Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1867-06-14
The journal Wants Knowledge
No Paper Needs It More,

| NV per INcCuS NAOEes
"THE principles of the Democratic party
mulged by Thomas Jefferson through his
administration of government."-S States
l man. So. I eN ~
l Thomas Jefferson promulged" one
tprinciple which bore close resemblance to
the Radicalism of the present day. When
Aaron Burr tried to detach the Western
and Southwestern States and territories
from the Union, Jefferson regarded the aci
as treason, and used his personal and off,
tcfat influence to have Burr convicted of the
offense and hanged as a traitor. Was that
sound Democracy? Was it identical with
1.-THE Democracy of to-day ?-Jornal. & sE
| As JEFF. DAVIS was liberated by an Alb.
olition Judge, with the consent of an Alb
olition District Attorney, and as his bail
bond was headed by the leading editor Of
the Abolition party, we fail to see the per-
tinence, although readily recognizing the
tmpertlnence of the question asked us.
When AARON BURR was tried fol
treason he was acquitted. The Admin
istration of Mr.. JEFFERSON thought
BURR guilty, and he was given a
speedy and public trial by an impartial
jury of the State and District wherein the
crime was supposed to have been commit
ted. In the case of DAVIS, no trial could
be had. For two years confined in prison,
and the Constitutional right of even the
meanest citizen for speedy trial denied
him. he was finally liberated ON bail by a
Judge who boasted that he could pack a
Jury to convict, but in doing so, acknowl-
edged that an impartial jury would not.
To the Journals question we then
answer: It was ''sound Democracy" in the
Administration of Mr.. JEFFERSON to have
BURR tried for treason, for he was believed
to be guilty. The course pursued by the
present Administration and by Judge
CHASE in denying DAVIS trial, was
"identicar' with other violations of the
Constitution by the same parties.
The editor of the Tribune. the chie1 of
DAVIS bailsmen, quotes from DANIEL
WEBSTER to show that JEFFERSON DAVIS,
and those under his control and command,
committed no more treason than did the
fathers of the Revolution when they re-
sisted British aggression. The argument
of Mr.. WEBSTER, as stated in his Bunker
Hill Grafton, as given by the Tribune, is as
follows:
The battle of Bunker Hill was at
tended with the most important effects
beyond its immediate result as q mill
tary engagement. 1t created at once
a state of open public war. There could
aaoeo be no longer question in proceeding
against indtUtdadls, as gully of treason or re-
beLLiOn. That fearful crisis was past. The
appeal now lay to the sword; and the only
question was, whether the spirit and re-
IF he 10 nnf 81
the object should be accomplished.
''Bear in mind that our fathers had not
even declared their independence on the
18th of June, 1875, when they fought at
Bunker Hill-nay, they had not definitely
resolved on separation from the mother
country. In the eye of British law-and of
the law of nations, for that matter-they
were simply rebels, resisting the authority
and army of their legitimate king. Yet Mr..
Webster holds that the naked fact that
they resisted in battle array, under the
command of their constituted local author
tiles, precluded any civil proceedings
against them as individuals guilty of trea
son or rebellion
According to this, Mr.. GREELEY believed
DAVIS committed no crime for which he
could be punished by law. His con-
finement for two years in prison was an
outrage upon an innocent man. This be-
lief prompted him to offer his property as
security for DAVIS, if the Court would re-
lease him, and for this act, at once, "a con-
centrated howl of indignation and rage
was sent up from every side against" Mr..
GREELEY, as we have the authority of that
gentleman for saying, "by the little crea-
lures whom God, for some inscrutable
BILE purpose, permits to edit majority of
the minor journals" of the Abolition party,
of which the editor of the Morning Jour
nal has our permission to include himself.