Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1863-07-16
Reply of the President to the Ohio
Committee.

SisioA anu al SunehV utlniy the same IS
the resolutions of the Democratic meeting
at Albany, New York, l refer You to nv
response to the latter as meeting most OF
the points in the former. This response
you evidently used in preparing your re-
marks, and l desire no more than that it
be used with accuracy. In single read
ing OF your remarks, only discovered one
lnaccuracy in matter which | suppose
you took from that 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 time of instruction or invasion from
what it is in time of peace and public Sc
curity"
A recurrence to the paper will show
you that | have not expressed the opinion
you suppose. | expressed the opinion
that the Constitution is different IN ITS
application in cases of rebellion or inVa
sion, Involving the public safety, from
what it is in times of profound peace and
public security and this opinion | adhere
To, simply because by the Constitution it.
self, things may be done in tie one case
which may not be done in the other.
l dislike TO waste a word on q merely
personal point, but | must respectfully as
sure you that you will find yourselves at
fault should you ever seek tor evidence to
prove your assumption that | "opposed
in discussions before the people the policy
of the Mexican war"
You ay: "Expunge from the Consti-
tuition this limitation upon the power OF
Con gress TO suspend the writ OF habeas
corpus, and yet the other guarantees OF
personal liberty would remain unchanged"
Doubtless, If this clause of the UOnstitu-
ton, improperly called, as think, q
limitation upon the power of Congress-
were expuuged, the other guarantees
would remain the same but the question
Is, not how those guarantees wou d stand
with that clause 0ut Of the Constitution,
but how they stand with that clause re-
naming In it. in cases OF rebellion or in
vasion, involving the public safety. Ii
the liberty could be INDUCED OF expungiae
that clause, letter and spirit, really think
the constitutional argument would be with
you.
My general view on this question was
stated in the Albany response, and hence
| do not state it now. | only add that, as
hobeas corpus is the great means through
which the guarantees Of personal liberty
are conserved and made available in The
last resort; and corroborative OF this view
is the fact that sir. Vallandigham, in the
very case in question, under the advice Of
able lawyers, saw not where else to go
but to the hd6eas corpus. But by the
Constitution the benefit of the writ OF
ha6eas corpus itself may be suspended,
when III Gases OF rebellion and invasion
the public safety may require it.
You ask, in Substance, whether | really
claim that | may override all the guar
anteed rights of individuals, on the plea
of conserving the pubic safety--when |
may choose TO say the public safety re-
quires. This question, Invested OF the
phraseology calculated to represent me as
struggling for an arbitrary personal pre-
rogative, is either simply question ach0
shall decide, or an affirmation that nobody
shall decide, what the public safety does
require in cases of rebellion Or invasion.
The Constitution coniemplates the ques-
ton as likely 10 occur for decision, bat it
does not expressly declare VITO Is to decide
it. BY necessary implication, when rebel
lion or invasion comes, the decision is to
be made, from time to time; and | think
the man whom, tor the time, the people
have, under the Constitution, made the
Command erin Chief of their army and
navy, is the man who holds the power
and bears the responsibility of making it.
1t he uses the power justly, the same peo-
pie will probably justify HIM il be abuses
it, he Is in their hands, to be dealt with
by all the modes they have reserved to
themselves in the Constitution.
The earnestness with which you insist
that persons can only, in times of re.
belliob, be lawfully dealt with, in accord.
ance with the rules tor criminal trials and
punishments in times OF peace, induces me
to add a word TO what | said on that point
IN the Albany response. You claim that
men may, if they choose, embarraSs those
whose duty ii Is to combat giant re
belion and then be dealt with only IL
turn as ii there were no reDell N. The
constitution itself rejects this NV. The
military arrests and detento 3 which
have been made, including those of MIR
Vallandigham, which are not different IL
principle from the other, have been fol
PREVENTION, and not for PUNISHMENT-a:
injunctlons to stay irjury-as proceedings
TO keep the peace-aud hence, like pro
ceediugs in such cases and for Ike reasons,
they have not been accompanied with III
dictments, or trials oy jury, nor, in sin.
gle case, by any punishment whatever be-
you'd what is purely incidental to the pre-
vention. The original sentence of i'm
prisonment in Mr.. Vallandigham's cas-
wss to prevent Injury TO the military SER
vice only, and the modification of 1t was
made as less dlsagreeabe mode to hin
of ST curing the same prevention.
am unsble to p receive an insult tC
Ohio in the case of Mr.. VaIaadigham.
Quite surely nothing OF this sort was or Is
Intended. | was wholly unaware that
Mr. Vallandigham was, at the time of his
arrest, q Candidate fur the Democratic
nomination for Governor, until SO inform
ed by your reading to me the resolutions
OF the Convention. | am grateful TO tht
State of Onio tor many things, especially
for the brave soldiers and. officers she has
given in the present national trial to the
armies of the Union.
You claim, a. | understand, that accord
ing to my own position In the Albany re-
spouse, Mr.. Nalandigham should be re
LEI sed !; and this because, as you claim, he
has not damaged the military service, by
discouraging enlistments, encouraging de-
sertions, or otherwise; and that If he had
he should have been turned over to the
civil authorities under the recent act OF
Congress-. | certainly do not kn0w that
Mr.. Vallandgham has specifically, and by
direct language, advised against enlist
ments, and in favor OF desertion and re-
sistance to drafting. We all know tina
combinations, armed in some instances, to
resist the arrest OF deserters, began severa
months ago that more recently the like