The Burlington weekly hawk-eye. [volume] (Burlington [Iowa]) 1860-1876, 1864-02-20
Further on the gentleman renews his at


tack in these words:
~ am shocked that in this age and in
this &C untry and in this House I am re-
quired to stand Hp before tho American
people. and, as matter of pure philan-
thrOpy and common decency, protest
against the cruel and remorseless charac-
ter of bills Of this kind, and to defend the
rights OF those who have committed no
crime, but upon whom it is proposed to
visit, after the death Of the parent, the
crimes of the ancestors
Sir, the common decency'' which ''re-
Quired the gentleman to make these attacks
on the joint resolution, in view of his own
construction OF the Constitution, was
enough to shock any man, and I do not
wonder that he felt shocked" But am
inclined to the opinion that it was The con-
tiict between his own positions which
shocked him, and not the character Of
the resolutions; for the conflict was certain
ly as great AS the "1eceRcv' OF the attack
was ''cODs1AOn,"
The joint resolution was printed; he had
it before him; he had read it; and found in
in it this language:
Nor shall any punishment or proceed
ing under said act be SO construed as to
work a forfeiture of the estate Of the often
der, except during his lite.'
This is the constitutional limitation re-
peated. The joint resolution follows the
Constitution; and yet the gentleman would
have MS believe him sincere when he tells
us that certain words used In the Constitu
tiOn forbids the forfeiture of real estate in
fee simple, nut that the same words, when
used in joint resolution Of Congress, au
thorize the forfeiture Of real estate abso-
| lutely and forever, and call upon him "as
matter Of pure philanthropy and common
decency to protest agairstth the great outrage
OF overriding the Constitution Of the Uni
n1 at Wi - iNin
| luton, thus placing. by this peculiar sys-
| tern Of reasoning, u joint resolution Of Con
gress above and beyond The Constitution.
Did ever man invent "A more absurd propo-
| sition? Can i be o matter of surprise tina.
! the gentleman Was shocked, shocked
by the unsurpassed absurdity Of his own
proposition?
Sir, the geutienA.n need not be alarmed
| His associates may repose in perfect tram
guilty and undisturb.i security. We pro
| pose 10 give them ''tne Constitution rs il
| is s"-noihing isorc, nothing less. /. may
| De that this IS JUS. the thing they DO not
| want. think most likely this is the ease,
for their opposition 20 the proposed use Oh
| the language OF the Constitution evidences
the existence o. fear in their minds that
the Constitution is against them. Indeed,
| sir, viii go further, and say that this fear
| llus Iuichencd INTO a. conviction and :!
| peneu into the fruit Of All unqualified ..a-
mission that the Constitution is against
| them and receives on its tirln breas. all OF
| the malignant shafts whsh have ueel,
| hurried at the joint resolution. Il is tie
| Constitution winch these gentlemen have
denounced, not the joint resolution. May
we not soon expect the gentleman from
Ohio, Mr.. Cox, in response 10 the re
gurement Of common 0ecency,' 10 f.ss
, IN his place and protest against the cruel
and remorseless character" of the Cons;i-
n1 fbn - ,f,,S ~,
| unborn innocents,' whose guardian he
seems TO be, stands III danger from the
free exercise Of the powers OF the CCnsii-
tuition, soon to be uniettered by the ps-s-
| sage OF this resolution. And rs The gentle
man cannot Climb over the Constitution
nor push it out Of Us firm and faithful
i track, it would be we'll for hi;n 20 east him
self before it aud let i, pass over him, thai
he may die a martyr TO the doctrine thai
leniency towards rebels is OF more i!npor
tance to this nation than that stern juStic.
which demands that the foil measure o
punishment shall be neted out TO the trai
tors who have written three years OF this
cOuntry's history in the best blood OF The
Republic.
IL may be that some gentlemen on The
other side OF the House do rot believe tha
the Constitution will permit the fOfeiture O
real estate in fee simple. OF course this re
mark does not apply to the gentlemen ovel
there who have spoken upon the joint res
olutiOn; for thev have all denounced thu
"cruel and remorseless" terms Of the Con
stitution which are copied into the resolu
ton because they do authorize such forfeit
ure. But all Of those who have no. spoken
may not concur in this opinion OF their po
litical associates. and therefore il may b'
proper for me to further remind them th:l
the resolution is not the monster il has beer
represented 10 be. 1t is not q legis.ativ,
| ip9 irl hp all -
conform toits lneXorablemcasureo oflength
stretching constitutions and cutting Off th
legs of political confessions Of faith 30 as Il
tit all to its unyieldng bed. 1t neither at
firms nor denies any proposition which ha
been advanced on either side OF the House
1t does not attempt to construe the Consti
tuition, nor does 1t require any one 70 sur
. render his opinions concerning that instru
ment. Those persons only who are Oppos
u ed to the Constitution have any reason (
declaim against this resolution. You hav
all had it before you You have all read il
and know that its office is declared in thes
plain words:
! "This amendment being intended to limi
. the operation and effect OF the said resoiu
. ton and act, and the same are hereby lilu
tied, only SO far rs to make them conform
. able to section three of article three Of til
Constitution OF the United States.''
This doessnOt read like an attempt to Civ
u legislative construction to the COnstitu
. tion, or a demand upon sensitive gentle
I men to surrender their convictions as to tn
true intent and meaning OF that instrument
q There could be no palmer declaration of a
: intention to conform the law to the Consti
:, tuition than this. But this il the "cruel an
!, remorseless' proposition which so sadl
shocked" the sensitive organization of IN
gentleman from Ohio, fMr. Cox. and pre-
! duced such painful effects on the minds {
: those Of his associates who, like him, be
= lieve in 1.-THE Constitution as it is" l al
: sorry for them, and deeply regret that the
: have SO poor an opinion Of the Constitutio
: they profess to adore.
Sir, the supporters of this joint res0lutio
do not claim that their construction OF til
!, Constitution shall be embodied in the Law
? nor do they insist upon excluding this
! which is entertained by others. The pre-
: position has all the time been to place tn
!, language Of the Constitution in the law, an
!, then submit the whole to the courts for in
terpretation. And am surprised, almos
a shocked" to find gentlemen who have s
persistently insisted on the infallibility {
the courts now shrinking from an applics
a ton of their long-cherished doctrine. VIII
clS .:,lx r,c