Litchfield enquirer., 1863-06-25


 DAY. JUNE 25. 1863.
 John B. Magruder. Gens William B. Preston Gen. Simon B. Buckner, and Commodore Franklin Buchanan. now occupying the very highest placesin in the rebel war service, were all within the power of the Government since the rebellion began, and were nearly as well known to be traitors then as now. Unques- tionahly if we had aeized and held them, the insurgent cause would be much weaker. But no one had then committed any crime defined iD the law. Every one of them.i arrested, would have been discharged on h1beas cospsts, were the writ allowed to operate. In view of these and similar cases,I think the time not unlike Y to come when I shall be blamed for having made too few arrests rather than too many.
 By the third resolution the meeting indicate their opinion that military arrests may be cons stitutional in localities where rebellion actually exists.but that such arrests are unconstitutional in localities whererebeilion or insurrection does not actually exist. They insist that such ar rests shall not be made aoutsiae of the lines of necessary military occupation and the scenes of insurrection." Inasmuch, however, as the Constitution itself makes no such dis tinction, Tam unable to believe that there is any such constitutional distinction. Iconceds that the class of arrests complained of can, be constitutional only when, in eases of rebellion or invasion, the pnblic safety may require them, and insist that in such eases they are consti- tutional scaere0er the public safety does require them !; as well in plscss to which they may prevent the rebellion extending as in those where it may be already prevailing as we'll where they may restrain mischiesous interfe- renee with the raising and supplying of ar mics to suppress the rebellion. as where the re bellion may actually be; as we'll where they may restrain the enticing men out of the the army as where they would prevent mutiny in the army; equally constitutional at all places where they will conducs to the pub lie safety. as against the dangers ot rebellion or invasion. Take the particular case men tioned by the meeting, It is asserted, in sub stance. that Mir. vallandigham was, by . mili- tary commander seized and tried, flor no oth- CT reason than words addressed to public meeting, in criticism of the course of the Ad. ministra:ion, and in condemnation of the mili- tary orders of the General" Now if there be .no mistake about this i; if this assertion is the truth and the whole truth; il there was no oth, CT reason for the arrest, then concede that the arres. was wrong But the arrest. as un sdsrstand, was made for very different reason. Mir. Yallundigham avovs his llostiIity to the war on the part of, the Union; and his arrest was made because he was laboring, with some effect. to prevent the raising of troops to eu- courage assertions from the army; and to leave the rebellion without au adequate military force to suppress it. He wasnot arrested be- cause he was damaging the political prospects of the Administration. the personal interests of the Commanding General, but because he was damaging the army. upon the existence and yigor of which the life of the nation de ponds. He was warning upon the military and this gave the military constitutional juris' diction toiay hands upon him. If MT. Val landigham was not damaging the military pow. CT of the country, then his arrest was made ou mistake of fact, which would be glad to cor. rect on reasonably satisfactory evidence. V
 I understand the meeting, whose resolutions I am considering, to be in favor of suppressing the rebellion by military force-by armies.--- Long experience has shown hatarmies cannot be maintained unless desertion shall be pun ished by the severe penalty of death. The case requires, and the lan and the Constitution sanction this punishment. Must ! shoot . simple-minded soldier boy who deserts, while l must not touch hair of 2 willy agitator who induces him to desert This is none the less injurious when effected by getting . father. or brother. or friend. into apqblic meeting, and there working upon his feelings till hs is per suaded to write the soldier boy that he is fight. ing in bad caussfor . wicked Administrations of eontsnptibls Goyerunsnt. too weak to arrest and punish him fl hs shaIl desert. l think that in such case. to silence the agita- tor and save the boyis not only constitutional
 gS ~ *55a4kAsf but withsl great mercy.
 If l be wrong on this question of cOnstisu- tional power. my error lies in believing that certain proceedings are constitutional when, in casss of rebellion and invasion, the public sats- U, as its in times of profound peace and pub lio security. The Constitution itself makes the distinction and can no more be persuas ded that the Government can constitutionally take no strong measures iu time of rebellion. becauss it can bs shown that tho ssule could not be lawfully taken in time Of peace. than l can be persuaded that . particular drug is not good medicine f0r sick man, hscapse it can be shown not to be good etaad for we'll one. etrs -s.k- I.~-