Year: 1864

Dir. BLISS. Mr. Speaker, the debate in
this House, on a motion, pending to recon-
NIT TO the Committee on the Judiciary House
resolution Ne. 1S, the same being joint res
olution to amend joint resolution ezplana-
tory of An act to suppress insprrection, TO
punish treason and rebellion, to seize and con-
6scate the property of rebels, and for other
purposes, approved July II, 1862, has given
rise to conflict of opinion between gentle
true intent and proper construction of that
provision of the Constitution which limits the
power of Congress in fixing the penalty Of
treason. / confess my surprise at any such
difference of opinion for until considerable
time after the inaugu' alton of this Admins
tration no difference of opinion existed among
men of legal attainments. or among the peo-
pie at larg. as to the full effect of that clause
in abolishing and repudiating forever in the
United States of America the English policy
IF ii terrupting the legal descent of ancestral
estates by corrupting and rendering uuinheri-
table the blood of the issue, whatever might
have been The ancestors crime.


In section third of the third article, after
defining the GRIN of treason against the Uni
ted States, the trainers inserted this clause:


"Congress shall have power to declare the
punishn ent of treason, but no attaiuder OF
treason shall work corruption of blood, Or for
feiture except during the Hfe-of-tlae person
attaTnret.-


1t seems to rue to be impossible that the
trainers of the Constitution, by the foregoing
clause, meant anything less than what the
words clearly import-an absolute interdiction
of the doctrine or penalty of corruption of
blood and a Limitation of forfeiture of estate
to the life of the convicted party. Their re-
pugnance TO the harsh infictisps of the Brit
L IL
OF her parts of the Instrument. They had re-
Gently achieved revolution by which they
had thrown Of the tyTannous expressions OF
the British Government, and in establishing a
new one for themselves and their posterity
they we're Determined to protect The American
people against all unjust and needless penal
ties inflicted by the State from whose authori-
ty they had revolted. They saw, as any one
may see, that it was industrious Injustice to IN
fict upon an innocent child the greater part
of the penalty due only to a guilty parent,
and that the doctrine of corruption Of blood
incapacitating the innocent for their lawful in :
heritance produced precisely that result, and
therefore protested against the barbarism by
common consent, and put their protest into
the fundamental law. "a =


Can any gentleman perceive now, any more
than the fathers could, the JUSTICE of wrench
ing fromrthe hands of child incapacItated
by homage and the want of moral accounta-
bility for any participation in the crime Of his
parent, the right of Inheritance which is just
ly guaranteed. to him by the law


The wife yho is to be made widow by the
infiction of the penalty of treason upon her
husband may be as innocent as her graded in
FAINT of his crine, and should her legal right
to be endowed of his estate be taken from
herr Does the Government desire to obtain
property in that way? The Constitution an.
: -nffsaT ife1cSs.t Sssl4sL