The Ouachita telegraph. [volume] (Monroe, La.) 1865-1889, 1871-05-20
y RADICAL VIEW OF IT.
From the NatiOn.1

III lIltl IL HIS aSSuIlltN lcI
the first time to take cognizancc of and
provide for the punishment of acts of
violence to the persons and property Of
private citizens. The bill is artfully
drawn, and its intent is vciicti in lam
guagc purpOscly vague and verbose
but still it's design is plain. 1t means
| that persons guilty of homicide, rob-
berry, arson, mayhem, assaults and the
like, may be brought within the juris-
diction Of the United States courts, and
| be punished by United States authori-
| ties. 1t means this or nothing. We
are familiar with its historical origin,
| with the avowcd purpose ofits authors,
| and with their diligcnt care to conceal
| and yet to accomplish their end by the
| tricks of language. In the light of
these facts, it is our design to examine
into the validity of this statute.
Before proceeding to discuss the ccI-
| trail idea of the whole legislation, and
the essential feature in which this idea
has been expressed, we must dispose of
certain other PORTIONS which are rather
| auxiliary than necessary. The first Sec
ton is practically ofno Importance. 1t
| is logically the statement of Il truism.
1t substantially cnacts that whoever
| violates the Constitution shall be amen
| able to certain penalties 3; but it docs
| AOl uSoCcIAu " anu uSScr1Dc
| the acts and defaults which shall con-
| stitute such violation. If the statute
consisted only of this section, it would
bc equally harmless and valueless. The
second section contains two different
provisions relating to different subject
| matters, and depending upon different
principles, although they arc gramnlat-
| lcafty united i'll one sentence. The first
| declares that certain enumerated acts
| Of resistance and hostility to the nu-
| thOrity of the United States, to its laws,
| and to its means and measures of adj
| ministratiOn, shall be crimes, and that
| the offenders shall be liable to indict-
| ment, trial, and punishment in the
| national courts. This clause is, beyond
all question, valid and proper. 1t is to
| be ranged in tho same class with the
statute which makes it an offence to OBJ
| struct the transportation of the mail
1t has never been doubted that, so far
as Congress may lcgislatc, it may en-
force its laws and protect the officers Of
| the Government in their administra-
ton by penal cnactments.
Although the statute under consider
| alton is entitled "An act to carry into
| effect and to enforce the Fourteenth
amendment of the Constitution" the
third section must he partially and the
fourth section wholly referred to other
portions of that instrument. We here
| collect all the constitutional provisions
to which they can by possibility relate,
and which can by possibility be con-
| sidercd as their foundation. "COngrcSS
shall have power to provide for calling
! forth tho militia to execute the laws Of
! the Union, suppress instructions, and
rcpel inVaSiOnS' Cart. l., see. s, Z 15.)
| ''Thc United States shall protect each
| of the States against invasion, and, on
| application of the Legislature or of the
Executive, when the Legislature can
not be convened, against domestic viO-
lencc' Cart. w., sec. l.) "Thc priv
| ilegc otth writ Of habcas corpus shall
not be suspended, unless when in cases
of rebellion or invasion the public safety
| may require it'' CART. L., soc. 9, Z p
| The third section under review enables
the President, under circumstances
therein described, in case OF "inSurrcc
| tiOns, domestic violence, unlawful COM
binatiOns, or cOnSpiraciCs in Il State"
which are to hc directed against the
! authority of that State, to suppress the
| same by tho military or otherwise as he
! may deem proper. For all this there
| is no support in the clause above quoted
| from the eighth section of Article l.
That clause provides in terms for en-
forcing laws Of the United States by the
militia, this statute provides for the en-
fOrccmcnt OfState laws by the military
under the direction of the President :;
the instructions spoken of in that
clause arc, from the context and from
the express provision found in Article
w., plainly to be those against the
United States, while this statute pur-
ports to arm the President with power,
on his own motion, to suppress inSur-
rcctions against Il State.
But there is IL difficulty of far greater
magnitudc-a violation of the funda-
mental law far palmer and more dan
gcrOus. This third section enables the
President to suppress not only "insur-
} rcctions," but 'domcstic violence, un-
lawful combinations, and cOnspir:,cirs'
terms were not inserted without 81 de-
sign. They describe something less
than insurrcctions they descend in
magnitude and criminalty until they
end in conspiracics, which perhaps may
be attended by no overt act, no out
break of violence. While, therefore,
the Constitution only permits a calling
out of the militia to suppress inSurrcc-
| tlonS, which arc, in fact, incipicnt wars
Congress has gone to the length of en-
pOWcring the President to use the mill
tafy in time of peace in putting dowr
mere domestic violence and in break
ing up cotfSTirucicS. 1t is plain that
TINS section of the statute finds no war
rant in the clause quoted from tho frs
article in the Constitution, although il
= is probable that the ingenious aut hOr q