Evening star., 1865-05-30


lis benefits. -.e~ W '''
The principles hereinbefore stated forbid,
however, that An offer OF pardon be construe
| as a license or Indulgence to commit COW
| tinuiDg or future ofenses, or as giving fmmu
nifty froIh the consequence of such ofenses.
After the offender shall have received notine
| Of the offer, or after q reasonable time shall
| have elapsed within which he must be ure.
sumed to have received noLice OF the offer, he
| cannot continue his Ill doing and then accept
| and rely upon the offer OF pardon as an indem
| nifty against what he did before and also what
ne did after notice. Such construction OF the
| pardon1ng power would virtually convert IL
| INTO power 10 license crime.
Inc nigh and necessary power of extending
| pardon and amnesty can never be rightfuiiy
| exercised SO as to enable the President to say
| to offenders against the law, ~ now offer yon
| free pardon tor the past; or at any future day
when you shall, from baffied hopes, or after
being toiied IN dangerous and bloody enter
prises. think proper to accept, Will give you
| pardon for he then past''
| When men have offended against the law,
@ thelr appeal Is for mercy, no: for justice. In
this country, and under this Government, yio.
| Iators OF the law have offended against law
| OF their own making out OF their OWE mouths
tney are condemned-convicted by their own
Judgmen nts-and, under law of their own
making, they cannot appear before the seat of
mercy and arrogantly claim the fulfiIlmept of
promise OF pardon which they have refused
and def1ed.
The excellence OF mercy and charity in a ma i.
tlonai trouble like OURS ought not to be under
ished and studiously cultivated. When brought
| into action they should be generously but
wisely INDUCED. Like all the great, neces-
safy ana useful powers IN nature or in gov
ernment harm may come OF their 1mprovident
use, and perils which seem passed may be
renewed, and other and new dangers be pre-.
clpltated. BY too EXTENDED, thoughtless, or
nnWise Kindness, the man or the Government
may warm into life an adder that will requfte
tnat kindness by fatal sting from poisonous
fang.
Keeping in view these obvious and fupda.
mental principles that fix and limit the powers
OF pal don and amnesty under the Constitution
and the law, will proceed to copsider the
questions pIopounded by you on the procla-
nations dated respectively the sth day OF
De cember, 1863, and the 26th day of March.
1854, commonly called the amnesty proclama.
lions.
You ask my opinion, first, as to the proper
construction and effect OF those proclamaiions
upon the citizens and residents of rebel States
who have taken the oath OF amnesty prescribed
therein.
These two proclamations must be read TO.
gether and regarded as one instrument. That
m ust, at least, be so from the date Of the last
proclamation, March %, 1864. No doubt many
persons did, betwixt the 9Th December, 1858,
and 26th March, 1864, take the oath who could
not have done so had the original proclama.
tion contained the exceptions set forth in the
second. What the rights are Of those who took
the oath in that intermediate space Of time, and
March, 1864, is purely a judicial question. The
facts in such cases are accomplished, and the
rights arising ont OF these facts have attached
and become vested. II not improper, it would
be. at least idle in me to express an opinion on
those cases. The judicial department of the
Government must determine the law In those
cases, when they are properly presented before
For all practical purposes so far as the Ex.
ecutive Department Of the Government is con-
serned, both proclamations @ may therefore be
that point OF view their proper operation and
effect are now to be considered.
1t is plainly stated on the face OF the second
proclama alton that its objects "were to suppress
the insurrection and to restore the authority Of
the United States, and with reference to these
objects alone" In the midst OF a gigantic eff.
fort on the part OF traitors to dismember our
country and overthrow our Government the
President in the legitimate exercise of his great
charity and forgiveness. His great heart hnt
responded to the eager desire of the Ameri
can people to win back this misguided people
to their allegiance, and to peace and order, by
ge.tleness, rather than to compel obedience by
the dread powers OF war.
1t must not be supposed that in giving ex.
preston to and making q law of this noble
wish of his heart. and the heart OF the people
whom he represented, it was intended to give
license and Immunity to crime and treason for
the then future. His expressed object was ssto
suppress the insurrection, and to restore the
authority OF the United States, and that
alone"
when he said that the person ssshall yelunta.
rily come forward and take the said oath, with
the purpose OF restoring peace and establishing
the national authority
The reluctant, unrepentant, defying persons
who, in their hearts, desired the success of the
rebellion and the overthrow OF the Govern.
ment, were not vited to take the oath: and if
any such should take 1t, they would but add
perjury, G od -defving sin, to that OF treason
and II that fact can be shown to judicial tri-
bunaI, it seems to me that they should take no
benefit from the pardon and amnesty. A mind
and heart unpurged of treason were not in vi.
ted by the amnesty proclamation to add there
to the crime OF perjury.
1t seems to me, then, that all the citizens and
residents of the rebel States, not excepted from
the amnesty, who did, after the issuing OF the
PROCLAMATION, or after notice thereof, or within
q reasonable time within which il must be
supposed they had notice. refrain from farther
hostilities, and take the oath of amnesty colun.
tobliShing the national authority, being ~ the
time free from arrest, confinement or ,ss,
and not under bonds, are entitled TO alI the
benefits and rights so freely and benignly given
by magnanimo Government When the
oath has been taken without the purpose of
restoring peace and establishing the national
me that the amnesty and pardon do not attach
This, however, is judicial question which
the courts may decide contrary to my opinion.
ought not, perhaps, to express any.
In giving this construction to the amnesty
proclamation, l have been constantly I'M
pressed by paragraph in the astannuaI mes
reads as fellows: "a year ago general pardon
and amnesty, upon specified terms, were Of.
fered to all, except certain designated classes:
and it was. at the same time. made known that |
the excepted classes were still within contem.
plation of special clemency. During the year
many availed themselves of the general pro.
vision, and many more would, only that the
signs of bad faith In some led to such precau.
tIOnary measures as rendered the practical
process less easy and certain. During the same |
time, also. special pardons have been granted |
to individuals of the excepted classes, and no |
voluntary application has been denied. Thus,
practically, the door has been for a full year |
open to all, except such as were not in con. |
dition to make free choice; that is, such as were
in custody or under constraint It'll still open |
to all. But the time may come-probabIy will |
come-when public duty shall demand that |
it be closed, and that, in lieu, more rigorous |
measures than heretofore shall be adopted"
A profound respect for the opinions OF that |
great and good man, Abraham Lincoln, late |
President Of the United States, induces me to
ponder long and well before can venture to
express an opinion differing even in a shade |
from his. But all who had the good fortune |