Marshall County Republican. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1856-1878, 1863-10-08
Suspension Of the Habeas Corpus

oeds corpus has been practically y suspended.
Persons held to be dangerous to the gener-
al welfare have been arrested and kept in
confinement without trial, until. in the
Judgment Of the Executive. |. was proper
to iberate them. We express no opinion
as to the legality or propriety of that
course. but simply note that such was the
fact. There was great outcry against that
mode of proceeding. because, as it was al
legged by the malcontents. and by others
more reasonable in their structures.
the power to suspend the great writ was
vested, not in the President, bnt in Con-
gress. Atlength Congress enacted law
empowering the President to suspend the
writ during the present Rebellion. whenev-
er in his judgment the public safety may
require it. limiting the exercise OF .he pow
er in such way as to prevent unjust i'm
lprisonment for any grea. length of time.
This act would seem to any candid mind
to obviaue most of the objections urged
against the suspension oil the writ in the
earlier months of the present Rebellion
But so far from silenclng the columns Of
the malcontents or satisfying their demands
they are now pouring out hercer obiurga-
tion than ever on the Presidents recent
proclamation under the law.
All this takes the shape of faction. and
it is the duty of those who communicate
with the great body of the public through
the newspaper press to warn the peuple
against being drawn into partisanship with
any such proceedings. We think it en-
tirely proper for every citizen to make up
his own opinion as to whether the power
to suspend the writ is vested in Con-
gress or the Executive-in either or in
both. A man may be truly loyal. and
yet hold that the power is in Congress
But we fail to perceive how any man can
escape tho charge of faction who equally
object to the exercise of the power. wheth-
er welded by the President upon his own
idea Of his official duty and responsibility,
or by the express authority of Congress.
The necessity of suspending the privi-
lege of the habeas corpus in times of great
public danger. was contemplated by the
trainers of tho Constitution. and they
provided for it.. The power is lodged
somewhere. If in tie President. then his
exercise Of it is no usurpation. If not in
him. bnt in Congress. then his present ex-
ercise Of the power, by the clear and express
authority Of an act Of Congress. is in no
sense a usurpation. Hence. those who OBJ
ject to the recent proclamation simply as
an undue assumption Of Executive author
ity--as an act Of tyranny and despotism.
&c.--place themselves in the position of
opponents to the exercise pf the power by
either Congress or the President. and ofl
reducing to a nality one of tie provisions of
the Constitution. Surely that is faction.
Again large portion Of the lenuncis.
ton levcled against the suspension Of the
writ is male up of recitals OF the dangers
to individual liberty when the citizen. un-
der certain circumstances. can no longer
invoke the all of the Aa5eas corpus These
recitals are all true enough, but how is the
writ to be suspended at all. either by Con-
gress or by the President. without subject
ing the people to these very perils. They
exist in both cases equally. They are
none the more dangerous when the writ is
suspended by the President than when it
is suspended by Congress. And hence, if
the writ is never to be suspended until it
can be done without danger.to individual
freedom, then it can never be suspended
at all, either by Congress or the Executive.
Yet it is clear that the uncompromising
Democrats who framed the Constitution
foresaw emergencies when it should be
suspended.
There is still another point that should
not be overlooked. The Constitution con- |
templates that the exigencies of rebellion
or invasion might compel tho suspension
Of the great writ. Such rebellion or In
vasion might as easily occur when Con-
gress is not ir session, as when it is; and
it is we'll known that Congress is not in
session more than half the time Is it'pre-
'sumable that provision Of the Constitu-
tion. intended to be . great safeguard to
the State, was designed to be ino perative
more than half the time! For during all
the lcngthened periods when there is no
Congress in session. the President would
have to, exercise the power. OIL, it could not
be exercised at all - And IL it was design
ed that the Executive should not exercise
il in his own discretion. is il presumable
that Congress was to be cut off from the
power to delegate the authority during the
long months of their annual recesss Such
. conclusion Would be The reduetio ad a5-
sHrdons with : vengeance. - -,
In view Of all the foregoing considera-
ffous ~ ,concl u.lo that thosa vho ara now