The dollar weekly bulletin. [volume] (Maysville, Ky.) 1862-1864, 1863-07-16
The Presidents Letter to the Albany
Meeting--A Review by. Judge 8. s.:
Nicholas, of kentucky. t.-lt ,.gg-i g.

80 II lS O. matter OF no lttle Sratulatlon
every lover of the constitution, to ever
Iloyalpatriot, that President Lincoln hastht
placed in tangible form before the publ
} what there is of reason, or its semblance,
support of his usurped power to abridgs an
punish freedom of speech and of the pres
, 1t is what he and his advisers in and out {
! the Cabinet have to present at the bar {
, reason. Let not the flimsy and. wholly in
adequate character of the reasoning induce a
inference of any deficiency in him. or them
\ The fault is not theirs; it is not from an,
lack of capacity in them to do justice to tn
subject, for the argument is really as good
just as plausible, as any that has been OF ca
be made on that side of the question. 1t
however so discursive and unmethodical a
necessarily. to impart much of the SAM
| quality to this brief notice of it.
The first noticeable thing which it pre-
sents- his seizing hold of the fact stated il
one of the Albany resolutions that the grsa
safeguards of free speech, free press, and per
sonal liberty were adopted into the Fedora
constitution after the close of the re volution
for the sake of making what he no doub
deems telling retort. He asks whethe
the, demonstration would not have beer
better if it could have been truly said thai
these safeguards had been adopted during
our revolution, instead of after its close -
During the revolution they could not have
been so adopted iato the Federal con-
stitutiou, for it then had no existence; but
those safeguards were taken almost YER
batim from the constitutions OF several .oi
the larger States which were made during
the actual pendency of the revolutionary
war and for the rule of goverbm ment in an
actually existing civil war. AS an exposi-
tion of the views of the trainers of the con-
stitutioD, as a revolutionary authority to
prove that those safeguards were specially
meant for times of war and civil commOtion,
the precedents from the constitutions of
those States are fully as authoritative as if
the Federal constitution itself had been
adopted dunDg the revolution.
10 escape from those safeguards, he as
serts that the military arrests, trial and
banishment of Mr.. Valla ndigham was not a
holding him to answer Tor a capital or other
wise Infamous crime,' nor were the pro-
ceedings against him criminal prosecu-
tion.' The effrontery of ere denial cannot
go beyond this. What classification must
a crime belong to that is not Infamous, yet
justified its punshment by close imprison-
ment for lie, according to the sentence of
the court IN artial, or to Punishment for life.
President? He does not tell US, and in
genuitv will not waste its sstuteness In any
effort to ascertain. The W hole burthen of
his attempt to Justify the punishment is by
asserting that the speeches Of Mr.. Vallan-
digham were aiding and assisting the enemy,
or iu other words were quasi reasonable
at least thev were the perpetration of moral
treason. There bsing no legal punishment,
as he wrongfully affirms. for the supposed
offence, he makes the absence of all such
Iaw the verv foundation Of his claim to in
1ict the punishment. The constitution hav
ing carefully defined treason, and precluded
that engine of tyranny constructive treason,
and Congress not having, as he alleges, pro-
vided any penalty for such an offence, he
undertakes e1 post facto to create this new
treason and punish 1t by
oenaIty of his own enactment. Verify, Mr.. |
lincoln, this is sad work you are making |
with our constitution, if you prove that it
yiyes you such latitudiuous discretion to ty- |
:aunize over the liberties of your country |
men. As to his denial to Mr.. Vallandig- |
lam's persecution was criminal prosecu-
ion' within the measing or the constitution,
t must ostouni every man OF sense. There
8 no denying that it is a criminal prosecu-
ion of some sort, and OF course must fall
within the broad com prehensive prohibition
If ali prosecutions except those legally made
With the aid of jury. trial. The only ex
,eption is that carefully made by the con-
titution itself, for the puuishments, by
military courts, OF persons employed in the
military service, the making of which ex-
.eption couclusively proves the Intention to
exclude any other. The theory of the con-
titution is, that it is far better crime should
70 unpunished .han that its punish ment
houId be iutrusted to anybody but courts
md iuries The recent glorious meetings of
he people to protest Agaiustt the punishment
# Mr. Vailaudigham show that such IS the
lationaE understanding with fixed resolve
lot to be robbed of their liberties by the
destruction Of the constitution. Mr.. Lin
.oln should take heed how be disregardS
his national sentiment, or he may have
ivil war at the North in addition to that at
he South. .a.IH .'t. .. ~
, The constitution says, "excessive bail
hal not be required, nor cruel and unusual
,unishments Inflicted" What say you 10
his safeguard, Mr.. Lincoln? You cannot
leuy that the punishment you, have intiict-
,eTe. for the exercise of free speech, is un-
Lsual. nor can you properly deny that it is
,-ueL also, or if you do, then it can only be
" affirming that the punishment is barely
with the Nervousness OF the
,ffence. But If snch be the character OF the
,ffence, then what becomes of your other
,lea, that it is not an ''infam Gus crime Ii
his newly invented crime, this constructive
reason, is so thinly divided from actual trea-
'on as in foro conscientine to require so dire
punishment as lifelong Imprisonment or
it surely m ust be an infamous
,rime' AS actual treason is by common con-
sent the most infamous of all crimes. all its
proximate congenerS, such as this, must par
take largely ofthat infamy. Your country |
men generally give you credit for doing all
you could, by your usurped legislation and
judicial authority to brand Mr.. Vallsndig-
han, and his Children. with the infamY Of q