Nashville union and dispatch. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1866-1868, 1867-01-04

| thus serving, suTrenders his right to be
tried By the civil courts. Al other persons,
] citizens of States where thecOurts are open.
| if charged with crime, are guaranteed the
| inestimable privilege Of trial by jury. This
privilege is a vital principle, underlying
| the whole administration OF criminal JUS
| tice it is not held By sutierance, and can
not be FILTERED away on any plea Of State
| or political necessity. When peace pre-
| walls. and the authority of the government
ia undisputed, there is no difficulty Of pre-
serving the safeguards Of liberty; for the
| ordinary modesOf trial arenever neglected,
| and no one wishes it otherwise. But if So
| eiety is troubled by civil eommOtiOn-if
| The passions OF men are aroused and the
| restraints of law weakened, if not disre-
| garded-these safeguards need, and should
! receive. the wltchful care OF those en-
trusted with the guardianship of the con-
I stitution and laws. In no other way can
we transmit to posterity, unimpaired, the
| blessings Of Liberty, consecTated by the sac
rifces Of the revolution.
II is claimed that martial law covers
with its broad mantle the proceedings of
This military commission. The proposition
| is this; That in a time of war the COM
rlander Of an armed force (if in his opinion
the exigencie5 of the country demand 1t,
and of which he is to judge, has the pow
er. within the lines of his military district
to suspend all civil rights and their rene
dies. and subject citizens as well as soldiers
10 the rule of his will; and in the exercise
Of his lawful authority cannot be restrained,
exceDt bv his superior officer or the Presi-
dent of the United States. If his position
IS sound TO the extent claimed, thep when
war exists foreign or domestic, and the
country Is subdiyided into military depart
nents for mere convenience, the COM
mander of one Of them can, if he chooses,
within his limits, on the plea of necessity,
with the approval of the Executive, substi-
tute military force for and to the exclusion
of the laws, and punish all persons as he
thinks right and proper without liked or
certain rules.
The statement of this proposition shows
its importaDce for, if true, republican gov
eminent is failure, and there is an end of
liberty regulated bv law. Martial law, es-
tablisbed on such a basis, destroys every
Guaranty of the constitution, and etlectual
" renders the military independent of
and sunerior to the civil power"-the at
temnt tn do which by the King of Great
Britain was deemed by our fathers such an
offense that they assigned II to the world as
one of the causes which impelled them TO
declare their Independence. Civil liberty
and this kind of martial law cannot endure
together; the antogOnism IL lrreconcilable,
and in the conflict one or the other must
perish.
This nation, as experience has proved,
cannot always remain at peace anu has no
right to expect that it will always hAyo
wise and humane rulers, sincerely attach
ed 10 the principles Of the constitution.
Wicked men, ambitious OF power, with ha-
tired of liberty, and contempt OF law, may
fiji the place once occupied by Washing
ton and Lincoln; and, if this right Is con
coded. and the Calamities OF war again be-
fall us, the dangers TO human liberty are
frightfnl 10 contemplate. II our fathers had
failed to providefOr Just such contingency
they would have been false to the trust repo5-
ed in them. They knew-the history OF the
world told them-the nation they were
founding, be its existence short or long,
would beinyolyed in war-how often or how
long continued, human foresight could not
tell0-and that unlimited power, wherever
lodged at such time, was especially haz-
ar5ous To freemen. For this and other
eoually weighty reasons, they secured the
| inheritance they had fought to maintain,
! by incorporating ina written constitution
| the safeguards which time had proved es.
| saniial to its preservation. Not one Of
| these safeguards can the President, or Con
greas. or the Judiciary disturb, except the
one concerning the writ of habeas corpus.
II Is essential to the safety of every gov
eminent that. in a great crisis like the one
we have inst passed through, there should
! he n mower somewhere of suspending the
writ Of babeas corpus In every war there
| are men of previously good character
| wicked enough to counsel their fellow
citizens to resist the measures deemed
necessary by a good government to sustain
its lust authority and overthrow its enc
mics. and their influence may lead 10
dangerous combinations. In the emergency
| of the times an immediate public investi-
cation, according to law, may not be posi-
bic: and vet the peril 10 the country may
| he too imminent to suffer such persons TO
| oo at large Unquestionably, there is then
an exigency which demands that the gov
| eminent. if it should see fit, in the exercise
| of proper discretion, TO make arrests,
| shouId not he required to produce the per-
sons arrested in answer to writ OF habeaS
corpus. The constitution goes no further
| II does not say after a writ of habeas cor
nus IS denied a citizen, that he shall be
tried otherwise than by the course of the
common law; if it had intended this re-
suIt. it was easy by the use of direct words
| 10 have accomplished it. The illustriOus
men who framed that instrument were
guarding the foundations of civil liberty
against the abuses of unlimited power
they were full of wisdom, and the lessons
of history informed them that trial by ar
established court, assisted by an impartial
Jury. was the only sure way of protecting
The citizen against oppression and wrong
Knowing this, they limited the suspension
to one great right, and left the rest to re
main forever inyiolable. But it is insisted
that the safety Of the country in time o
var demands that this broad claim fo
martial law shall be sustained. If thi
were true. il could be well said that a coun
try preserved at the sacrifice of all thu
cardinal principles OF liberty Is not wortt
the cost Of preservation. Happily, 1t !
not 50.
Ii will be borne in mind that this ID mo-
a question of the power to proclaim MARTA
| law. when war exists in a community AMI
| the courts and civil authorities are over
| thrown. Nor is it question what rule
= military commander, at the head OF hi
) | army. can impose on States in rebellion I
| cripple their resources AID quell the insuI
5 | rection. The jurisdiction claimed IS muc
t | more extensive. The necessities of tn
service, during the late rebellion, requires
{ that the loyal States should be placed With
t | the limits of certain military districts, an
I | o,,,,,,,,,,Jars anuointpl in them. and IL
- nrged that this. in a military sense, consti
e tuted them the theatre OF military opera
} | tons; and, as in this case, Indiana Ia
e been and was again threatened with inv'
4 sion by the enemy, the occasion was luI
4 nished to establish martial law. The cor
. clusion does not follow from the premises
] | If armies were collected, they were to ;
e. employed in another locality, where Law
! were DISTRACTED and the national authorlt
disuuted On her soil there WAS no hO5til
n | foot. if once invaded, that invasion wa
r. at an end, and with it all preteIt for ma
tial law. Martial law cannot arise from
e threatened invasion. The necessity mu
i be actual and present the invasion rea
S such as eiiectually closes the courts and d
J. poses the civil administration.
] II is difficult to see how the safety OF Il
d country required martial law in Indian
J. Ifanv of her citizens were plotting treaso
n the mower of arrest could secure them unit
Is the government was prepared for their tria
Il when the courts were open and ready to Il
% them. II was as easy TO protect witness
+ before a civil as a military tribunal an
n IA there could be no wish to convict, exec
1t on sufficient legal evidence, surely an 0
Is I dained and established court was bett