by citing the practice of Mr. Jefferson, who, in 1807, as President of the United States, applied to Congress for a temporary suspension of the writ of habeas corpus for three months; which, however, was refused by the House of Representatives, where the bill was defeated, which had passed the Senate for that purpose."

In the House of Representatives, in the debate on the bill to indemnify General Jackson, January 2,. 1844, Mr. Barnard said, "The Constitution gave Congress authority to pass laws for the regulation of the army and navy of the United States, and under that, Congress have passed laws for the government of the army and navy and the militia. That code was applicable to the officers and soldiers, and to the militia, when in service; but it was not applicable to any other human being. Congress itself could not proclaim martial law. It might suspend the habeas corpus act, but it could not suspend the Constitution. A proclamation of martial law by the Congress of the United States would, of itself, be a violation of the Constitution." (Vol. XIV. Benton's Debates, p. 657.)

In an opinion delivered by Mr. Attorney-General Cushing, upon the subject of martial law, and the suspension of the habeas corpus, in February, 1857, growing out of a proclamation of martial law by the Governor of Washington Territory, in order to suspend the habeas corpus, this language is used: "The opinion is expressed by commentators on the Constitution, that the right to suspend the writ of ha beas corpus, and also that of judging when the exigency has arisen, belongs exclusively to Congress. It may be assumed, as a general doctrine of constitutional jurisprudence in all the United States, that the power to suspend laws, whether those granting the writ of habeas corpus, or any other, is vested exclusively in the Legislature of the

particular State." (Opinions of Attorneys-General, Vol. VIII, p. 365.)

So much for historical proofs embracing also the opinions of the statesmen, patriots and jurists of the better days of the Republic.

Judge Taney having already quoted the opinion of his illustrious predecessor, Chief Justice Marshal, I shall not repeat the opinion of that eminent jurist as given in the case, ex-parte Bollman and Swartwout, but refer the reader to it as quoted by Judge Taney. I will only add one quotation from Judge Story, who in his commentaries on the Constitution, says: Sec. 1336," Hitherto, no suspension of the writ has been authorized by Congress since the establishment of the Constitution. It would seem, as the power is given to Congress to suspend the writ of habeas corpus in case of rebellion or invasion, that the right to judge whether the exigency had arisen, must exclusively belong to that body."

To the understanding and judgment of the reader, these facts, historical proofs, decisions of illustrious judges, and opinions of eminent jurists are committed in contrast with the act of will of Abraham Lincoln; and unless the interested motive of the partisan has usurped the place in the American mind which was once occupied by patriotism, it will not be in vain for our country's well being that history, common sense and the judgment of our most illustrious ancestors have been cited to prove how utterly absurb are the pretensions to power of Abraham Lincoln, how unwarrantable has been his assumptions of right to set aside the Constitution, to subvert the government, and to deprive individual citizens of their rights of person; and how dangerous to liberty it is to permit these assumptions of power to pass unrebuked, and to be exercised unrestrained.

CONFLICT WITH MISSOURI

CAPTURE OF CAMP JACKSON-MASSACRE IN ST. LOUIS-MISSOURI DRIVEN TO REBELLION.

As a part of the history of the arbitrary course of the Administration at Washington, and of its determination to press the irrepressible conflict by driving every slaveholding State into rebellion, its relations to Missouri are referred to here as evidence of its reckless disregard for State rights. The impartial world as well as the Patriotic American will be amazed at the arrogance of the Executive in assuming power and at the boldness with which this assumed power was exercised.

A law of the State of Missouri, enacted in accordance with constitutional requirements, made it the duty of the organized Militia to meet in May of each year for drill and camp instruction.

In accordance with this law a brigade of State Militia were in camp near St. Louis early in May, 1861, under the command of Gen. Frost, a Militia officer. While thus conforming to a law of Missouri which these Militia could not dis regard under penalties of fine at least, they were surrounded by United States troops, part regulars and part volunteers, under the chief command of Captain Lyon, and the whole brigade made pris

oners.

Very naturally a flagrant outrage such as

this, accompanied as it was with the massacre of a number of citizens, created a profound sensation, and excited hostility in thousands of Missourians against the Federal Government. Many who till then thought of holding no other relation to the Government than that of fealty, wavered in their allegiance, and thousands, who up to that time, were wavering in their course between preserving their relations to the Federal Government and joining their fortunes to the seceded States, were driven by this high-handed outrage of the Administration, to become Rebels, in defence of State Rights. It would seem from all the circumstances which were then known and which have since come to light, that it was systematically arranged between partisans of the Lincoln Administration and the leaders of that party at Washington, that Missouri should be driven into revolt for the purpose, and by that means, of placing the State in the control of such partisans as Frank Blair and his fellow spoilsmen. The assemblage of the State Militia at Camp Jackson afforded the first opportunity to the conspirators against the dignity and peace of Missouri to commence operations. Gen. Harney, who was in command of the Western Department, was disposed of temporarily, so as that the more ready tool of the designs of the Administration and its partisan friends, Captain Lyon could be placed in command of the Federal forces at St. Louis; this done, the capture of the State Militia at Camp Jackson was effected. This occurred on the tenth of May, 1861. The State of Missouri had till then made no demonstrations of hostility to the Federal Government, nor had the State Militia, even those under the command of Gen. Frost, manifested any design to array itself against the constituted authorities; on the contrary the Legislature of Missouri had taken means to

preserve the peace of that State, and Gen. Frost had made a tender of his own services and of those of his command to the Federal authorities.

These are not mere assertions without foundation in fact. The Acts of the Missouri Legislature previous to this occurrence, the published correspondence between Gen. Frost, and the Federal authorities and the testimony of Camp Jackson prisoners, all go to prove that the State of Missouri and for aught that appeared to the contrary, all its people were truly loyal: but this condition of things did not suit the Administration and its Missouri partisans; the State was under the control of others than creatures and parasites of the Administration. Something must be done to afford Frank Blair and company a pretext for seizing on the State Government, not to preserve the State from seceding, but to use it for partisan and personal purposes, to strengthen the hands of the Administration in the abuse of power which it had already commenced to exercise, and to fill the pockets of its needy and greedy followers. Such was the "Military necessity" which the diabolical machinations of Blair & Co. in Missouri, and the leaders of the Administration at Washington contrived to bring about and apply to Missouri; and behold the result in the devastations of the homes of Missourians, in the massacre of thousands who, were it not for the partisan policy of the Administration and for the satanic selfishness and ambition of the Blairs, would be living evidences of their devotion to the Union.

But no, Missouri must be scourged into servility to the Administration and to Blair & Co., and as Gen. Harney would not be used for that purpose, he was called to Washington on the pretense of important business and Blair found the scourge in the person of Captain Lyon, who had orders from Washington