Gambar halaman

authority, there would be no independence of thought or action. No citizen could safely trust his interests in the keeping, or to the determination of a judiciary thus trammeled. Communities would be driven back toward a state of barbarism. Every man would be compelled to take into his own hands the adjudication of his own controversies. The strong would govern the weak. Men would combine together in clans and factions to protect each other. This condition of things would be anarchy.,

In the above suggestions we have assumed that Judge Constable committed an error in the judicial decision upon which he was arrested—but in fact he did not, as could be amply shown, if it was at all necessary to enter into an argument on the subject. But it is not necessary, for, conceding for the sake of the argument that he was in error in his decision, it is not pretended that he decided corruptly, and therefore, all the reasons we have stated, fully apply in favor of the freedom and independence of the judiciary in his case. Again, admitting he was wrong, in England even, from whose oppressions we separated by a long war, it is held by the king, that “he looks upon the independence and uprightness of the judges as essential to the impartial administration of justice—as one of the best securities of the rights and liberties of his subjects, and as most conducive to the honor of the crown." Ld. Raym. 747, Blkst. Com., Jacob's L. Dict., 3, 547.

A judge is not answerable then, even to the king, for an error of judgment in a matter of which he has jurisdiction. 1 Salk. 397, 2 Hawk., c. 1, sec. 17.

But here, the President, as Commander-in-Chief, through his subordinates, usurps greater powers than the king in England dare exercise, for through them he undertakes to determine when a judge has decided right or wrong, and to punish him for that decisionnot by any regular course of judicial proceeding, either civil or criminal, nor yet by the mode pointed out by the Constitution for corrupt acts, which is by impeachment, but by an arbitrary Turkish process of military despotism, merely because, as in the case of Mr. Green, these gentlemen may believe they are “ backed by six hundred thousand bayonets."

It is time that the people should arouse to a just sense of the great danger to their liberties, when the men and the money they have placed at the disposal of the Government are thus boastingly diverted from the purpose for which they were furnished.



The Committee, in treating of the evidence as it has been developed, and according to the classification of offenses, would invite attention, first, to the Blackford County cases, where eighteen arrests were made, as declared by the authorities, for resistance to the draft. These arrests will astonish everybody--a tyrant would be ashamed of them. Without the semblance of guilt, without a shadow of pretext, in the absence of all reason, forgetting all reverence for law and personal liberty, a few weak and misguided creatures, calling themselves the officers of the law, in the nighttime, and acting under false pretenses, seize and carry away from their families and homes unoffending and peaceable citizenscitizens of character, of inflnence, and position; and after they are thus seized and dragged away, these irresponsible wretches hunt an occasion to appease their wicked and gangrened party malevolence, by exposing these kidnapped prisoners, in the streets at Indianapolis, to the jeers and derision of a remorseless mob. They are cast into prison, and there, within the damp walls of their dungeon cells, without comfortable bedding, fed upon tainted food, they are left to become the prey of disease and the victims of death.

Thus outraged and thus fettered, they call upon their accusers to come forth and confront them. The officers having them in charge are asked of what crimes they are accused an examination by some legally constituted tribunal is repeatedly demanded. They had a right thus to be brought into the presence of their accusers; they had a right to demand the reasons of their restraint; it is an ancient and well established right-a right guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of Indiana; but their appeals were addressed to the hard hearts and deaf ears of tyrants.

The United States Marshal, when appealed to, folds himself more warmly in the flowing cloak of his own luxury, and with a view to shift the responsibility, he wags his head ominously, and points these outraged citizens to the modern Caligula and his willing satraps, who now inhabit the ancient metropolis of Republican liberty: There, he says, is my authority; I must obey——ask me nothing more.

But all this does not satisfy the people, who are jealous of their liberties. They will not be put off. Our rights and liberties are common rights and liberties. That which wrongs a citizen, wrongs the State. There stands the stubborn question, How were these arrests made? The prisoners are told upon affidavit. Upon whose affidavit? Who can tell? Some one is responsible, certainly! We have laws, we have courts, we have a Governor for our protection, and he is the sworn custodian of our peace and liberties. How does it come to pass that all these great elements of power and protection were powerless and silent in this great emergency? The people of this country are free, unless placed under restraint for the violation of some law, and then only by positive proof, with the presumption of innocence in their favor until proved guilty. Here citizens of Indiana were restrained of their liberty, and denied a trial. Why did not the Executive, made so by the Constitution, and backed as such by the whole military power of the State, enforce the constitutional and unquestioned rights of these citizens? Was he ignorant of the fact that they had been trampled upon? That could not be. He does not pretend so much. One million of free Americans, of Anglo-Saxon-Celtic descent, ask the question- Where was he while these monstrous outrages were being practiced upon the liberties of the great people whose fortunes and destiny were the especial objects of his care? Was he in league with the oppressor? or was he only sleeping, like Anthony, folded in the voluptuous arms of some Cleopatra, while the safety of the city, and the liberties of the citizen, were left exposed to the clemency of the vandal and the knife of the assassin? There is a serious question couched in all this outrage, which, sooner or later, Governor Morton will be called upon to answer. The people, who have suffered so severely, will neither forget or forgive these unparalleled and wicked wrongs.

The Committee have looked in vain in all the cases for the pretext upon which the arrests were made. The story out of doors is, they were made in vindication of the destruction of the draftbox in Hartford City, which it is said was done on the 6th day of October, 1862.

Upon careful investigation, the Committee have ascertained that the draft-box was destroyed there at that time by one Jesse Williams, who was drunk at the time, and who has not to this day been arrested for it. The evidence shows clearly that Williams is the only man who had any thing to do with the destruction of the draft-box: still Andrew Brickley, Frank Taughinbaugh, Elihu Lyon, William Armstrong, Thomas Daugherty, John M. Vanhorn,

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

John McManamon, Dr. William Schull, Leander Tarr, Thomas Longfellow, Daniel Watson, Jacob Clapper, John Miller, Henry Snyder and Bluford Mills, all Democrats, are seized by the authorities, and without warrant are cast into prison, and without mittimus are held there by the United States Marshal—some for several days—others for weeks—and then discharged and sent home without a trial. Bluford Mills lost his life in this wicked affair-upon those who have been instrumental in taking the life of a valuable and intelligent citizen rests this terrible guilt. Anguish of soul will overtake them some time on account of it. If not before, they will feel it at last in that dark and melancholy hour, when with feeble breath, they shall come to falter forthe their last cry for mercy on an erring life.

Andrew Brickley, one of the parties arrested, is the sheriff of Blackford county—a gentleman of the highest standing in the community where he resides—as an evidence of his respectability and standing, he has received the indorsement of a majority of the people of the county where he lives. He, among others of the highest respectability, is arrested, and what is the evidence against him nothing-not a word-on the contrary, he had used his influence to allay the excitement at Hartford City, where the draft was to be made. It is true he had agreed to assist in the work of the draft, he had agreed to do so for the satisfaction of his neighbors, who had faith in his integrity, and who believed he would protect them from fraud and party partiality. He proposed to act according to his understanding of the orders issued from the War Department, at Washington. But no, Mr. Frash had received special instructions from Governor Morton which must not be departed from. Governor Morton, in his ambition to dispense patronage, could not rest satisfied with the orders at Washington. Notwithstanding the people were already suspicious of his public integrity, and notwithstanding a large majority of them believed he would draft Democrats to the fullest extent that his slavish tools dared to venture-notwithstanding numerous complaints had been made to that effect in all parts of the State, still the Indianapolis programme must be carried out. So, Frash, the pliant tool of this no-party Governor, was allowed to have his own way, and Mr. Brickley, for allowing him this contested privelege, in the opinion of these gentlemen, became a great criminal, and was thrown into jail for it.

Not one witness examined, says that any one of those who were imprisoned, in any way aided or abetted in the destruction of the

draft-box. Poor Allen Ward did so testify, but he afterward said that his statement was false. Let this testimony show for itself here it is in full :

Mr. Morgan.“ Who did you see engaged in stamping on the


[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Mr. Ward." I saw Jesse Williams, Andrew Williams, John Dougherty, Thomas Dougherty, John Vanhorn and Bluford Mills.”

Mr. Morgan.—“ Who did you see hallooing, cheering, and stamping on the floor?

Mr. Ward.“ Besides these I have named, I saw Leander Tarr, Daniel Watson, Henry Lyons, John Miller, Henry Snyder, and John P. Garr."

Mr. Ferris.. What is your politics ?"
Mr. Ward.“I am a Republican."

Mr. Ferris.—“How many men were there in the Court House when the draft-box was mashed ?"

Mr. Ward.- About a hundred.”

Mr. Ferris.—“ Do you swear positively that Jesse Williams, John and Thomas Dougherty, John Vanhorn and Bluford Mills, were each of them engaged in stamping the box and throwing the pieces around?

Mr. Ward.66 Yes sir."

Mr. Ferris. How much was the box broken, into how many pieces?

Mr. Ward." The rim was broken into two pieces, and each head into the same number of pieces.” .

Mr. Ferris.—“ Who did you see throwing the pieces around ?" Mr. Ward... I can not name any person.”

Mr. Ferris.—“ Name the persons you know you saw stamping the box.”

Mr. Ward." I saw Jess. Williams. He is the only one I can swear I saw stamping the box.”

Mr. Ferris.—“ If you stated that any person except Williams stamped on the box, or the pieces, was that true ? "

Mr. Ward.“ To be certain, Jess. Williams was the only person I saw stamping the box to pieces.”

Mr. Ferris.—“ Could you have heard it had any one hurrahed for Jeff. Davis before the crowd left the Court House?

Mr. Ward.5 Yes, I could.”

Mr. Ferris.-“ Was there any hallooing for Jeff. Davis in the house ?"

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »