The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1868-10-28


case In which McCardle was punished. or attempted
70 pc punished, by court martial convened
py the military commander, who was put IN charge
Oil 81 .ne district IN which Mississippi was si.ua.eS.
!ished some remarks which that high and mighty po
tentate thought were derogatory 70 his dignity ne
Lnneulately caused him to be arrested and nad nun
tried by military COMMISSION. The commission
found him guilty, condemned and convicted him 10
pay nne and 10 lie In jail. The case was Appealed
on writ or habeas corpus to the Supreme Court OF
the United States; and while 1t was pending, the
radicals In Congress, knowing that the principle OF
Migan and Bowles, in the state OF Indiana,
and knowing that the court would decide this
sct 70 De unconstitutional they passed aslaw taxing
me conviction, my fellow citizens, that they knew
the supreme Court would declare this law 10 be UNI
court TO 90 on but that they were satisfied there
would be an adverse decision from the courtY
And again, that was not the only decision; the one
covers the princp involved In this Reconstruction
act. The very essence and slst or that nr acss
about Sou 100000 s An White men In the south Of
their franchise and citizenship and conferrs the
franchise upon the negro thus giving the negro en-
simply to have given the negro the suffrage because
the white men had outnumbered them and would
Of S
give the negro the in those States. That
was done. This was done by legislative enactment,
and In case which arose in the State Of Missouri,
this same principle was involved. The same state
was deprivinQ certain men Of their franchises and
deprivng certain others OF the right to practice their
professions deprving people OF the right to teach,
'and deprtving ministers Of The Gospel OF
the right to preach unless they would before
hand take o certain Oath-a test oath. This
case my fellow citizens went before the Supreme
Court OF the United States In the case OF the Rev.
Father Cumming Catholic clergyman, who was in
dicted In the state OF Missouri for preaching the os-
pei OF Jesus Christ and Him crucied. He was found
guilty OF that offence, fined and thrown into prison.
HIS case was appealed to the Supreme Court, and
announced
decision was had was unconstitutional null and yod
because 10 was bill OF attander eJ post hct0 Inat
covers The principle, and to-day under that decision
am very happy 10 say that anybody can preach IN
the State OF Missouri without getting out commits
sion from the radical court.
That decision covers the principle OF this disqual-
ncation OF the Southern white on these reconstruc
ton acts. The court held that 1t was bill q at
tainder-that is TO say, men were charged win
crimes, and convicted or crime and punished Tor
crime by a legislative enactment, without trial, with
out witnesses and without jury, when the consti-
under judicial form, under law which says that
the offence charged was committed, and that
under this law be convicted or acquitted. Now, my
fellow citizens allow Inc TO illustrate for one mo-
ment, and briefly, the effect OF this measure by APP
plying 1t to an individual case OF legislative body
issuing bill OF attander and Furnishing a man under
II without trial. Look at the case OF Alexander II.
Sephens-lloud cheersl-a very distinguished gen.
tleman OF Georgia, who was the Vice President OF
the so-caed confederacy. YOu all know, my fellow
citizens that these reconstruction acts dlsranchise
him, take away from him his right OF suffrage and OF
citizenship and denyhim the right to deposit his ballot
contend that he cannot be punished, nor can any
other man IN the South be punished without trial
and verdict rendered by q jury, and that any act
by which they are punished-slngly, as individuals
or by states or communltlesmtnat any such act Is
clarcd to be SO in the case Of Mr.: Cummings ZAP
plause) Now suppose, fellow citizens, that Alick
Stephens could get trial before jury-and make
this supposition simply to show how outrageous 1t
Is 10 punish man and not give him chance to de-
f fen hnsesnppose they proved that ne was was
in the proof Of the. Georgia State Conven:
ton that he, Alexander Stephens, rose and
made the ablest speech that ever was made, North
or South, in defence OF the Union, and that as soon
az he had concluded that speech the only reply was
that OF q gentleman who read an article from the
New York Tribune, which said-sIf the people OF
the South choose to secede from the Union they have
perfect right to do so. They have as good right
to declare their independence OF Great Britain"
That was the response to his speech and In addition
soldiers-men armed out of the arsenas and arm.
cries OF the United States And the government had
permitted them 50 to arm themselves and thus the
and arbitrary government was established through
the South, by which all the men OF the South were
ment of the United states. Now suppose Stephens
the jury that the law was reciprocal OF the duty
that the government owed to the citiZenshat Ia to
say that the citizens owed duty OF allegiance to the
protection to the Citizen and that these duties were
reciprocal and inseparable, and II the government
refused fts protection It had no right to claim
the allegiance Of the citizen. Now, Alexander Ste
phens defended the government when the gov crn-
him, but gave the cOnspirat0rs with which to
overthrow and Cypress him and bear him down. and
think II these facts were brought before the jury,
ana they found that the government would not pro-
tect the citizen, then they would say that the gov
eminent could not convict him-(applause)-of trca-
son against the government. They say am exceed
mi
them all pardoned. II Is not so. l am will
ing that the government should come forward
and prosecute legally, under the existing laws any
OF them who are dangerous to the republic, or have
offended, and if they find them guilty that they
should be punished I would n IKE to see man BY
these laws, and In his case think I would under
take the prosecution myself-tlaughter)-and think
could prove that when he was Cabinet officer
under President Buchanan receiving salary from the
government, and with the oath 10 MAINTAIN the con-
stution still on his lips, he met one Albert Galatln
Brown OF Mississippi, VINO was coming ont in Obe-
dence call OF the government OF his State fight
against the government OF the United States and he
stand by them and I think / can promise you that
these back abOtionists Of the North viii concedc
verything you demand" Now, here was man. an
officer under the government, going TO a man who
was declaring his intention Of kindling war
against the United states, and patting him
on the back and telling him IL would be
success. tHisses and laughier.) On another
Indictment l would prove that he became
Secretary or War, and that IN the fortunes OF this
into the hands or the enemy and that he refused to
cxchang them for rebels captured unless the South
ern government agreed 10 exchange also the negroes
they had taken. More than that, men III the South
actually came forward and offered TO give u our
wounded who were in their hands without any
compensation or exchange whatever: but he
refused It, and then they asked that our
government would provide medicine and food
and supplies for these wounded men, and
Edwin NJ. stanton refused that also. (Ttisses)
Now, II any of those soldiers were on this jury
against Stanton what do you suppose would he their
verdict? Voices-"GuIltyl guilty guilty ~ in the
two cases there Is this difference howeverthere IL
law standing which prevents the bringing Of any suit
against Mr.. Stanton or any indictment against him.
aud II that were laid aside would like TO see ihis
case tried. If you recollect, this man Alexander
Stephens was imprisoned and thrown into Fort
Warren aud Stanton turned the key on him.
should like 10 see on which side OF
the door the traitor stood when Stanton
turned that key on him. (Applause.l In these
remarks have tired TO show the effects OF this bin
OF attainder, and will say that under II trial might
also be had OF this Buter-tupr0arious shouts OF
"Spoons,n spoons and laughter)-on this suit
But am opposed to this principle or method Of try
ing and condemning our citizens because 1t Ia I'M
constitutional and because II man can be punished