~nation-possibly a decided ma
jorty of even our Union loving citizens. give Il
no credence whatever. Certain it is, that the
great Democratic party believe. as they say. with
unanimity. that the main reason for his punish
ment was because of his being a Democrat How