Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1863-06-25
From the n Y Times.
The Law of the Case of VaIlandigham
The BEKCHEs. Nav 25, 1868.

feeling OF indignation as perused the
grave and legal argument to prove that
eyerybody-Generals, courts, and peo-
pie were wrong in the Vallandigham
case, and nobody knew anything, ex-
cept only the National Latezligencer.
Not one in a hundred Of your readers
ever see that paper-stil it has some
weight with small class Of men,
especially lawyers and politicians. Com
blne this with the fact that it is supposed
to be sort Of Konite,1r of the Ministry
an organ or not, as they may choose
and think that is sufficient reason to
answer its assumptions and presump-
tions, for it has an abundance of both.
| wish to state the case in terms which
will put it in clear light, and show the
mistakes Of the Iatelligcncer::
l. No man in this country has had a
fairer trial than Clement L. Vallandig-
ham. Where can you find another case
| IN which man has been tried by both
military and civil tribunals and con-
demned by both. He was tried by a
court and was convicted. He
was tried, on the application for a writ
of habeas corpus, before the Circuit
Court, and convicted. Every a, eument
in the case was brought before the court
and the writ refused. His counsel made
every possible effort and failed.
2. But the National LateLzi0eucer
passes by all this and says, that an act
of Congress passed last session, pro
vides for this very case; and the court
so0s bound to issue the acrit. Now, the
National AetehSgeucer has taught, for
half century, as one of its fundamen-
tai doctrines, that the courts are the
sole judges Of the laac. This is its own
doctrine, an | agree with it. Well, the
Court said in this case, that the writ
OF h06e0S corpus is not writ which
issues Of course. This is very impor-
tant point; for most of our Young
lawyers think that every Judge is
bound to issue a writ for everybody.
And here the inteNjge'eccr makes asneer
utterly unworthy of respectable news
paper. 1t sneeringly asks whether
Judge Leavitt could not get copy of
the statutes, or had Eot read them? 1t
is no matter whether he did or not,
since, (as I shall show,) the case did
not turn upon that statute. Judge
Leavitt is most worthy man, who has
had thirty years experience on the
bench, and having been appointed by
Jackson, has something ot the fervid
patriotism which animated the old
hero.
3. We now come to the real point
The MtelNgencer quotes the statutes
OF the last Congress, to show that
Congress had conferred full jurisdiction
over this case, and directed the courts
how to proceed True. But the mis-
take of the LateUigencer is in assuming
that, because Congress had conferred
this jurisdiction on the civil courts,
that, therefore, it took from military
commanders and military courts their
power and jurisdiction in matters which
were necessary to the purposes of war
1t did no such thing. Let me say 1T
IS not IN the constitutional poacer of
Congress TO do that.
War once having been declared, the
President alone is charged with the
mode and measure of its execution, and
it is not in the power of Congress to
cut dowr the executive power over the
proceedings of the army in the least
particular. The only question is, has
such case arisen in regard to either
person or property, as makes it neces-
sary for military commander to inter
fere? If there was not such case,
then Vallandigham ard his tail are
wronged men. If there was, then the
jurisdiction conferred on the civil
courts has nothing to do with the mat
ter. Now, what was Vallandigham
doing? He was doing precisely this {:
He said, practically, 'sThis war is all
wrong. The rebels are right and we are
wrong. We must have peace on any
terms; and we might have it immedi-
ately but for this wicked Abolition
Administration" This is the substance,
and what was the effect? The dis
affected pro-slavery Democrats got
together, with butternut emblems, Sc
cretly encouraging resistance to the
conscription, and alarming and discour-
aging the soldiers in the field. In one
word, they were doing their utmost to
aid and comfort the enemy. Now, do
You think that the common sense of
mankind will believe it right that we
should sacrifice thousands of soldiers
on the bloody field, while we permit
these fellows to aid the enemy at home?
The common sense and the common
honesty Of the people will everywhere
say no. The soldiers in the field cry.
with one voice, against it. In these
circumstances, Burnside issued ''Order
No. 5S," and under it Vallandigham
was tried and convicted. What man
OF sense will deny the justice of his fate?
What patriot can vindicate him?
Before the court, the able counsel
for Mr.. Nallandigham, Mr.. George E.
Pugh presented the single point Oh
which the case must turn. 1t is whether
the military jurisdiction for arrests took
effect in Ohio, where he said there was
no war, and which was not within the
military territory. There was no other
point in the case. No man can DENY
Burns;de's right to make this or any ar
% rY-sfl <l