Delaware State journal and statesman., 1864-02-02
SPEECH OF HON. H. WINTER DAVIS,
OF MARYLAND.
On OOnfsoatiOn of Rebel Property

Deiicered in Me House ofRepresentdfipes Ja
uary ID, lsG4.
The House being in Committees OF tue VINO
on the State of the Union, and having under col
I, slderAtion the bill to coniscate the property
L rebels, Mr.. DAVIS said
g Mr. SPEAKER: With whatever pleasure 4,
u gentlemen upon this side of the House NAV hay
heard the very novel declaration of the gentle
man from Ohio, that be contemplated support
ing IN all proper measures the Administration i
the prosecution of the war and the suppression
OF the rebellion, il is, perhaps fortunate that th
result OF the political election, iu the centra
! slave States, has placed the Administration be.
yond the necessity of relying upon his support
Were it not 30 incline to think that the kind o.
support the Administration would receive from
the great majority OF gentlemen on the other sid.
OF the House was indicated early in the session
IN that resolution proposed by gentleman from
New York, Mr. FernandO Wood which pro-
nounoed this al inhuman war. For myself sir
relying on the fact that the people have semi
enough of us here for the purpose Of supporting
the Administration, would suggest that per-
maps gentlemen Oh the other side of the House
had just as well execute the mission with which
the constituents that elected them charged them
Ito oppose, to embarass, to libel and to break
down the Administraton-and leave the support
OF It to gentlemen whom the people snt here to
It, WIN ull uut TtsueCt TO the Dltri-
otto purposes, the eminent ability of the gentle
men on the other side, when they tender support
shall look at it with something of suspision,
and for myself, shall say, "Non tall auziiio, nee
deteEsor5us isis "
"a specimen of that support, Mr. Speaker, is
exhibited by the mode in whioheihe bill brought
iu by the chairman OF the Committee on the
Judiciary has been received on that side of the
House. 1t relates to what is now the settled
policy Of the Administrations which gentlemen
say that they intend to support in the suppress
sion Of the rebellion. Whether one degree or
another of cOnfseatlon he expedient, whether it
be extended to the lower actors in this great
scene, or, as in my judgment is proper, It be
confined to few Of the leaders, stiil that the
ooniiscation of property shall attach to some por
ton of the people engaged in the rebellion is now
the settled, resolved policy of the Administra-
ton The bill introduced by the Judiciary
Committee is in furtheranoe Of that policy. A (
joint resolution, in my judgement very unwise
one, OF the last Congress, limited the operation
Of the coufscaton law to life estates. This bill /
couteniplate5 the oblteration Of that limitation
think its language does not accomplish that
purpose; and therefore I shall vote for the
Amendment of the gentleman from Pennsylvania,
| Mr.. Stevens, which goes directly to the object
sought to be accomplished by repeating the
limiting resolution.
But there we are met by the new supporters
of The Administration with the suggestion that
thsis uprootng' the fundamental law of the
Republic ask where? What word in the
Constitution. does ii violate? What principle
does It in the least degree impeQoh TEey
quote the clause of the Constitution, deelariug
that Congress shall have power to declare the
punishment Of treason, bui that no attainder of
treason shall iVork corruption of blood or forfeit
tHre, e1cept during the AJe Of The person atiaated.
II have road Alright the coniiscations law Of
The last Congress, it nowhere attaches any con
iscGton or forfeiture to a c0npichoR for treason
Dr. to an dtaindcr of treason. Am | right, or !
am wrong? There is no word in the law Of
he last Congress that attaches eonfscaton Of
property TO conviction Of the person for treason,
10 attander of The person for treason, on crimi- :
lal proceeding in any court of justice II that :
70 SO, then tue quotation of tue clause from the
Constitution is SIM ly irrelevant TO the matter in
Iebate, for it is hat no ATTAINDER Of treason .
hall work corruption of blood or forfeiture .
xcept during the life Of the party so that, it =
here be no proceeding by indictment, there can =
e no attainderi and if there be no attainder =
here is nothing on which the residue of the y
lords in the Constitution can operate. That =
impie observation dispoaes Of tho whole argu- a
lent. 1t is wholly immateral whether, in the y
vent of the party's being convicted of treason, "
Ongress can or caun0t make consequence of \
le judgment the forfeiture Of lands in Zee sim u
le, or is confined to a forfeiture limited in du-
ltion by the life of the convict. u
The question here is whether there is any pro- AZ
eBs Of law however this provision be construct ~
/, by which we eau effect forfeiture Of the o.
hole fee in lands. That question gentlemen ~ y
ave nowhere met ei
IT, however, the Constitution limits the con- o'
quenoes of a conviction 10 a forfeiture for life, D'
assume that it limits every other form Of pro- o.
rs ofaw in like manner, is simply begging the ~ y,
stion. The Constitution speaks for i.s5lf- tn
limits the operation of an attninder 1t limits IN
,Ihing else. When, therefore, gentlemen accuse tn
here Of uprOotiBg the settled law OF the laud IN
ey lnterp1late langu Ige not in the law, and Fl
iote ii to condemn us. But even if the mean "
K of the Constitution itself were doubtful in a OF
Sc Of aliainder, where the QUESTION would be III
neither the Judgment of the court should be for
e forfeiture of the land for life or in fee no ge
cision on that could effect any 9th process of m
law Tor conhseating lauds without attainder. y
be doubt upon that question cannot apply to a M
biect beyond tue purview Of the question. 10
Still il is worth while te hazard a suggestion Sc
uchng the real meaning Of those words So con- ao
lently invoked by our new allies for our confu- co
,n. desire to speak with all modesty in solv- ca
& this problem for difficulties beset every So wi
ton, aud while il is quite clear that its mean 60
& is not that assumed by our new allies, it is pr
Ihaps not so easy to give demonstrably right gu
lutlVn' speuh WIN uesllNtloui oecause unelr on
nidence surprised me into assuming once be- VI VI
re the correctness of their Interpretation. ,n
ink, however, the technical language Of the ~ ns.
ss. - - ''o IO,S , III !, 5oints IN SOL
- ,Tnea. 40 w ~ ~, ,a, Sbioh tbe hon. ed
able gentleman from Ohio mir Cox supposes. .n' .i
No attainder shall lpork corruption Of blood or 'n'
rfeiture, except during the life of the person EN-
tainted Now | take it that the meaning Of
at clause is that the forfeiture worked must eas
effected during life. The honorable gentle VIII
-, froru obi, and those who think with him. or
ud construe ii to be that the forfeiture when an
rked shall only endure for the life of the par ag'
PalpAbly the latter is the incorrect and the eve
mer the legal meaning. The purpose assum neg
is the protection Of the offspring from punish. wa
Mt for the guilt of the ancestor. But fine is COL
lally taken from tho offspring, as land yet ori
one denies the right to fine person attaint- ora