Fremont journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County [Ohio]) 1853-1866, 1863-07-03

democrats who are nobly exposing their lives
and shedding their blood ON The battlefield,
have learned that many approve the courte TAX
en- with Mr.. Vallandfgham, while ] have not
heard o single one condemning II. / can not
assert there are none such.
And the name Of General Jackson recalls an
incident Of pertinent history. Amer the battle
Of New Orleans, and while the fact that the
treaty Of peace had been concluded was well
known In the city, but before official knowledge
of il had arrived, General JucksoD atill main
tanned martial or military law Now, that Il
could be s6d the war was over, the clamor
against martial law, which he'd existed from the
first, grew more furious.
Among other things, Mr.. Louiallier publish
ed denunciatory newspaper article. Gen.
Jackson arrested him. A lawyer by the name
Of Morel procured the United States Judge Hall
to order writ Of habeas corpus to relieve Mr..
Louiallier. Gen. jackson arrested both the
lawyer and the Judge. A Mr.. Hollander ven
tured TO say Of some part of the matter, that "it
was dirty trick" Cen jackson arrested him
When the officer undertook TO serve the writ Of
habeas corpus, Gen. jackson took Il from him
and sent him away with a copy. Holding the
Judge in custody few days, the General sent
him beyond the limits Of his encampment, and
set him at liberty, with an order to remain un-
til the ratification of peace should be regularly
announced, or until the British should have left
the Southern coast A day or two more elapsed,
the ratification of the treaty Of peace was regu-
larly announced, and the Judge and others were
fully liberated. A few days more, and the
Judge called Gen. jackson into court and fined
him thousand dollars for having arrested him
and the others named. The General paid the
fine, and there the matter tested for nearly thir-
ty years, when Congress refunded principal and
interest. The late Senator Douglas, then in the
House of Representatives. took leading part
in the debates in which the constitutional ques-
tion was much discussed. I am not prepared
to say whom the journals would show to have
voted for the measure.
1t may be remarked first that we had the
same constitution then as now; secondly, that
we then had case of invasion, and we now have
case OF rebellion; and thirdly, that the perma-
nent right of the people TO public discussion,
the liberty of speech and of the press, the trial
by jury, the law of evidence, and the habeas
corpus suffered no detriment whatever by that
conduct of General Jackson, or its subsequent
approval by the American Congress.
And yet let me say that in my own discretion,
do not know whether ! would have ordered
the arrest of Mr.. Vallandigham. While cam
not shift the responsibility from myself, hold
that, as a general rule, the commander in the
field is the better judge of the necessity in any
particular case. Of course, l must practice
general directory and revisory power in the
matter.
! One of the resolutions expresses the opinion
of the meeting that arbitrary arrests will have
the effect to divide and distract those who
should be united in suppressing the rebellion,
and am specifically called on TO discharge Mr..
Vallandigham. l regard this as, at least, a fair
appeal to me on the expediency Of exercising a
constitutional power which think exists. In
response to such appeal, have to say it gave
me pain when heard that Mr.. Vallandigham
had been arrested-that is was panied that
there should have seemed to be necessity for
larresting him-and that il will afford me great