Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1864-02-11
M SPEECH OF o1
HON. WILLIAM E. FINCK
ON coNF1sCATION. ~
Delivered in the House of Congress ON che 2sth
"'. Of January, 1854. -

Thejoint resolution (H.R No. l8) to amen
joint resolution explanatory of an act
suppress insurrection, to punish treason an
2 rebellion, to seize and confscate the proper
8 sty' of rebels, and for other purposes, az
proved July II, 1862, being under consider
alton, Mr.. FrNcK said:
Mr.. Speaker, the debate on the resolutio
under consideration has led to the examina
ton and discussion of questions of gray
Interests to the country, and demand fron
this House, as j have no doubt they viii
receive from the people, most careful am,
prudent consideration. p.
We1iye, Mr.. Speaker, in an eventflil peri
cd of the history of this nation. Every
thing seems to be unsettled and thrown ,lf,
1on a sea of uncertainty. Plain provision
of the Constitution, which have heretofor,
been regarded as settled beyond contro
versy, are now called in question, and new
and unheard-of constructions placed upor
them The provision contained in th,
third section of article three of the Consti
tuition, which provides that "the Congress
shall have power to declare the punishment
of treason, but no attainder of treason shal
work corruption Of blood, or forfeiture ex.
cept during thelife of the person attainted,'
Is now gravely argued in this House by
astlte lawyers and distinguished statesmen
to mean that Congress may, in declaring the
punishment OF treason, provide for the for
gteiture of the estate not for lite only but in
Zee. Sir, before the year 1862 there did not
exist in this country any difference of opin-
ion upon this clause of the Constitution. -
No one dreamed that the Constitution had
vested in Congress any power of declaring
forfeiture beyond the life of the person
convicted of treason; but that by express
provision the forfeiture was to be limited
to the life of the traitor. That such was the
construction of the trainers of the Consti-
tuition is evidenced by the writings of James
Madison, justly entitled to be called the
father of the Constitution, and by the legis-
lation the First Congress, of which many
OF the trainers of the Constitution were
members. The opinions of Justice Story,
already cited in this debate, show how
clear that distinguished jurist was on this
question. IN
Sir, was about to saythat was aston
lshed that there should exist in this House
any difference of opinion upon clau .e of
the Constitution which has for more than
seventy years been regarded beyond con-
troversy; but the sad occurrences which
have unfortunately taken place in this coun-
try within the last three years admonish me
that Ishould not be astonished at anything.
1t seems to me, Mr.. Speaker, that the hon
orable. gentleman. from Pennsylvania Mr..
Stevens] has exhibited more boldness and
frankness in this discussion than any gem
tleman on that side Of the House. He does
not seek by any subterfuge to avoid the
force Of this provision of the Constitution,
so plain in itself, but marches boldly out,
the leader of his side of the House, and
takes the distinct ground, that the Union is
already dissolved, and that this Question is
one outside Of the Constitution. Y He says
that ,'Nn
The United States are at war with an acknowl-
edged begerent, with foreign nation, and as such
war has abrogated all former compacts existing be-
tween them neither the United States nor the Con-
iederate states can, as against the other. claim
der it, LiIENT.f{- 5(TTg ~ F7GG''3
That the States in rebellion are no longer
portion Of the United States, but are out
side of the Union, and are to be conquered
andtheld as subjugated territories; and ar
CUES that this Government, on becoming
the conqueror, is, by the laws of nations,
clothed with the right, and should exercise
it, to conflscate and appropriate the proper
ty of the people of the States thus to be
conquered. Well, we have here distinct
recognition of the Confederate States, and
a concession Of what jeff. Davis and the
leaders of the rebellion claim. They insist
that they are ''outside of the Union,n and
that the 'former compact existing between
them and the United States has been abro-
gated, and the honorable gentleman from
Pennsylvania admits it.
The questions discussed by the gentleman
from Pennsylvania ( Mr.. Stevens are OF sol
imnOrtqnf a n oy,. 40 rs,,, no,
of examination somewhat more extensive
than anything which has been advanced In |
this discussion, that i shall feel it my duty |
to examine the several questions which he |
has alluded to inh his argument. To sustain !
his position, that the States in rebellion are |
out OF the Union and constitute foreign |
nation, the honorable gentleman quotes |
from Vattel, Phillimore, and Kent, to show |
that a war between two nations annuls and |
abrogates the treaties which had existed be- |
tween the belligerents. Sir, respectfully |
submit that the authorities cited are not in |
point. These States were not held by the |
force of treaties, but by a Constitution |
adopted and assented to by each of them, |
and by their people through their conven- |
tions. fully admit that when q civil war |
breaks out between the different members |
of the same society the contending parties |
oiV SoSh SilUiOlCu w al tiO IlSlIo anu uSttSco
of war asagainst each other. This is rule |
of necessity, and is established by the plain
est dictates of humanity and Christian civil
ization. Writing on this subject, Mr.. Whea-
ton says in his excellent work, page $40;
Aciyil war between the different members Of the
same societyis what Grotius calls xed war; 1t is,
according to him, public on the side of the establish
cd Government, and private y the part Of the peo-
pie resisting its authority. But the general usage of
nations regards such war as emitting both the con-
tending parties to all the rights Of war as against
each other, and even as respects neutral nations.
But claim that there is nothing in this
sound and necessary principle Of public
law which implies In case like ours that
these States are outside of the Union and
constitute foreign nation. 1t is mot against
the States as such that the war is to be pros
ecuted, but against the people in, the States
who are in armed resistance to the author
ity of. the United States. .esi t-.,>.S
A rebellion exists within portion of the
States carried on by, q portion of the people
IN those States. They have for the time be-
ing prevented the execution Of the Federal
laws within certain boundaries, but their
ordinances of secession, being invalid and
mo force which they may
bring to maintain such acts can give them
legality until they shall successfully estab-
lish their separation, and this would be sue
cessfll revolution, and constitute them be-
fore the world, q distinct nation. lI
believe, MT. Speaker, this unfortunate