Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1872-03-18

of indictment having been presented
against Milligan. In fact, no bill o
indictment had ever been found
against him by any grand jury Of tbs
United States. May 10, 1865, he pre-
sented a petition to the United States
court for Indiana to be discharged
from unlawful imprisonment. The
United States court was divided In
opinion as to whether (1) a writ o.
habeas corpus ought to be issued; q,
whether Milligan ought TO be dis
charged from custody; and (3) wheth'
er the military commission had iuris-
diction legally to try or sentence the
prisoner. These questions came be-
fore the supreme court at Washing.
ton, where, in behalf Of the United
States, they were argued by Attorney
General Speed, Mr.. Stanberry and
General Butler, and In behalf Of Mil.
Iigan by Mr.. Field, Mr.. Black and
others. Judge Davis gave the opin-
ion of the court, which occupies near.
ly thirty pages, and no opinion ever
given by that tribunal better deserves
careful and repeated study. The
chief justice, with Wayne, SWayne
and Miller, dissented from a majority
of the court, consisting of Davis, Nell
son, Grier, Clifford and Field. The
msjority, in whose behalf Judge Da-
Wis spoke, pronounced in favor of the
prisoner and
AGAINST THE ACTION OF THE MILL
TARY AUTHORITIES ON EVERY
POINT.
We have not the space to give such
copious extracts from this opinion as
we could wish, for it cannot be pub
llshed too often. The chief point in
the decision is that Federal authority
having been unOppOsed in the State Of
Indiana, and the Federal courts open
for trial OF Ofienses, the usages of war
could not, under the constitution,
afford any sanction for the trial there
of q citizen in civil life and not con-
nected with the military or naval SER
vice, by a military tribunal for any
Offense whatever. The guarantee of
trial by jury, says Judge Davis, con-
tanned in the constitution was intended
for state of war as well as a state of
pesce, and it is equally binding upon
rulers and people at all times and un-
der all circumstances. Neither the
President, nor congress, nor the judi
ciary can disturb
THE KNOWN SAFEGUARDS OF CIVIL
LIBERTY
incorporated in the constitution. Sus-
pensiLn Of the writ OF hG5edS corpus
does not su pend the writ itself.
These are the prominent points Of the
opinion. When Judge Davis came to
consider the proposition put forth by
General Butler in behalf of the gov
that martial law covered
with its broad mantle the proceedings
Of this military commission and au-
thorized a military commander to sus-
pend all civil rights and their RENE
dies, ard to subject citizens as well as
to the rule OF his will, Judge
Davis rises TO the hight of his great
theme, and, as il by presentment,
the dangers to public lib
9rty il purely military men, like Gen.
arsl Grant, perpetuate their power.
HOW he DETEsTs MILITARY UsURP-
ERs-IT SHOULD BE WRITTEN IN
LETTERS OF GOLD.
he said, in delivering his opinion
n the Miligsn case:
If this position is sound to the eX
ent claimed, then when war exists,
oreign or domestic, and the country
s subdivided into military depart |
nents for mere convenience, the com-
nander of one OF them can, ii he
chooses, within his limits, on the
plea of necessity, with the approval
)f the Executive, substitute military
iOrce for and TO the exclusion OF the
avs, and punish sll persons as he
he thinks right and proper, without
fixed or certain rules.
The statement Of this proposition
shows its importance; for, il true, fe-
publican government is a failure, ard
here is an eud Of liberty regulated
BY law, martial law established on
such basis destroys every guarantee
)f the constitution, and effectually
renders the " military Independent OF
and superior to the civil power" the
to do which by the king OF
Great Britain was deemed by our
athers such an Ofiense that they as
signed il to the world as one OF the
esuses which impelled them to declare
heir independence Civil liberty and |
martial law cannot endure together;
he sntagOnisIa is irreconcilable, and
n the conflict one Og the other must |
perish.
The nation, as experience has
proved, cannot always remain at /
1eace, and has no right to expect that |
{ will always have wise and humane l
'ulers, sincerely attached to the prin- /
,iples Of the constitution. Wicked |
men, ambitious Of power, with hatred |
# law, may fill the place once Occu-
)ied by Washington and Lincoln; |
md, II this right is conceded, and the |
,alamities of war again befsll Us, the |
hangers to human liberty are frightful (
o contemplate. II our fathers had |
allied to provide for Just such con-
ingeney, they would have been false
o the trust repOsed in them. They 4
LneW-the history Of the world told
hem-the nation they were founding,
)e its existence short or long, would /
)e involved in gar-hOw often or how /
ong continued human foresight could /
lot tsll-and that unlimited power,
wherever lodged at such q time, was
specially hazardous 70 freemen. For /
his and other equally WeiGhty rea.
ons, they secured the inheritance
hey had fought TO maintain by incor
,Orating In g written constitution the
afeguards which time had proved 4
we're essential to its preservation.
IOt one Of these safeguards can the /
or Congress, or the iudicia-
Y disturb, except the ODe concerning /
he writ Of hGbeQs corpus
,HE TENDENCY OF JUDGE DAVIS
CONVICTIONS
a respect to the nature and scope of
be Federal Constitution, and the true |
elatiOn of the several States thereto. |
a those vast concerns which touch |
he life and individual liberty Of the |
itizen, land what concerns are Of 1
more impOrtance?) he has clearly put |
Iinaself upon record in the Milligsn /
ase in a most unexceptiOnable way. |
Ne wish we could say as much Of his |
in the dissenting opinion |
% the cOnstitutiOnality of the legal /
ender act, wherein the minority /
realty exaggerated, as we think, the /
xtent and the consequences Of the |
implied powers of the Federal gov
rnment.
The large mass of the cases which
ONE before the supreme court OF the
United States are those which do not
INVOLVE constitutional questions. In /
hose touching private rights his Opi-
lions give evidence Of sound judg-
neEt, excellent sense, and above all,
.learness OF thought. His style Of eX-
,zessiOn Is simple and lucid. In that /
particular he reminds one very much 1
Il Judge Nelson. His opinions are /
,eyer overloaded with elementary
IoctSine, or with a protusiOn Of cases,
yhich, as somebody says, present
,icture OF vanity appealing to ignor-
nee.
A severe snOW-stOrm prevailed /
lioDg the Eastern States yesterday. |
was disastrous up In Maine, block
- -. ,.agl-ooGa arH 6ofnor Ofhpr dam