Year: 1865

dent in consequence OF their OFFICIAL relations
Proceeding to examine this defense as q
question Of law, the Judge referred again TO
me ACT OF March I'd for the trial and punch
pending the writ OF hoseas eorpns, and claimed
that the offence charged against Dr. Qwynne
is provided for by the first, and expressly ex-
argument to be met by the defense was that the
act of Congress authorized the Presiden, 70
suspend the privilege OF hdbeas corpus in such
cases as, in his opinion, the public safety re-
quired. He had accordingly, by proclamation,
declared and specified all the cases In which
the privilege should thereafter be suspended;
and this case Of DR.. Gwynne's was not one Of
those cases. The arrest In this case was, there
fore, made in violation, not only OF the law OF
the land, but OF the most solemn proclaimed
and authentic order which 1t was possible for
the President to make; an order, too, which he
At the same time and in the same manner di-
rected should stand and be ebeyed In all parts
of the land, until it should be revoked or mod
with the termination Of the rebellion.


The defence had attempted to answer this ar
sument by denying that the arrest was made
under the suspension OF the habeas corpus bnt
assert that by the Cons the President is
commander in. chefof the army and navy, and
that by virtue Of his authority, in time Of war,
he may, at his own pleasure, place the whole
or any part OF the country under subsection to
martial law, and thus lawfully, in obedience
to the Constitution itself, cause any man whom
soever to be deprived OF his life, liberty, or
pronerty; and that, ing this power, each
and every member Of his Cabinet is presumed
to speak for the President, and issue orders by
his authority, whether in matters pertaining to
his own proper department or not.


Propositions ef this character the Judge con-
sidered monstrous. He was sure that the law
did not constitute an order Of the Secretary an
order of the President, whether the order rela-
ted to business connected with the Secretaries
own Department or not, and in conclusion
says:


al may now claim, 1 think withou. pre-
sumDtiOn. that IL has heen demonstrated the
arrest in question was made, Ist, upon a charge
cogniZahle and trlable only according TO the
law OF the land, and for which no order could
lawfully be issued either by any member of the
Cabinet or by the Executive himself; and, I'd,
that, in point Of fact, no order for the arrest
was given to the defendant by either the Sec
retarY of War or the Secretary OF the Treasury,
for which either of those officers can be held
responsible


But there still remains one other view of the
subject for our consideration, which has here
tofore received but an incidental allusion.


The first section Of the act, which applies TO
the case of party actually In confinement,
provides that the officer having prisoner in
custody, under an order of the President, or by
his authority, shall decline to deliver him mp.
in obedience to the writ of habeGs corpus, bnr
shall make return to the writ, under oath, that
he retains him in prison in pursuance OF sach
order.


The order, therefore, must be in writing, else
how could the officer make such return with
safety to his conscience! At the time the order
was issued also, it must have contained the
name o. the prisoner, and not have been general
or in blank otherwise it could not have been
an order to detain or imprison that person, and
so 10 order at all.


The fourth section Justifes the officer for
show upon his trial for having made ii, a
like order from the President, or under his
authority.


And although in this last case the officer, or
the party sued or prosecuted for having made
the arrest, is not required, in his defense, to
make the oath as in the first case, yet must he
show that such an order was given to make
the very arrest in question.


Now, If the President had himself directed
this defendant, by order under his hand, to 60
into any of the departments, or into any town
or city in the country, and arrest whomsoever
he might suspect Of committing frauds against
anybody, maintain that such an order as that
would not have justified the arrest, because
the whole discretion which the lew designed to
conf1de to the President In the execution of this
act, had In fact not been exercised by himself,
but by some, perhaps, unknown and trustees
individual. think 1t was the manifest intan-
ton Of Congress to require that every arrest
made under this act should be made by order,
in writing, either by the President himself, or
by the Secretary of State, or Secretary of war;
and that every such order, when issued, should
contain the name OF the person to be arrested
or detained in prison. If left to the discretion
OF any irrespons ble constable, or detective, to
fill up blank order with the names Of whom
soever he might select, the exercise OF this
m es n he to &c and
ous to the Government itself How mnch
more Is II 10 De deprecated, il in addition To the
danger OF entrusting this fearful f,ou..
exercised at the discretion of irresponsible and
ignorant hands, the authority should be verbal
only, and no record of il preserved by the
Government"


HI A very cunning case OF smuggling on the
Canadian border has recently been detected,
for which the law provided no remedy. 1t
seems that the smuggler built his house i'm
mediately upon the boundary line, with an
entrance from the North and another from the
South. He can thus bring British or Ameri-
can goods into his house without paying duties
to either Government. and can, without detec-
tion, easily pass them over to the other side.
1t is said the fellow has, by this elicit trade,
grown rtch, and scarcely feels under the neces-
sity Of concealing the secret OF his ILL gotten
gains The Government OF the United States
has, of course, been the principal loser, as the
import OF dutiable goods greatly exceeds the
export But this hole is to be stopped. An
amendment to the laws for the prevention OF
smuggling is about TO be presented In Congress,
and will unquestionably be adopted, by which
the fact of building upon the boundary line
will of itself be assumed as evidence of pur-
pose to smuggle, and the revenue officers will
be empowered to enter and search the prem
ises and seize the goods.


PRESSING TOBACCO FOR DOMESTIC UsR-
Mr.. James Laurie, of White county, Ind.
writes to the American Institute Farmers'
Club, as follows:


"Another man wanted to know how tn man.