The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1866-04-22

was necessary, anu Wnht power CDnxftss hnu W -.
law for the trial Of persons for crimes committed mere
t1ore.
Mr. ELDRrDGE suggested. az a conditional question,
what the President bad 10 do with H.
Mr. surn said he knew that Congress could not pass
post fac,o law, but he could understand very wen
the effort that being made by 10 avoid by hti
CATION or legislation the bringing Of these men 10
trial II because they II would afoct tho true
policy adopted by President Johnson.
Mr. BRo0AALL inquired what power Congress had IN inc
natter
Mr. SMITH retorted by asking what power the President
hadY
Mr. BRooxArL suggested that he had the power TO
execute existing laws
Mr. SMITH said that President johnson had pursued
the policy inauguated by President Lincoln ana tnat
Congress would dare destroy It, because Congress
felt the force and effect OF that policy on the country
and knew that tho great OF the Union people
would soon rise and maintain it, and that the leaders
who were opposing Il would 20 down ana DO forgo''en
and unwept
dent had the ID OF October 1865 addressed letter
TO Chief Justice Chase the subject and that the CHIEF
Justice the 18th OF the month replied decln
ing TO hold such court had been suggested by tho
President and suggesting trial by military commission
Mr. SMITH knew that was So for no had read II In the
Tribsme
Mr. SHEIIABARGxR, trep> OF Ohio, desired TO make
statement In that connection He said that within few
days past the Attorney General Of the United states
stated 70 him and another gentleman not In confidence
or privately that the position taken by the Chief Justice
proper as the condition OF the country was sach a.
eise than q mockery.
Mr. SMITH asked If that were whether II would not
y
Instituted 10 try these men The position assumed oy
Congress- TO screen the Chief Justice and other men and
throw the whole onus OF complaint on the President
those who assumed IT, He referred 10 the resolution Oh
ercd by Mr. Stevens In 1862 declaring that II any per-
should propose TO make peace upon any Other basis
than the integrity and union OF the United States he
would DO guilty OF high crime He Mr SMITH adopted
that principle and no held that II were applied now to
the gentleman who offered the resolution he would be
convicted OF high crimes
Mr. RITTER, DEM Of KY, next addressed the House
on the question chiefly OF the relative value Of slave
labor and free labor contendng that slave labor was
more profitable 10 State, and comparing the product
and property statistics OF Ohio aud Kentucky ana OF
Illinois ard Alabama He subsequently admitted, how
ever response 10 Mr. Kelley that tho statistics he had
cited embraced the assessed value OF the slaves He
appealed TO Congress IL II did not desire the reputation
OF the federal debt stop in mad career and TO
its efforts force its peculiar views on The people OF the
late slave States They should initiate the noble example
of the President and open the doors Of Congress 10 the
representatives duly elected Each State should be left
control its internal affairs subject TO the consti
tuition and the laws OF the unitc States This was the
only way In which they could have a restored Union.
Mr. SnEIABARGER next addressed tho House. He
remarked that some weeks ago he bad introduced areso
luton requesting the Judiciary Committee 20 inquire as
whether IL competent under the American const
tuition for Congress TO declare forfeiture of citizenship
by act Of law where that citizenship had been volun-
tarIv abandoned OF dsoyalty Since that resolu
ton had been adopted he was glad 20 find that the
distinguished gentleman who occupied the char oil thc
House had been rejecting this great question IN tho
same direction 10 which that resolution pointed Ono
Of tho most distinguished lawyers Of the House had
idea and expressing with dstinctncss plan for
putting In application that power Of the government He
glad therefore TO end these and other evidences that
the mind Of the country being directed towards
this important practical question as one oil the means
which may be resorted TO for the purpose OF relieving
the government from those questions OF terrible enbar
rassnent by which II surrounded. Hc desired now
TO direct his remarks ~ thai great question in tho
breach between tho President Congress- touching the
method OF restoring the States In the recent revolt 10
controlling power the Union, and In the causes FOR
that breach most found the occasion for alarm
IT. however any faith could be placed in the most solemn
utterances OF Congress and OF tho President then they
did not differ, but did most precisely agrVe
upon at least OF the most important ana decisive
10 power He soemnly ayeued his belief that " the
President and Congress had the constitutional right TO
employ the 10 which we alluded Tor the rcstora-
ton OF the States and they would in good faith unite
apply and put fore the principle which both pro-
feSsed 10 hold the work OF restoration would be- II not
easy least ultimately certain and at once secured
That principle that In all those states truly loyal
people should alone have power Of goyernment either
by the holding or by the exercise Of the elective fran
ch,e thn the conscious and responsible leaders OF
the rebellion should be tried convicted and executed
II the loyal people OF hose states had iull control Of
their government no no reason why each OF those
States should not be welcomed to-day 70 the embrace
Of the parent government with an acclaim OF Joy almos
like that which angels gave at Bethieh-m The asowss
by the President OF desire for the exclusion Of rebels
from all powers Of government AMI Tor Their condign
In, 10 d.ai hr slnosty woald s 70 st,ribaso
President treachery 70 his professions and nhdey 10
all instincts OF honor snd MANHOOD ~ wonld oe 20
disgracefu 10 tho most vulgar political harlequin, but
which, in the ruler 81 great and generous people who
had honored aud trusted him, would be- utterly dis
gushing and Congress had already Indicated IT,
belief In the thing II was obvious, therefore,
should be sernly excluded by ordeals from gov
until they bring forth fruits meet for repent
ance He then proceeded 70 discuss nc rgh, OF con.
renounced H. sustaining his position on the constitution
international Law and ON precedents established and
practised by foreign governments and followed by tho
the Oi perrOnA who Ha1
been engaged In Shay's rebellion In hassachnsctts
Mr. HAIS (rep1 Of " ", inquired whether. IN the
prcceden from the Of foreign governments
the persons whose rights were forfeited had not been
hrsi tired and found guilty by court Of competent jurts
dict0n
Mr. sntIaaARaKR replied that the forfeiture took a.
feet by the act Of this sovereign or the hw-making
power, without the ntcrposition Of judicial power
Mr. HaLg also inquired whether in the case Of shay =
rebellion forfeiture Of civil rights did not apply excl1-
siyey TO those who had been tired and convicted
Mr.. SHkfLAnARGER replied IN the negative
Mr. HAIR wanted 10 know. then. how the fact that
the per had been engaged Ia rebellion had been
sscsrtaincd,
Nr SH,IIsn.rGERs answer failed 10 throw much light
on that point but lac continued bis argument
Mr.. Has Interrupted him 10 ask another question
The drfft o' the gentleman Argument he said,
VA. 10 show that Congress might lawfully enact
forfeiture of citizenship penalty for having been
engaged In rebellion againa the government He sub.
mttei whether there not another diihcuiy In tho
casc namc thai by express provision OF the cons
tutien, which the gentleman bad iaed 70 notice The IN
position of penalty for any crime whatever, committed
bsfe the passage Of the act b. expressly and directly
within the dcnnltiop Of Is aoo Law and whether
thereby forbidden by the oonsttutiOn Just
snc-tually bills OF aitainder wsr- forbidden. "
Congress might by legislation enact the penalty Of for
feue Of ciiEenshiP for rebellion or dsoyaty, nlght
by the rule enact any other different penalty
for an offence committed before the passage ~ the art
Mr sHKrLAHsRan replied that thai provision of tho
constitution bad no application 20 tn matter be Wa
Discussing That provision related 10 the punishment
~ crime such. and ~ tn forfeiture q rizhts In
punishment 81 crime What he Considering
an eyercse Of national sovereignty not In prnishment
OF crime but simply In deprNng mon who by tcis %
dsoy atty, had voluntarily renowned ther Aegnnco ~
Their own government % the right % resume Their
% IDEAL power he would not have What be aid
pushed % any Otheg conseqnsnce than the c0nse-
quenre 10 which he pus ssd his argum~u,,
namely that the nght 81 citzetNbip being % national
donation of national definition and q national control
VS. a fnatier the deprivation 81 whigh consequence
q voluntary surrender ~ the obligations ~ citzruatip
va bot hike an nnetion u punishment for cnmo bat
va simply declaration q the sovereign poser that
they hGd SURRENDERED their political franchises thsy