Wyandot County Republican. [volume] (Upper Sandusky, Ohio) 1869-1903, 1871-06-08
NUMBER 80.
The MiIligan Case.

On the 5th of October, 1864. Lambdin |
p. Milligan, a citizen of Indiana. was ar
rested by order of General A. P. Hoyey.
commanding the District of Indiana. On
the 2ist of the same month he was tried
before a military commission, upon
charges of: 1, conspiracy against the Gov
ernment of the United States; 2, afford
ing aid and comfort to rebels against the
authority of the United States; 3, melting
insurrection; 4, disloyal practices, and 5,
viola ion of the laws of war. The SUBJ
stance of the charges was membership of
the order of American Knights or Sons of
Liberty. The charges were amplified in
military style by numerous specifications.
Upon these charges he was found guilty.
and sentenced to be hanged the sentence
was approved by the President, and Nav
~, 1865, was fixed as the day of execu-
ton.
On January 2, 1865, following these
proceedings of the military commission,
there was session of the Circuit Court
of the United States held at Indianapolis.
at which a grand jury was empaneled.
This court adjourned January 81, having
previously discharged the grand jury,
which had found no bill against Milligan
On the 10th of May, 1865, Milligan filed
a petition before the Circuit Court of In
MANA, setting forth all the facts, and pray
Ing that, under the act of Congress of
March 8, 1868, he might be brought be-
fore the court, and either turned over to
the proper civil tribunal to be proceeded
with according to the law of the land, or
discharged from custody. The Judges of
the Circuit Court were divided in opinion.
and the questions of difference were certi-
fed to the Supreme Court of the United
States. The case was argued in the
Supreme Court, and, at the opening of the
court in December, 1866, Justice Davis
delivered the judgment of the court, in
which it was held: 1. That the Federal
Court had jurisdiction of the case insti-
tuted by petition for the writ of hG6eds
corpus. 2. That the military commits
sion had no jurisdiction, and mo usages
OF war could sanction military trial there
for any offence whatever of a citizen in
civil life, in nowise connected with the
military service. Congress could grant no
such power; and, to the honor of our
National Legislature be it said, it has
never been provoked by the state of the
country even to attempt its exercise"
The act of 1888, authorizing the Presi-
dent to suspend the privilege of habeas
corpus, requires that lists of all persons
placed in arrest should be furnished to the
next succeeding term of the Federal Court
of the district, and, in case the grand Jury
should fail to indict, then the persons so
arrested should be discharged His trial
having been illegal, the court held that he
was entitled to be discharged from custody
under the terms of the act of 1868. In
this judgment the court was unanimous,
though four Judges dissented from several
points of the opinion as delivered by JUS
tice Davis.
The finding of the military commission
had never been approved by President
Lincoln; it was still unacted on by him
when he was killed, in April. 1865; but
President johnson approved it, and fixed
the 10th of May for Milligan's execution.
In June, 1865, the sentence was commut-
ed to imprisonment in the penitentisry,
where he was confined until the 10th of
April, 1866. For the imprisonment COM
mencing October, 1864, and ending April
10, 1866, Milligan brought suit in an action
of tresspass against General Hovey and
the other members of the commission and
this latter case has just been conclud-
ed In the United States Circuit Court at
Indianapolis. The facts were not disputed.
The defense was that the arrest grew out
of the plaintiffs conduct charged against
him before the military commission-that
he was guilty of these charges; that the
defendants were officers of the army, act
ing under orders without malice, and
using only necessary force; that the suit
having been brought March 13, 1868, it is
barred for all acts committed before March
13, 1858, by the two years limitation of
the act of 1868; that for the imprisonment
after that date the defendants are not
guilty. Upon the trial Judge Drummond
delivered the charge to the jury in which
he pvaminad thaoa eauarol Of la
defense. He held that, under the evidence
offered by the defense to prove that there
was state of war in Indiana at the time,
there was no proof that the civil courts
were closed, or that their proceedings
were interrupted or their judgments re-
sisted or defeated. There was no s1ch
difficulty in administering criminal Justice
according to law as to change the circum-
stances upon which the Supreme Court
had denied the legality of the trial by the
military commission. All defense, there
fore, as tn the action of that commission,
was overruled.
The third defence was the statute of
limitations of 1858. Judge Drummond,
while holding that it was not within the
power of Congress to grant absolute in
demnity for wrongs and injuries COM
mitted without authority of law, con-
sidered that it was competent to declare
that the remedies should be sought within
certain time, provided it were not so
short as in eff ct to destroy the remedy it.
self The term of two years was ample
time for the enforcement of any rights
protected by the constitution, and he held
the limitation to be obligatory in this case.
The plaintiff, though released April 10,
1866, had waited until the 18th of March,
1868, to institute his suit The plaintiff,
therefore, could recover only for the i'm
prisonment from March 13 to April 10,
1866. The jury, upon this charge, awarded
the plaintiff damages to the amount of S5.
Dhicnno Trihnne