Weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1858-1865, 1863-04-22

the crime shall have been committed which district
shall have been previously ascertained by law and
to be informed of the nature and cause Of the &C.
cusaton to be confronted with the witnesses against
him; to have compulsory process for obtaining
witnesses in his favor; and 10 have the assistance
g. counsel for his defence" >.
We fear, from your report that you do not re-
gard these unfortunate men as under the protection
Of the civil laws and that, With your present views
they tay look for no relief so long as this war
dures, beyond what military commissioner may
grant them after secret examination, without aid
of counsel for their defence, or the privilege Of con-
fronting their accusers. Here, then, is class of
prisoners who cannot, in your Judgment be tried
at all They cannot be tried by the military, BE-
cause they are "civilisns ;" and they are not al:
lowed to be tried BY the civil tribunals, because they
are prisoners "under military authority" fkpis
said, and upon authority which your military Cap
tain at Salisbury cannot dispute, that middle
course has been pursued, which, as in the case of
Thomas Kenneday, Of Wayne, No. 40 on the list Of
prisoners, is as follows: 7hey are n,ereyully al
loSed to go into eri1s to escape endlss inprison-
nent You, Sir, cannot but be sensible that the
exaction of such an alternative punishment involves
both trial and Judgment The prisoner, as
preliminary step to the privilege of choosing be.
tween the horns of the sentence-perpetual impris-
onment without the hope of trial on the one hand,
and exile from his family and native land on the
other-'nust of course, admit such gutiness as de-
serves one or the other punishment
But, Sir, allow US to inquire Of youjn what law,
civil or military, State Or Confederate, do you find
the authority thus to dispose of citizen accused Of
disloyaty, for such is the charge against Mr.. Ken
neday? Being civilian, he had the constitutional
right TART. l, sec 9, l6,) 70 refuse to "be held
to answer for an Infamous crime unless present.
ment or indictment of a grand jury" And even
after conviction, he could not have been punished
with exile, because such punishment, being both
"cruel and unusual" is forbidden to be inflicted
(Art l, sec. 9, 49, Yet under your ministra-
tion, this citizen of North Carona-and how many
others weknow not as the secrets of the prison house
are probably kept in the bosom of its redoubtab,e
Captain-was adjudged to suffer an interminabie
imprisonmentor or 60 into Punishment The worst days
Pfthe Stuarts can furnish nothing more thoroughly
lawess or despotic. At this day, such al act of An
English minister would fire every soul in the land.
You will pardon our feeling against this outrage
when we inform you that nearly o century ago,
North Carolina transplanted into its fundamental
guarantees of liberty the 46th section of Magma
Charta "that no freeman ought to be taken, i'm.
PEsSGss e asaf7s 9 Sr b d lily manner
destroyed deprived Of his life, liberty, or proper
ty, bat by the Law Of the land."'
Your report, in specifying the charges pre-
ferred" distinguishes the several kinds, and pre-
sents the names of sixty four imprisoned for "dis-
loyalty" and eighteen for being " Union men. -
If we may judge of the grounds for the arrest and
detention Of those still ncarcerated from the returns
the few writs Of habeas corpus that have entered
the prison walls, we may fairly conclude that there
never Tas oath taken, either to arrest or detau
one Of the prisoners, before his examination by a
commissioner, or since. If one could be moved to
ridicule in the examination Of subject so sad and
touching to humanity the classification of the
"charscs preferred" against the prisoners would
!, furnish an ample theme for its indulgence Thus
| No. 6 is q "strong Union man,"-Nos. 10, 81, ~
! 9s simply Union men, Nos. 80, 55, G6, 70, ant
| many others, "svowed Uuonists." No. 95, "dan
gerous Union man,"-5G, "suspicioned of going t
enemy, Union man,, suspicious character
| ayowed Unionist,"-9, dangerous, s,"-ss, "dan
gerous man,"-99 "suspicioned of reasonable con
duct,"-73 and 1873, "goipg to Kentucky, take1
! within the enemy's lines"
Such are specimens of the charges preferred,
which those accused of them have the csnstituton
al right to meet speedily and publicly. Have the.
not been denied the right to be informed of tn
nature and cause of the accusationT' p Do 20,
think, Sir as lawyer, that the charges preferred
furnish any such information "To be confronte'
with the witnesses against them. When wer
they offered this privilege? "To have compulsor.
process for obtaining witnesses in their favor"
When has this right been extended to them An
finally, to have the assistance of counsel for de
fence" The denial of this right has been as noto
rious and avowed the existence of the prison Il
self
In your report you inform the President. tina
''under the examinations that have been made,
large number Of prisoners have been discharged
Thus it appears that from fagrant disregard b
your subaterns Of that "probable cause supports
ty oath or affirmation" which is demanded BY tn
Constitution before any arrest can be- made, I"
large number" of innocent persons have been snatch
ed from their families by the rash hand of miliar
power and doomed to languish in jail for man.
MONTHS in violation Of the solemn guarantees of tn
Constitution for the protection of personal liberty
But you proceed to conclude your report by an
nouncng, as some consolation for past enormities
that "none are retained unless there be a caus
Of suspicion, supported by testimony rendering
probable that the discharge of the prisoners woul
be prejudicial to the public interests" Withes
looking to your report of charges preferred" W
had evidence that at the time it was penned, ther
was one at least and great reason to believe ther
were many persons, pining in the prison, srreste
upon suspicion wholly unsupported by proof a
truth, who, if brought before an intelligent Judge
would have been discharged instantly on hearing