Holmes County farmer. [volume] (Millersburg, Ohio) 1857-1926, 1863-07-23
TIE REInInnEp.


Nrw YosK cfrr, July 1, 1893
To his EScelleney the Prtsden, Of the United states
SIR-Your answer to the application
of the undersigned for revocation of the
order of banishment of Clement l.. Val.
landigham requires reply, which they
proceed, with as little delay as practica.
BILE, to make.
They are not able to appreciate the
force of the distinction you make between
the constitution and tie application Of the
constitution, whereby you assume that
powers are delegated to the President at
the time Of invasion or insurrecton in
dcrogation of the plain language Of the
constitution. The inherent provisions Of
the constitution remaining the same in
time of insurrection or invasion as in
time OF peace, the President can have no
more right to disregard their positive and
imperative requirements at the former
time than at the latter Because some
things may be done by the terms of the
constitution at the time of invasion or in
surrection which would not be required
by the occasion in time of peace You as
sumo that anything achateper, even though
not expressed by the constitution, may
be done on the occasion Of insurrection
or invasion which the President NAV
choose to say is required by the public
safety. In plain terms, because the writ
Of haJeqs corpus may be suspended at the
time of invasion or insurrection, you in
fer that all other provisions Of the con.
stitution having in view the protection of
the life, liberty, and property of the citi-
zen may be in like manner suspended
The provision relating to the writ Of ha.
beas corpus, being contained in the first
Article OF the constitution, the purpose of
which is to define the powers delegated to
Congress, has no connection in language
with the declaration of rights, as guaran-
tees Of personal liberty, contained in the
additional and amendatory ar icles.-
And inasmuch as the provision relating
to habeas corpus expressly provides for
its suspension, and the other provisions
alluded to do not provide for any such
thing, tho legal conclusion is. that the
suspension of the latter is unauthorized
The provision for the writ of ha5eas cor
pus is merely intended to furnish a sam.
mary remedy, and not the means where.
by personal security is conserved, in the
final resort; while the other provisions
are guarantees of personal rights, the
suspension of which puts an end to the
pretense of free government. 1t is true
Mr.. Vallanjigham applied for writ of
habeas corpus as q summary remedy
against oppression. But the denial OF
this did not take away his right to a
speedy public !rial by an impartial jury,
or deprive him of his other rights as an
American citizen. Your assumption of
the right to suspend all the constitution
al guarantees of personal liberty, and even
OF the freedom of speech and of the press,
and because the summary remedy of ha-
Jeas corpus may be suspended, is at once
startling and alarming to all persons de-
sirous of preserving free government in
this country.
The inquiry of the undersigned, wheth-
er "you hold that the rights of every
man throughout this vast country, in
time of invasion or insurrection, are sub.
ject to be annulled whenever you may sag
that you consider the public safety re-
quires it," was a plain question, undis
guised by eircuml ocution, and intended
simply to elicit information Your affir
NATIVE answer to this question throws I
shade upon the fondest anticipations 0
the trainers Of the constitution, who fiat
tered themselves that they had provides
safe guards against the dangers whic
have ever beset and overthrown free gov
. ernment in other ages and countries
Your answer is not to be disguised by th
, phraseology that the question sis simpl
. question who shall decide, or an affil
nation that no6o ly shall decide what tn
public safety require in cases of rebellion
or INVASION" Our government was de
signed to be government of laaO, settle'
and defined, and not of the arbitrary wi!
; of single man. AS a safe e-guard, tn
powers granted were divided. and delega
ted to the legislative, executive, and Judi
cial branches of the government, anC
each made CO Coordinate with the Others
and supreme within its sphere, and thu
mutual check upon each other, in cas-
of abuse of power. 1t has been the boas
OF the American people that they had
,or,tten constitution. not only expressl
defining, but also limiting the powers o
the government. and providing perpetua
safeguards for personal liberty, securit
. and property. And to make the matte
more positive and explicit, it was provi
ded by the amendatory articles. nine an
ten. that ''the enumeration in the const
tuition of certain rights shall not be cor
strued to deny or disparage others retair
ed by the people," and that "thc powe
, not delegated to the United States by Il
constitution, nor prohibited by it to IL
3 States, are reserved to the States II
spectively or to the people" With tn
care and precaution on the part OF OF
3 forefathers, who framed our institution
8 it was not to be expected that. at SO earl
0 day as this, claim of the President
}, arbitrary power, limited only by his col
n ception of the requirements of the publ
safety, would have been asserted.
l derogation OF the constitutional prov
: sioms making the President strictly I
y executive officer. and vesting all the d'
Q sgated legislative power in Congref