The evening Argus. [volume] (Rock Island, Ill.) 1861-1871, 1866-05-30
DAVIS AND CHASE.
THE CHEF JUSTICES RECORD As AN
ADVOCATE Or SECESSION AND
STATE SUPREMACY.
Reasons for Chase's UnWilIingnesS 10
Preside at the Trial of Davis.
&C., &C., &c.
From the Cincinnati Commercial.


The telegraph from Washington announ-
ces, periodically, some sensation about the
trial of the rebel chief, and the public natur-
ally inquire why something Is not done about
the matter. The latest news is that Chief
Justice Chase peremptorily refuses 20 hold
a circuit court in Virginia on the pretext
that the writ of habeas corpus Is still suspen-
ded, notwithstanding the supreme court OF
the United States has been sitting for years
under the shadow ct bayonets, with
martial law prevailing In the District OF
Columbia, and the circuit court of Kentucky
has teen held for a long time under similar
circumstances, without dreaming Of its dig
nifty being thereby infringed in the least de-
gree.
as appears from the Published correspon-
dence communicated to congress, addressed
note to Chief Justice Chase, lnqulrlng
when he would hold his court in Virginia,
as there were important cases or treason tor
trial, and received a reply that the court
could not be held The president then, in
his annual message, in December, 1865, call
ed the especial attention of congress to the
necessity of some legislation to remove any
difficulties in the way of holding trials for
treason, Senator Doolittle, In conformity
with this suggestion, introduced bill on
d the subject which has since been reported
{ from the Judiciary COMMITTEE OF the senate,
providing that, in trials for treason, jurors
s. who are able to render an impartial verdict
on the evidence shall not be disqualified ON
account of having formed and expressed an
opinion from the publication of facts of pn5-
lie nosoriety. or from hearsay, and also al
E lowing writ Of error to the supreme court
of the United States, in order that there may
s be an adjudicated precedent OF the highest
judicial tribunal on all questions involved In
- the issue.
Now the chief difficulty in the way OF a trial
of Jefferson Davis for treason has been IN the
obtaining Jury because of the public no.
. | soYity of the facts in the case--an obstacle
that has become serious IN the trial OF
/ criminals, that already several states have
! enacted laws declaring that jurors shall not
be disqualified by having formed and ex.
pressed an opinion from hearsay and news
] paper publications for it was fast becoming,
, practically, almost the rule that the greater
and more notorious the criminal, the less
chance of furnishing him, from the impossl-
bility of getting an intelligent and competent
4 Jury in the case The state of Ohio enacted
!, a law to this effect March 8, 1860; which
was held constitutional by her supreme court
!, this winter, in the case of Cooper, hung for
1 murder in Portage county.
81, The bill of Senator Doolit5le was drawn &c
accord with the ruling of Chief Justice Mar
shall. in the celebrated Burr case who, after
1 full argument by distinguished counsel, or
II the very question of challenges TO jury
4fi said:
~ ssIt, for example, juror had said that levyIn!
- an army for the purpose OF sub the govern
81 mept OF the United States by force, and arrayIn
Ill that army in a warlike manner amounted to treas
III on no person could suppose him on that accoun
q unfit to serve on the jury. The opinion would b
aF one in which all must concur. The argumen
I'LL drawn from the situation OF England during tn
rebellion of Ills and l745, with respect t
FL certain prominent characters whose situation ad
it a matter OF unusual noterlety, that they wer
the objects of the law, is founded entirely on tn
Il absolute necessity of the case, and the total an
"a obvious i'm possibility of obtaining jury who's
!. minds were not already made up While this net
f# essity exists the rule, perhaps, must bend to 1t
II but the rule will bend further than 10 require
nv actual ecessity'' (Burr's trial, by DR.. Rober
/. son, vol. l, PIP. 4lo, 4lS.)
~ Col. Burr after this intimation from tn
H. court, on account of the delay OF obtainln
90 Jurors consented 10 be tried by men VINO a.
ia olared they had formed and expressed an III
E.ss f.vorahle opinion in his case, though the
q believed that they could render an lmparti'
1T verdict. according to the evidence produce
.4 before them on the trial.
MI Summer and Stevens, with tde'r peculisrl
sN Ioyal clique have perslsteutiy obstrueted an
congressional action ON thI5 practical Dill
the latter declaring that to try and execut
Jefferson Davis for treason you'd ba simpl
judicial murder, because it is in conflict wit
Il their favorite theory that Davis Is to be treat
ed a. a beiligerent, and the so-calied secedet
ST states as conquered territories-a doctrine il
Z direcs conflict with the decision OF the Unite
4, States supreme court in the prize cases, II
!. 4 which the judges, though differing as to tn
II time our OWL war began, unanimously he'll
q that while the government, during Its pro
gress, could treat the rebels as bslligerents
Il this did not divert their allegiance, or oper
d ate as an estoppel 60 their punishment fol
q treason after peace was restored. Il Black
IL ~ Rep. 673, GA
s. The true reason of the persistent effort O
IT, ,a,+a;n noliticians of the radical school I
nravan. tho trial of Jefferson Davis before
pp;r;I tribunal ia that such a trial would max
III nasent to the public the tact that, IN regar
- the doctrins of state rights, upon who
Isffarson Davis justified secession and wa
. yainst coercion by the general government
HI thew stand, by their previous record anu Q
.as on;nions on identically the san
platform, only he carried CUT nis sne ra al
r .ha overt act Of treason and foroiDie lesl
tsnce to law by openly levylng war aga gun;
-. foderal authority. Two extreme PAL
II The ene subordinating the Union u !. sn :,
L LIZ md even other considerations 20 u
domination and perpetua'lon s =. si .ha 'ifJn;o
she other determined to oissoivs s s n.Eo.-;s
II SC slavery could not be got rio OF o'ue1 "''