Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1865-06-27

burned all the letters and papers they had re.
ceived from Richmond, for tear some YANKEE
would get them to use IN Washington: Wit
ness would say here Tat he never heard West
Gen Wallace.-"Dfd Tucker say whe It waa
that posted him as to what was going on mere.
Witness-"He said they had friends in the
Court did not ,a az hit fSI srsnT
Judge Advocate Holt here announced that
the testimony for the prosecution was closed
ceeded to read the argument upon the juris.
Mr.. Bingham briefly referred to the atrocity
OF the crime wi tn which the prisoners were
CHARGED, and said that in presenting hts views
upon the question Of law, raised by the sew
eral counsel for the defense, and also on the
testimony adduced for and againstthe accused
and Just to the country, ana TO his own con.
yictions The issue joined involved the high.
est interests of the accused, and IN MS Judgmeht
United states It was matter OF great mo-
ment to all the people Of this country that the
prisoners be lawfully tried and lawfully con,
yicted or acquitted. wrongful and lllegai
con yiction OF q wrongful and illegal acquittal
upon this issue would impair somewhat the
security Of every mans life and shake the sta
bility Of the republic.
record was not simply the crime OF numbering
human being, but 1t was the crime OF killing
and numbering within the military department
o
of, Abraham Lincoln, then President OF the
United States and Commander In Chief OF the
army and navy thereof, and then and there as
saulting with intent to kill and murder Will
liam H. Seward, then Secretary OF State OF the
United States, and then and there lying In wait
to kill and murder Andrew johnson, then Vice
President of the United States, and Ulysses s.
Grant, then Lieutenant General and In COM
mand OF the armies Of the United States, in
pursuance Of reasonable conspiracy entered
into by the accused with one John Wilkes
Snrratt.
tion of Jefferson Davis, Jacob Thompson and
George N. Sanders and others, with intent
thereby to aid the existing rebellion and sub.
vert the Constitution and laws OF the United
States
The rebellion, in aid Of which this conspi-
racy was formed and this great public crime
committed. was prosecuted for the vindication
of no right, for the edress of ne wrong, but
was itself simply a criminal conspiracy and
crushing this rebellion the American people
take no step backward, and cast no reproach
upon their past history. That people now. as
ever, proclaim the selfevident truth that
whenever government becomes subversive Of
the ends of its creation, 1t Is the right and duty
of the people to alter and abolish 1t; but during
clearly proclaimed, as was their right and
| duty, both by law and by arms, that the gov
| eminent Of their own choice, humanely and
wisely adm ,s, oppressive OF none h and
| conspiracy or armed rebellion.
The government in preferring this charge
or Sc etion, but only the alleged parties to this
unnatural and atrocious conspiracy and
| crime. The President of the United States. In
chief Of the army, and by virtue Of the power
| vested in him by the Constitution apd laws
OF the United States, had constituted
military court to neas and mo
and for no other purpose whatever. To
this charge and specification the defendants
had pleaded, first, that the Court had no juris-
ipti N q
AS the Court had already overruled the plea
to the jurisdiction, it would be passed over in
silence by hin, but for the fact that grave
and elaborate argument had been read by
counsel for the accused, not only to show the
want OF jurisdiction. but to arraign the Presi-
dent Of the United States before the country
and the world as usurper Of power OF the
lives and liberties OF prisoners.
The argument against the jurisdiction Of
this Court rested upon the assumption that
crimes are eosnisabie and pn ana SSiS %ar no
tary commission or court martial, save crimes
s Tned g OF IL 81
| eral States when called into the actual seryice
| Of the United States But that was not all the
| argument: 1t affirmed that under this plea to
| the Jurisdiction, the accused had the right to
= demand that this Court shall decide that it is
mn, : judicial tribunal and had no legal ex-
isened.
This was rnuct extraordinary proposition
that the Presjdsut INFER the Constitution and
laws Of the United States, Vas not only not
authorized but absolutely forbidden 10 constl.
tute this Court for the triai of the accused, ana,
therefore, the act Of the President is void, and
the gentlemen who compose the tribunal VIII
out judicial authority or power, and are not IN
fact or in law court.
The Court had had no common exhibition OF
law learning in this defense, prepsred by a
Senator OF the United States; bat with all his
experience, and all his learning, and acenowl-
edeed ability, he had failed to show how tri-
bnnal constituted and sworn, as this had been,
to duly try ana determine the charge and
sk~
commission not authorised to hear or de-
termine any other issues whatever, coald right
fully entertain, or by any possibility pass
rent Of The senie%aa for its eonsideras,on
The members of this Court are officers in the
army Of the United States, and by orcsr OF
required to discharge this duty, and are
authorized in this capacity to discharge
NO other duty, to exercise no other judicial
Court to decide all questions of law and fact
arising in the trial of the case, but 1t bad no
power as Court to declare authority by which
shown by the learned gentleman who demand
ed the Court should so decide, that officers Of
the army may lawfully question in this man.
ner the orders Of the Commande--in- hief dis
obey, Get them aside and declare them nudity
and usurpation Even if 1t be conceded that
the officers thus detailed, by order OF the Com
his authority, was it possible in the nature Of
things that any body OF men constituted and
qualified as a tribunal Of Justice could sit in
Judgment upon the proposition that they were
not Conrt for any purpose and finally fecide
Judicially as a Court, that the Government
which appointed them was without autheri.
ty? The objection which he (Mr. Blngham)
urged to such proposition had been ruled BY
the Supreme Court Of the United States: That
urt says: ''The acceptance Of the Judicial
Office IL recognition OF the authority from
which 1t is derived. II Court should enter
upon the inquiry whether the authority ofthe
Government which established it existed) and
should come to the conclusion that the Govern
ment under which it acted had been put aside,
1t would cease to be Court and be incapable
OF prononncing Judicial decision upon the
question 1t undertook to try. Ifit decides. at
ence and authority of the Government under
which 1t is exercising Judicial power."3I Ln-
ther vs. Borden, Howard, 40l
The absurdity OF the proposition so elabo-
rateIy urged upon the consideration Of the
Court could not be saved from the ridIcute
and contempt Of sensible men by the pretence