The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1866-03-12

SNAAeAJ' L WOulu SUOu IDlllk Oh all aDD1al
from the military tribunal that sat in the CIV
OF Washington and condemned to death the
murderers OF our late Pre- ;ident, 10 the judi.
cial tribunals of the country! Where militia
ry authority bears sway, where the courts are
overcome, IS 1t not an absurdity to say that
you must have presentment of grand
jury and trial in a court? Sir. it is an old
adaSe. that the law never requires impossible
ties. There was time when in all these re-
belllous States there was not one judicial Off
Ger recognizing the authority Of the Govern
meDt OF the United States, when there was
not one single court where q grand Jury could
be empanelied to maintain the law and Con-
stitution OF the United States; and are we to
be told, and is it to be seriously argued, that
in district OF country thus situated, where
courts cannot be held, where, in the confii Il of
arms, the civil tribunals are overborne and ex-
PEELED, and where martial law prevails, that no
person can be tried or punished for any offence
by the military power, which is the only pow
er in existence at the time?
All parts of the Constitution of the United
States are to be construed together and in har-
mony with each other; and although the
Constitution does provide for the protection of
the citizens, that he shall not be tried for
criminal offence except on the Indictment or
presentment of grand jury, and that he shall
be entitled to a trial before petit jury, mani
testify these clauses of the Constitution apply
to condition of things where it is possible to
have court, have grand jury and petit jul
ry empanelled, and to bring the offender to
justice before the civil tribunals; and the fra
mers OF the Constitution never intended, and
such is not the meaning of the instrument,
that when the civil tribunals were overborne
and grand jury could not be empanelled, still
you must have the presentment or indictment
OF grand jury. No, sir; the same Constitu-
ton that contains these guarantees for the
protection of the citizen in localities where
the courts are in operation, and where they
are not interrupted in the peaceable admins
tration of justice, contains also clause au-
thorizing the calling out the militia to enforce
the laws of the Union, and to put down insur-
rection and rebellion; and when this army is
called forth it operates, Mr. President, not as
civil tribunals, through juries and courts, but
it operates as armies operate. 1t proceeds to
put down rebellion by Staying the rebel, if he
is found in arms, without trial in court, with
out empanelling juries; but, sir3it does it in
the exercise OF the power which is conferred
upon the army. 1t acts as an army, and not
as a court, and the Constitution authorizes it
to act as an army ard not as court, and the
very reason Of giving this power to call forth
the army, is because the courts are'unable to
preserve the peace and punish offenders.
The President says:
81 cannot reconcile system of military jul
risdiction Of this kind with the words OF the
Constitution"
Sir, if might be permitted to ask question
of the President of the United States. Iwould
inquire if you cannot reconcile system of
military jurisdiction of this kind with the
words of the Constitution, why haveyou been
exercising it? Why have you been organizing
courts martial and military commissions all
over the South, trying offenders and Furnishing
some of them with death? Why have you
authorized the present freedmen's bureau to
hold bureau courts all through the Soulh?-
This has all been dome by your permission,
and is being done to-day. Then, sir, if you
are still in the exercise of this power now, if
you have been exercising it from the day you
became President OF the United States, howis
it that you cannot reconcile a system OF juris-
diction of this kind with the words of the
Constitution?
Sir, does it detract from the Presidents au-
thority to have the sanction of law? l want
to give the sanction. / do not object to the
exercise of this military authority of the Pres
ident in the rebellious States. i believe 1t Is
Constitutional and legitimate and necessary;
but believe Congress has authority to regu-
late it, / believe Congress has authority to
direct that this military jurisdiction shall be
eAcTClS6u ny tudI DTduCu VI tuG huOWu
as the freedmen's bureau, as well as by any
other branch of the army.
But the President tells us further that the
rebellion is, in fact, at an end. The measure,
therefore, seems as inconsistent with the ac
tual condition of the country as it Is at vari-
ance with the Constitution of the United
States"
Sir, in reply to that need only ask ques-
ton, which, believe, l nave once already
asked. If the rebellion is at an end, will any
body tell me by what authority the President
of the Uunited States suspends the writ Of hd-
beas corpus in those States where 1t existed?
The act of Congress OF March, 1868, author
lied the President of the United States to sus-
pend the writ of hGbeas corpus during the
present rebellion. He saws 1t is at an end
BY what authority, then, does he suspend the
writ? The Constitution of the United States
declares that the writ of habsas corpus that
great writ of right for the protection of the
citizen, shall only be suspended when in cases
of rebellion or invasion the public safety re-
quires it. The President tells us, officially,
that the rebellion is ended We know there
is no invasion. By what authority, then, does
he declare the writ of R1beds corpus suspend
ed? Sir, the rebellion is ended, so far as the
conflict Of arms is concerned; but the conse-
quences of the rebellion are not ended; peace
is not restored; the safety OF citizens where
the rebellion existed is not yet established, and
till it is, till the courts can be re-established,
till they can administer justice peaceably, till
the citizens can be protected from lawless
hands, from prejudiced SHAREHOLDERS, from in
eensed rebels, the military authority may prop
erly be continued in all these States, and the
President is authorized, in my opinion, to sus-
pend the writ Of hdbeds corpus. But, sir, by
his own declaration let him stand or fall. 1t
it is competent to suspend the writ, it it is
competent for military tribunals to sit all
through the South and entertain military jul
risdiction, this bill, which does not continue
military jurisdiction, does not establish mill
tary jurisdiction, but only authorizes the Off
GERS of this bureau, while. military jurisdiction
prevails, to take charge of that particular class
of cases affecting the refugee or freedman
where he is Disseminated against, cannot be
obnoxious to any constitutional objection. !
The President further says that
"This bill proposes to make the freedmen's
bureau, established by the act of 1885, as one
of many great and extraordinary military
measures to suppress formidable rebellion,
permanent branch of the public adminstra-
ton, with its powers greatly enlarged"
That is a mistake. 1t is not intended, I ap-
prehend, by anybody, certainly not by me, to
make it permanent branch of the public adj
ministration; ami / am quite sure that the
powers OF the bureau are not by the amenda-
tory bill greatly enlarged. A careful examin-
alton of the amendment will show that it is
in some respects restriction on the powers
already exercised.
The President says: . ls....
"The third section of the bill authorizes
general and unlimited grant of support to the
destitute and and suffering refugees and freed
men, their wives and children"
Noxv LOT TIC caa If n doas tbo+ Tn tba frot
place let us see what the original law was
The second section of the original act is in
these words:
"That the Secretary of War may direct
such issues of provisions, clothing and fuel as
he may deem needful for the immediate and
temporary shelter and supply of destitute and
suffering refugees and freedmen, and their
wives and children, under such rules and reg
ulations as he may direct"
That is the present law, enacted March Sd,
1865. Now, what is the third section of the