The National tribune., 1909-04-22
TREASON.
There Has Never Been an Active Dcfini-
tion Of the Crime-The Prosecutions
Under It.

Editor National Tribune: The Con-
stitution of the United States defines
what shall constitute treason against
the United States very clearly. II also
declares that Congress shall have the
power to declare the punishment for
treason" Has Congress ever exercised
| that power? We all know that no one
was hung at the end of the rebellion
for treason. Please answer thru your
valuable paper.-Thomas Charlton, 5.
and S. Home, Ohio.
While there has been great deal of
| talk about the crime of treason, yet
| the Legislatures and Congress have
| been singularly remisS in providing
against so momentous an offense. In
adopting the Constitution an effort was
| made to give Congress the sole" power
of defining the crime of treason and
fixing the punishment for it, but this
was lost by five States voting for it and
six against it. This left belief in the
minds of lawyers that there was a con-
current power to punish for treason, so
that it left the States chance to offer
choice between treason against the
State and treason against the United
States. 1t is said that rarely has the
omission of a single word been so inn
portant as that of dropping the sole"
from the laws. If Congress had been
clothed with the sole power of punish
ing treason, the arguments for State
sovereignty and secession would not
have been worth while refuting. AS a
rule, the State Constitutions have adopt
ed the wording of the United States
Constitution, with the provision that
treason against the State of - shall
consist only in levying war;" etc. 1t
was this omission that carried into Sc
cession muItitudes who were opposed
10 htrf 1rnn dnd n
treason against the State. The Confed-
crates have claimed that in the only
case of treason at the close of the war,
| that of jefferson Davis and his asso-
ciates, the Government did not dare
push the case to a legal termination.
Those who make this plea do little JUS
tice to the generosity and forbearance
of the Union people. They were tired
of war and slaughter. and wanted peace
and to heal the wounds of strife. III
| they had had any real spite against the
lSoutherners and Jefferson Davis as their
head, there would have been no trouble
about executing him. He was captured
Internationally, was not q soldier in the
armies in the sense of those who sur
rendered conditionally to Grant and
Sherman, and was therefore amenable
to a court-martial or a military COM
mission. If the people had so willed,
q drumhead court-martial and file of
soldiers would have settled Mr.. Davis's
case.
In the history Of our race treason
trials have been a fostering sore, and
the wisest men in the Government who
had read history to some purpose were
anxious to avoid them. Beside, as said
before, the people were weary of kill
ing, and wanted as little of it as possi-
BILE. The act of April 80, 1890, made
death the penalty of treason. and pun
ished with fine and Imprisonment those
who concealed or abetted treason, but
there have been few proceedings under
this law. The principal one was that
of Aaron Burr, which was failure.
The Southern States used the charge
very effectively to force Union men
into the army, but aside from this there
have been very few prosecutions for
treason against the State.-Editor Ma
tional Tribune.