Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1865-06-13
QDblloI .Statt,s'rlra,r(r|.. n.
From The New York Tribune, June O.. .
GaEKRRIF SMITH ON TREASON.

assembled laSC evening aC COOperolDSUIttUe
to listen to the Hon. Gerrit Smith. upon the
suSeSt i. "EssGsr Rsas HFsl gTs wagg wRgss
a Sure and Enduring Peace not, through
Perfdy and Vengeance, but through Justice
and Love-" The audience were evidently
also thoroughly in sympathy with the lec-
turer's views, and greeted their eloquent
and pointed enunciation with frequent and
hearty applause, 'lN'3 .1a2 o17ri
,.. THE LECTURE.
The powers OF my voice are such, said Mr..
Smith, that fear shall not be able to make
myself audible over all this spacious hall,
but shall do the best Lean. The South, in
plunging the nation into this horrid war,
committed the great crime of the age; the
North, under strong influence from the press
and the pulpits to punish the South, is In
danger of committing the mean crime OF
the age. [Applaus.] Lips and pens no
more influential Than mine can do but little
to avert this thing, but what little they can
do shall be done; for, If this mean crime
shall be committed, shall want the conso-
lation of knowing that /, at least, have no
responsibility. [Applause.l All over the
North, there's clamor for the blood of the
leading Rebels whom we have captured and
of those whom we hope yet to capture. ]
have no sympathy with this class. APP
plause.l The South, by Lees surrender, let
bloodshed cease, and all punishment should
cease. [Great tapplause.l OF course, have
no reference to the assassination OF our be-
loved President, nor to the starving OF
prisoners; let all merited punishment fall on
the authors of these Infamous aud Internal
crimes. [Cheers.1 My basis is simply that
the South shall not be punished for the Re-
bellion, or to use another word, that the
South shall not be punished for treason.
Now, ] do not say this because she has snf-
fered, in my Judgment enough, or because
the property of her people Is wasted and
she is reduced to desolation; LIDO not say
this because the South has not been guilty
of treason; but say that she is not
to be punished for treason,. because
not be. We came into the agreement
very reluctantly admit-to conduct this
war according to the rules Of war, by which
] mean the rules of international law. Now,
/ hold that our coming into this agreement
was waiver-an entire surrender OF our
right to punish the South for treason. APP
plause. That we came into this agree
ment, to conduct the war according to the
rules of war; is manifest. We followed
other nations, and accorded to the South
fbelliserent rights. The Supreme Court
of our nation unanimously acknowl-
edged those rights of the South. More
over, we have acted upon this agreement.
Instead of Furnishing, of killing, of trying,
convcting and furnishing prisoners for
treason, we have treated them rs prisoners
of war; as enemies at war with us; and
then, from time to time, we have exchanged
prisoners for those the enemy have taken
from us; there have been innumerable
truces between the enemy and ourselves,
for parole and other purposes, and there
have been formal, as well as informal ne
gotiations for peace between the North and
South. Why, on one occasion we recog-
nized her de tdcto nationality, and all its
outcoming dignities and rights, bylchoos-
ing for our Commissioners peacethe Pres
ident himself and the Secretary of State;
and these gentlemen did not wait to have
the Southern Commissioners come to them
sueingly and pleadingly, but they honored
the Commissioners of the South by going
more than halfway to meet them. APP
plause.] Now, all this, and much more
than this, Including especially our block
aiding of the Southern ports, goes to show,
beyond controversy, that we agreed with
the enemy to conduct this war according to
the laws of war, and such an agreement is
virtually an agreement to treat prisoners as
enemies in war. Now, how came we to con-
sent to conduct this war according to the
laws of war? In the first place, we came
to do so because the laws of war require it.
Let me read some authorities ON this point.
Yattel says: -... .- .......
'But when nation becomes divided into
two parties, absolutely independent and no
longer acknowledging a common superior,
the State is dissolved and the war between
the two parties stands on the same ground,
in every respect, as proper war between
two different nations; ay, they decide their
quarrel by armies, as two different nations
would do. The obligation to observe the
common laws of war toward each other, is
therefore absolutely indispensably binding
on both parties, and the same which the
Law Of Nature imposed on all nations in
transactions between State and State" a.f
Now, this is precisely our case, is it not?
FApplause.l Vattel has adapted his words
as precisely to our case as he could have
done if he had had it, and it only, in his
eye. For, bear in mind, when the Southern
half of this nation broke off from the North
ern halt, it becamea nation de .fdcto just as
clearly as our part Of the country became
a nation de facto, and each mad all the ma
chinery of a National Government. Then,
had not we just the same rights in conduct
ing this war as in conducting war, with
Mexico-no more, no less? [Great cheer
ing.] But" some will say, 'Vattel lived
more than a century ago." Yes; and all
the more shame to us if we, in this.age of
greater intelligence, cannot rise up to the
appreciation and, generous enlargement of
the principles which heso nobly advocated.
Now, hold that we ought to be prepared
for policies altogether more liberal and hu-
name than these. We ought to be prepared
to take the high ground that Hallam, the,
unsurpassed publicist of our own age, who
takes the ground that the instruction oftheI
war in England in the middle of the sew
enteenth century, which ended in the exc
cution of Charles L, should have been con-
Quoted, from the beginning to the end, ac-
cording to the law of war, and that the
Kings life should have been spared. / will
read what Hallam said. You must rernem-
Der that he died In 1859, only six years ago.
The speaker then read from Hallam as fol-
Charles adherents did not
form, as think they did not, the majority
of the people, they were at least more nu-
merous, beyond comparison, than those
who demanded or believed in his death.--
The steady, deliberate perseverance of so
considerable body, in any cause, takes
away the right of punishment from the
conquerers, beyond what their own safety
required. y They are to be judged by
rules of national, not municipal war;
[Applause.] ol iol ssH9d Ii8,l ~ lIlI-.al
S9And then see how emphatically Hallam
Is indorsed by another of the largest minds
of our day, Macaulay, who died In the same
year as that Hallam died-in '59. Macaulay
says; ,,, ao,,soa, oondonn. ,m r. tho ~, .vI