Daily State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1865-06-20
EXPLOSION AT CHICAGO
Ac.. &c. Ac. &C.. &C.
The Conspiracy GT al-ArgumentO of
aeyerdy Johnson

~ u q
aeverdy Johnson.
WASHINGTON, June l9.-Mr. CIampitt read
the argument addressed 10 the President and
gentlemen of the Court, signed by the Hon
Reverdy johnson, and concurred in by Nc Fresd
A. Aiken aud Mr John II Clampilt, associate
counsel Tor Mrs. Mary Z. Surrau.
Ii commences by asking II the Commission has
jurisdiction ia the case before IL, and calling al
teuuon to The great Importance of the question
refers to the duty OF the Commission 10 consider
Il. and declares If the Commission is unauthor-
lied, the act establishing t - usurpation on
The part oi the Executive.
liz then proceeds TO say that the Constitution
defines the powers and duties of the Executive
and provides punishment, tor his violation OF
them; therefore be possesses no powers beyond
what the Constitution coniers, and this act, be-
yond that authority, can furnish no defense
against the legal consequences OF what are done
under It, and whatever is done is utterly void
The Commission must, therefore, decide this
question before pronOuncing judgment. That
tribunal like this has no jurisdiction over them
other than military Ofienses. is believed to be
evident. That Oiienses defined AMI punished by
the civil law, and whose trial is provided by the
same law. are not the subjects OF military juris
diction, IS OF course true. A military "a dis.
tlnguished from civil 0hense, must therefore he
made TO appear, and when IL is IL must also ap
pear that military law provides for its trial. If
that las does not furnish a mode of trial or sffix
the punishment the case is uupro yided tor and
as lar as the military power is concerned
Is to 20 unpublished; but as either the
civil. common or statute Law embraces
every species Of ofense that the Uui,ed
States, or States have ueemed il necessary TO
punish. IN all such cases the civil courts are
clothed with every necessary jurisdiction Ina
military court, II the charge does not state
crime provided for generally or specifically by
any OF the articles OF war, the prisoner must be
discharged 20 Brien. pa ge 235 Nor is il suf-
hcient that the cnsrges oil = crime known TO the
military law, that the offender when be commits
It must oe subject to military jurisdiction. The
general law has supreme and uudspu;ed jurisdic-
tlon over all. The military Law puts forth no
such declaration liz aims solely TO enforce on the
soldier the additional duties be has assumed IL
constitutes tribunals for the trial of breaches OF
military duty only. % Brien. pages % and 81
The one code, the civil, embraces all citizens
whether soldiers or not; the other. the military
has no jurisdiction over any citizens, as such III
the PROVISIONS vi the Constitution clearly main.
tain the same doctrine, the Executive has no
authority TO declare war. 10 raise aud support
armies, " provide aud maintain a navy, or TO
make rules tor tue government and regulation o
either force. These powers are exclusively in
laws Tor its government and regulation. except
as Congress shall provide The power Of Con
gress was granted by the convention without
objection la England the K,us IL generalissimo
Of the whole klngdom-hss TINS power through
L ,rIlameut. anu has frequently intetposed and
regulated Tor ITSELF. Bus with US iI was thought
safest 10 give the entire power 10 Congress since
-umm Try and severe punishment mil BIT be inflcl-
ed No member OF the convention. or com
al.
mated that even this Congressional power could
Oe applied TO citizens not belonging ~ the army
or navy. The powers given TO Congress are to
make rules Tor the Government anu regulations
OF the land and naval forces No arlhce OF in.
genulty can make those words include those who
do not belong 10 the army and navy. and they
are, therefore, 10 be construed 10 exclude all
Others as il negative words TO that effect had
been added
And this is not Only the O6you, meaning OF
the terms considered by themselves, but Is dem
onstratable from other PROVISIONS OF the Cun>ti-
tuition. 80 jealous were our ancestors OF un.
granted powers and 80 vigilant to protect The CHI
zen against II. that they were unwilling 70 leave
hun 10 the safeguards which a proper construc-
ton OF the Constitution, - originally adopted
furnished. la this they resolved that nothing
should be left in doubt The, determined there
fore. not only 10 guard him against executive
and judicial but against congressional abuse
With this view they adopted the nth consiitu
tiona amendment, which declares that no per
son shall be held TO answer Tor capital or other
Infamous crimes unless on presentment or in
dctment Of a grand jury. e1cep; in cases arising
in the land or naval force, or in the mllitis wheu
IN active service in time OF war or public danger
This view is elaborated by reference to the high
esi legal authority, and the constitutional Ques-
tons are discussed al length
The Sixth Amendment, which our fathers
thought so vital 10 individual liberty, when
sailed by the Government, prosecution claims but
new guarantee. In The course of his srgu
ment, Mr. johnson said be bad brought forw ard
this question OF jurisdiction only because he con
scienuously believed it To be has duty. be did
not seek tor immunity 10 any one engaged in
the horrd crimes OF the Ii b - April. Over
them the Civil Courts of this ID strict had ample
jurisdiction, and will faithfully exercise it il the
cases are remanded 10 them
As 10 the case OF Mrs. Surrait he referred TO
her as woman who was educated a. devOut
Christian, ever kind, sfectionste and charitable:
with 10 motive disclosed that could have
caused her 10 participate n the crime in question
de said We had no evidence uncontradicted
showing she was a participant He would say
uoIhlng OF the testimony that would be received
10y h. associates the evidence OF Weichmsn
,nd LOyd He aid II the facts they stated were
true. their knOs edge OF the purpose TO commit
The crimes. aud their participation ia them is much
more satisfactorily established than the alleged
Knowledge and participation Of Mrs Surr.it
Mr.. Aiken stated TO the Court that he should
not be prepared 70 read the argument 10 the case
of Mrs Suratt until Wednesday The delay
vas attributable TO the voluminous evidence pre-
viously 10 be examined bs him
Al Restrictions ON Trade TO be Abo.