Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1863-12-31

10 the true inlcnt and msantag Of the provision 30 wilt
tina! the forfeiture to be perfected during and not
afisy, tie lifetime OF the party attainted"
This is very easy and expeditions way OF ar
irving at his conclusion, but it will net We fancy,
be satisfactory to many minds. 1t certainly never
occurred to the mind of Judge Story, who, in his
commentaries on the Constitution, vs. I'd to
consider this subject After quoting tie c.A'e Of
the Constitution relating to treason, and ASST sning
as the probable reason why it expressly authorized
Congress to punish that crims that it would ne
cessariy possess such power in the absence of ex-
press grant, he Gays:
Two motives probably concurrsd 10 introducing it
express power One not TO leave it open TO I'M
pcation whether il was to be exclusively punishable
with death, according to the known rule OF the common
law aud with the bal Accomplishments pointed out
by IL, but to conf e the punishment to the discretion OIL
Congress. The other was, TO impose SOME HMiTATIoN
upon the NATURE AND EXTENT Of the punishment, so that
IL should work corruption OF BIO d, forfeiture BE-
YoND the life ofhe offender"
Ii surely is enough for society to take the life OF the
offender just punishment of his Grim without taking
from his Offspring relatives that properly which may
be the only of saving them from poverty and ruin
Ii bad policy too; for ii cuts If all the attachments
which these unfortunate victims might otherwise feel for
their own Government and prepares them to engage 10
amy other service by which their supposed injuries may
be redressed their hereditary hatred grnfd Upon
these and similar grounds il may be presumed that the
clause first introduced into tho orgOal draft OF The
Constitution and afer amendments it was adopted
without any apparent resistance BY the laws since passed
by Congress il declared that conviction JUDGMENT
for any capital other offences, shall work corruption oil
blood any forfeiture Of estate. The history II other
countries abundanty proves that of the strong ncen
ves offences has been the chance OF
sharing Plupder Of victims Rapac has been thus
stimulated to exert itself in the oil the most
upt tyranny and tyranny has been thus furDishe with
opportunities OF DduIgug ts malgnity and revenge
Of gratifying its envy of the rich and good and OF ncreas
ing its to reward fayores and retaners for
the worst deeds"
And Dr. Francis Lieber, in his work on "Civi
Liberty and Self Government" seems to have been
equally ignorant of this " short cut" to knowledge
for he not only conceives this provision to near
what its language purports, but, in concurrence
with Story, gives cogent reasons of public policy
ard national justice Why it could and should
mean nothing else He says
THE true protection of individual property demands
likewise the exclusion of confiscaoU For although
scaon punishment, is to be reiected account OF
the underlined character of the punishmen depending
not upon itself but upon the fact whether the punished
person has any property and how much, it is kewisa in
admissible on the ground that individual property implies
individual transmission which cOnfscaton totally destroys
1t would perhaps not be wholly unjust to deprive in
divdua of his property punishment for certain crimes
zoe D0d dH0c TO TO has heirs We do 1t IN fact
when mprison for life, aud submit him to the
regular prism discipline, dsallowng him any benefit
the property he may possess; but IS mnjut to deprive
his children other heirs The individual property
speak Of the appetzing effect nich confscaon property
has often produced upon Governments"
1t will be seen that there is striking similarity
between his vicws and arguments aud those Of
Judge Story. On the score both Of justice and Of
policy, DR.. Leber opposes confscation "beyond
the life of the offender" and these are consdcra-
tons which, We submit, should not be put totally
out of sight in judging between rival interpreta.
ions of the Constitution, even if it be admitted
which we do not for a moment admit, that there
is any obscurity in the terms of the provision un
der this head.