archive-org.com » ORG » W » WIKISOURCE.ORG

Total: 1648

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".
  • File:Romain Rolland Handel.djvu - Wikisource, the free online library
    domain in the United States because it was published before January 1 1923 The author died in 1944 so this work is also in the public domain in countries and areas where the copyright term is the author s life plus 70 years or less This work may also be in the public domain in countries and areas with longer native copyright terms that apply the rule of the shorter term to foreign works Public domain Public domain false false File history Click on a date time to view the file as it appeared at that time Date Time Thumbnail Dimensions User Comment current 00 18 9 October 2008 2 649 3 962 224 pages 13 67 MB Yann talk contribs Handel by Romain Rolland 1916 Source http www archive org details handel009130mbp PD 1923 You cannot overwrite this file File usage More than 100 pages link to this file The following list shows the first 100 page links to this file only A full list is available Wikisource Proofread of the Month Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 1 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 10 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 100 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 11 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 12 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 13 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 14 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 15 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 16 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 17 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 18 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 19 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 2 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 20 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 21 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 22 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 23 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 24 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 25 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 26 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 27 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 28 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 29 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 3 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 30 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 31 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 32 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 33 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 34 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 35 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 36 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 37 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 38 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 39 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 4 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 40 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 41 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 42 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 43 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 44 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 45 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 46 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 47 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 48 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 49 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 5 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 50 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 51 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 52 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 53 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 54 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 55 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 56 Page Romain Rolland Handel djvu 57 Page Romain Rolland

    Original URL path: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/File:Romain_Rolland_Handel.djvu (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive


  • Handel (Rolland) - Wikisource, the free online library
    and Handel s Water Music 69 to face page Handel s Monument in Westminster Abbey 107 Handel Directing an Oratorio 165 Retrieved from https en wikisource org w index php title Handel Rolland oldid 5096545 Categories 1916 works Music Navigation menu Personal tools Not logged in Talk Contributions Create account Log in Namespaces Page Discussion Variants Views Read Edit View history More Search Navigation Main Page Community portal Central discussion

    Original URL path: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Handel_%28Rolland%29 (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • File:Suspension of Habeas Corpus during the War of the Rebellion.djvu - Wikisource, the free online library
    Time Thumbnail Dimensions User Comment current 21 43 17 July 2009 1 200 1 717 35 pages 2 89 MB Spangineer Information Description The Suspension of Habeas Corpus during the War of the Rebellion in Political Science Quarterly vol III Source http www jstor org stable 213905 File usage The following 38 pages link to this file User William Maury Morris II Wikisource Proofread of the Month Page Suspension of Habeas Corpus during the War of the Rebellion djvu 1 Page Suspension of Habeas Corpus during the War of the Rebellion djvu 10 Page Suspension of Habeas Corpus during the War of the Rebellion djvu 11 Page Suspension of Habeas Corpus during the War of the Rebellion djvu 12 Page Suspension of Habeas Corpus during the War of the Rebellion djvu 13 Page Suspension of Habeas Corpus during the War of the Rebellion djvu 14 Page Suspension of Habeas Corpus during the War of the Rebellion djvu 15 Page Suspension of Habeas Corpus during the War of the Rebellion djvu 16 Page Suspension of Habeas Corpus during the War of the Rebellion djvu 17 Page Suspension of Habeas Corpus during the War of the Rebellion djvu 18 Page Suspension of Habeas Corpus during the War of the Rebellion djvu 19 Page Suspension of Habeas Corpus during the War of the Rebellion djvu 2 Page Suspension of Habeas Corpus during the War of the Rebellion djvu 20 Page Suspension of Habeas Corpus during the War of the Rebellion djvu 21 Page Suspension of Habeas Corpus during the War of the Rebellion djvu 22 Page Suspension of Habeas Corpus during the War of the Rebellion djvu 23 Page Suspension of Habeas Corpus during the War of the Rebellion djvu 24 Page Suspension of Habeas Corpus during the War of the Rebellion djvu

    Original URL path: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/File:Suspension_of_Habeas_Corpus_during_the_War_of_the_Rebellion.djvu (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • The Suspension of Habeas Corpus during the War of the Rebellion - Wikisource, the free online library
    upon the wing a whole covey of reviewers 9 Some of them were anonymous and some had difficulty in finding a printer for in those days the expression of an opinion even in the North would sometimes result in social ostracism and there was also an apprehension that perhaps the mob might take part in constitutional discussions The foundation of Binney s argument was that the habeas corpus clause even if expressed in the form of a restriction implied a grant It restricted suspension to certain conditions and at the same time granted power to some department to suspend when those conditions were fulfilled 10 This was also the underlying principle of Chief Justice Taney s opinion although he differed from Binney in regard to the department to which the grant was given Most of the pamphleteers who answered Binney attacked him at this point They took the ground that if there had been no habeas corpus clause Congress would have had the unlimited right to suspend and therefore there was no need of reading a grant into the clause which as its words implied was a restriction and nothing more If it can be shown that the clause is a restriction without a grant it is at once fatal to Binney s whole chain of reasoning For if the power to suspend could exist without the clause it would be an unlimited power and no one would think of arguing that the convention would have given it to the President In fact one of Binney s own arguments was that if the power was unlimited it would be dangerous to give it to the President and that the clause gave it to him because its use was strictly limited to the conditions of rebellion and invasion If the constitution without the clause gives an unlimited power to some department to suspend and the clause is simply a restriction on that power the department intended to wield the power and to be subject to the restriction can be none other than Congress One of the reviewers Judge Nicholas of Kentucky put the question thus 11 Suppose said he the constitution had no habeas corpus clause and was entirely silent about the writ and its suspension where then would be the power to suspend It would be of course with Congress Congress would have untrammelled discretion over the writ and could suspend it or repeal it out of existence It was this full power this full discretion which the convention intended to restrain and accordingly they made the habeas corpus clause restrictive It does not grant power to suspend for Congress had that already but it says that the privilege shall not be suspended except in certain cases The words of the clause are entirely restrictive and contain no implication of a grant They presume the existence of something which they restrain Moreover as was pointed out by Randolph in the Virginia convention Congress was specifically given the right to suspend habeas corpus when it was given the right to regulate the courts out of which the writ issues The habeas corpus clause is an exception to this power Binney wrote another pamphlet in reply to this reasoning He showed what is very evident namely that to suppose the constitution silent and infer from that the right of Congress to suspend was mere assertion and a begging of the question More than that it was contrary to the most fundamental principle of constitutional law No powers can be assumed for any part of the government Nothing is so well settled as the doctrine that Congress has only the powers which are expressly given by the constitution and such other instrumental and incidental powers as are necessary to carry the expressed powers into effect Ours is a government of enumerated and limited powers and the powers not mentioned in the constitution are reserved to the states or to the people It is monstrous to assert that a power exists simply because the constitution says nothing about it By that reasoning Congress would be omnipotent It is equally useless to contend that the habeas corpus clause is a restriction on the power of Congress to regulate the courts Congress has no such power It is true that it can regulate the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and decide on the number of inferior courts but that is all The constitution says The judicial power of the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish And again The judicial power shall extend to all cases in law and equity arising under this Constitution the laws of the United States etc etc The constitution has therefore vested the judicial power in certain courts Congress has a discretion as to the number and order of the inferior courts but it has no discretion whatever as to vesting or not vesting the whole judicial power in courts of some description The language of the constitution is mandatory It does not say the judicial power may be vested but it says it shall be vested Congress could not lawfully refuse to create courts of some sort it could not lawfully refuse to create the means for the exercise of that power which the constitution says shall exist To suppose that the obligation is not binding but might at pleasure be declined is to suppose that under the sanction of the constitution Congress may defeat the constitution The constitution creates the judicial power and declares to what questions it shall extend Congress creates only the instruments which are to use that power and when thus created the whole judicial power attaches to them and cannot he diminished or changed by Congress 12 By the constitution the judicial power extends to questions of personal liberty and its exercise in that respect cannot be interfered with by Congress Congress having the right to establish the tribunals must give to them such an organization as will enable them to exercise completely the judicial power created by the constitution A tribunal is not constituted unless it is endued with the active powers necessary to the exercise of its jurisdiction The mere erecting of a court by name and the vesting of jurisdiction in it would amount to nothing It must have the practical powers of bringing parties before it enforcing its decrees and issuing writs It is idle to argue that the withholding or suspending of the writ of habeas corpus is an appropriate means of constituting a judicial tribunal It is a caricature of argument to say that Congress must create a court in which the whole judicial power is to vest and at the same time may withhold from that court any of the instruments necessary to the practical exercise of judicial power Accordingly the act 13 which established our courts says that they shall have power to issue writs of scire facias habeas corpus and all other writs not specially provided for by statute which may be necessary for the exercise of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the principles and usages of law Courts cannot exist without writs and Congress has given such as were necessary Can it be contended that they could now cripple the courts by taking away the writ of habeas corpus If they could take away habeas corpus they could take away all the other writs which would in effect be a failure to constitute the tribunals 14 Even supposing that Congress had the arbitrary power of withholding or repealing the writ that would not be the same thing as suspending the privilege of it If the courts were denied the power to issue the writ that would simply be a denial to the prisoner of his specific remedy but the principle the right the privilege whereof the constitution speaks would still remain The constitution says the privilege shall not be suspended except in rebellion or invasion It speaks only of the privilege and says nothing of the remedy Congress might tamper with the remedy indefinitely and yet be far outside the language and meaning of the habeas corpus clause The fact that Congress gives the courts a habeas corpus writ has nothing to do with suspending the privilege of personal liberty guaranteed by the constitution Binney was perhaps successful in answering this objector but there were others with whom it was harder to deal Like Nicholas they took the ground that if the clause were absent Congress would have the right to suspend but they drew the authority to suspend not from the power to regulate the courts but from the power of Congress to suppress insurrection and repel invasion One of them George M Wharton took a wider range 15 He quoted the clauses of the constitution which gave Congress power to declare war make rules concerning captures raise and support armies call out the militia and make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying these powers into execution and said that the right to suspend could be implied from any one of them or from all of them together and that the habeas corpus clause was simply a restriction on the power thus implied Binney answered this by saying that it was too much at large too indefinite None of the powers contained any reference to the writ or even to the judicial department He had already maintained that Congress could not impair the judicial department after it had once been created and surely a right to impair an express provision of the constitution could not be implied from the war powers Suspension of habeas corpus was a matter of municipal law was not of the nature of military force could not be identified with it and could not be implied from it If it could be implied from the power to call out the militia or from any of the other war powers it could be implied still more easily from the power to punish counterfeiting for it would certainly be very useful against that offence But Wharton wrote another pamphlet 16 in which he fortified his argument admirably and relied on the doctrine of the implied powers of Congress This doctrine has been extended until it means that any act of Congress is constitutional which has such a relation to one or more of the expressed powers of Congress as in any way or under any circumstances to promote their efficiency We hesitate to admit that the power to suspend habeas corpus may be implied from the right to make war because it seems like such a great and substantial power that its authority ought to rest on something stronger than an implication But in McCullough vs Maryland the power of Congress to charter a bank was implied from the powers to collect taxes borrow money regulate commerce declare war and raise and support armies Congress also has by implication the right to define and punish crimes and the famous embargo act which by prohibiting vessels from leaving port practically destroyed commerce was said to be a natural incident of the power to regulate commerce The whole question of habeas corpus hinges on this doctrine of implied powers Congress may do all things necessary and proper to put down a rebellion and if the suspension of habeas corpus is necessary and proper for that purpose then Congress and not the President may suspend Binney never answered these statements and it is doubtful if they can be answered The argument against Binney amounts to this If there were no habeas corpus clause the right to suspend could be implied from the war powers of Congress therefore it is unnecessary to read a grant into a clause which is expressed in the form of a restriction and so the clause is simply a restriction on the implied right of Congress to suspend Then it is an undoubted fact that the state conventions when adopting the constitution supposed that the suspending power had been given to Congress alone This of itself is almost enough to settle the question What was intended by the convention which framed the constitution is of comparatively little importance That convention was simply offering a constitution and their opinion about it could not bind the people But the state conventions were accepting ratifying and creating the constitution and what they understood it to be is almost decisive When we add to this the fact that up to 1861 all authorities agreed in ascribing the power to Congress we have an argument which even the marvellous ingenuity of Binney cannot overcome It is curious that in spite of the great importance of the habeas corpus question very little is said about it in the debates of the convention which framed the constitution and it is hardly referred to in The Federalist The people of that day were easily excited on the subject of liberty and Binney suggests that the Fathers said as little as possible about it because they were afraid of arousing a discussion which would interfere with the adoption of the constitution The addition of two or three words to the habeas corpus clause would have put the matter beyond the peradventure of a doubt and their failure to do this is hard to understand Gouverneur Morris was the author of the clause as we now have it and a chance passage in one of his letters has raised a suspicion that that adroit gentleman intended the habeas corpus clause to be exactly what it is a masterpiece of vagueness 17 Besides Binney s argument there were three others which supported the President One of them was by Attorney General Bates 18 He said that in time of rebellion the President has a right to arrest and imprison such persons as he suspects of holding criminal intercourse with the enemy He has this right because by his oath he has sworn to preserve protect and defend the constitution and Congress has confirmed him in this by those statutes which give him the use of the military power when the combinations are too powerful to be suppressed by judicial proceedings It is his bounden duty therefore to put down insurrection and Congress has given him the means and instruments which he may use at his discretion If the insurgents assail with an army he may find it best to use the army against them It they employ spies and emissaries he may find it necessary to arrest and imprison them Having thus arrested and by this right he is not bound to obey a habeas corpus issued to him by a court The departments of government are independent of each other Each has its own sphere The President s duties are political those of the courts are judicial If in time of a rebellion the President arrests a man it is a political act not within the domain of the courts and they cannot interfere with it They cannot revise or reverse his political decisions Can it be said that after the President has conquered the insurgent army and arrested their emissaries he is bound to bring their bodies before any judge who may send him a writ of habeas corpus and submit to whatever the judge shall see fit to order Bates said he felt so sure of the power of the President that he argued about habeas corpus only out of deference to the opinions of others that he thought it no more necessary to suspend habeas corpus in order to enable the President to arrest spies 19 than to suspend the writ of replevin before seizing the arms and munitions of the enemy His reasoning is peculiar He begins by assuming the proposition which has to be proved He argues that the President has the power to suspend because he has the power to arrest and imprison But the right to arrest is derived if at all from the right to suspend It is impossible to reverse the order for the privilege of habeas corpus is intended to be a protection against arrest and imprisonment by the sovereign Again he derives the right to arrest and imprison from the oath to preserve and defend the constitution An oath cannot contain a grant of power which conflicts with other parts of the constitution and the grant would in this case conflict with the provision declaring that no citizen shall be deprived of life liberty or property without due process of law and also with the provision which forbids arrests except by sworn warrants on probable cause The only exception allowed by the constitution to these two provisions is when habeas corpus is suspended Arrest and imprisonment derive their validity from suspension 20 The right to arrest and imprison is the thing to be proved His final assertion that when the President has arrested an emissary it is a political act and cannot be interfered with by a department whose duties are judicial is the most barefaced assumption that ever was heard of What is habeas corpus for what is all the talk about liberty for if not to check these political acts of the ruler It remains to notice the two other views in support of the President s power One declares that suspension of habeas corpus is an incident of martial law the other that it is one of the implied rights of the commander in chief when engaged in putting down a rebellion Martial law is best defined by distinguishing it from military law and military government Military law is the code of rules and regulations for the government of the officers and enlisted men of the army and applies to no others Military government is the government by a military officer of a conquered foreign province where the local law has been overthrown It applies to all the people in the province but is supposed to last only until civil law can be re established Martial law is military government at home It is the government by a soldier of the citizens of his own country If an American general should invade Canada conquer it and govern its inhabitants that would be military government 21 If an American general in command of a district which included Ohio should undertake to govern the citizens of that state and to punish them for what he deemed to be crimes and offences that would be martial law Martial law is therefore the good pleasure of a soldier administered to the citizens of his district It is the arbitrary will of one man it overthrows all the civil law and of course suspends habeas corpus Lincoln declared martial law in several parts of the country If he had a right to declare it habeas corpus was thereby suspended wherever such law extended When the war was over the Supreme Court decided in Milligan s case 22 after the most solemn argument and deep consideration that the President could not declare martial law in any district not invaded by the enemy and where the judges were on the bench and the courts of law in operation Martial law exists where there is a battle It exists in a community where war exists and the courts and civil authorities are overthrown A commander at the head of his army may impose it on states in rebellion to cripple their resources and quell the insurrection But it never exists where the courts and civil authorities are performing their normal functions It prevails on the actual theatre of war because it is the only law there the other law has been destroyed Beyond these instances it cannot be created except perhaps by an act of Congress 23 The decision in Milligan s case has played havoc with the theories that prevailed during the war Lincoln maintained that any one who injured the efficiency of the military power could be seized by that power tried by a military commission and if necessary hanged 24 It was quite generally believed among ardent Unionists that martial law followed the army that the right to carry on war being given to the government all things necessary to make the war successful were implied 25 Undoubtedly when the Union armies captured a soldier of the Confederacy or an inhabitant of the Confederacy who was aiding the rebellion such person was a prisoner of war and could be held in confinement without a trial until the war was over or he was exchanged No one disputed that people who injured the governments military force in this way could be seized by the army wherever found But suppose a man who had never been in Confederate territory who had never joined the Confederacy and who had no connection with it except by sympathy should in a loyal Northern state of which he was a citizen persuade soldiers to desert combine with others to liberate prisoners to resist the draft and to seize the arms and munitions in the arsenals what name was to be given to this species of traitor Beyond question he was injuring the military force of the government and injuring it more thoroughly than if he were an armed Southern soldier Could he be seized by the army and under martial law dealt with as the commander or a military tribunal saw fit or must he be simply arrested and turned over to the courts and the ordinary procedure of law This was Milligan s case He was a citizen of Indiana a state within the military district of General Hovey but at that time not invaded by the enemy or at most only threatened with invasion and with courts of law and all the machinery of civil government in full operation Milligan believed in the Southern cause but he did not care to join the Southern army and carry a musket or wear a sword He found he could do better at home and he used his best energies to injure the National government and the Northern army and belonged to a secret society devoted to that purpose There is reason to believe that he and some others belonging to the order of American Knights or Sons of Liberty had formed a conspiracy to release the ten thousand Rebel prisoners in Indiana supply them with arms from the Federal arsenal and use them to conquer the state and take it over to the Confederacy He and his accomplices were in communication with the enemy and indulged freely in the usual disloyal practices of the party to which they belonged It was a case which seemed to justify the argument that whoever aids the enemy is an enemy and may be dealt with by the army A conspiracy by Northern men in the North certainly seemed to be as much an act of hostility as an open attack by armed Southern men from the South It was hard to say to the army which Milligan attacked that because he was not a soldier and because he stood on loyal soil and by accident of birth and residence was a citizen of a loyal state they could not touch him It was equivalent to saying that a citizen may take advantage of his citizenship and of the protection of his government to conspire against it After they had caught this arch traitor tried him by a military commission and sentenced him to be hanged they thought it a strange thing to be told that all their proceedings were void and that he must be allowed to go free But that is what the Supreme Court decided and it is the law if the constitution is to be followed Milligan though reeking with treason and rebellion could not be taken as a prisoner of war He was unfortunately a civilian and a resident of a state which was not the theatre of actual warfare and in which the courts of law were wide open All the offences of which he was accused were forbidden by law and could he punished by the courts 26 Habeas corpus was at that time suspended by act of Congress He might therefore have been arrested and held in custody to prevent his taking part in the conspiracy and finally turned over to the courts for trial and punishment But to seize him try him and condemn him by a military commission violated three or four provisions of the constitution First of all the constitution says that The trial of all crimes except in cases of impeachment shall be by jury Again No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous offence unless on presentment by a grand jury nor be deprived of life liberty or property without due process of law The sixth amendment declares that In all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed and goes on to describe further formalities for such a trial When used to deal with offences which can be tried in courts martial law and military commissions violate every one of these provisions The constitution says that no man may be tried and punished except by a jury and due process of law If the courts are open and opportunity given for jury trial and due process of law the constitution must be obeyed and it is absurd to say that martial law may exist When the courts are overthrown and there is no chance for jury and due process then martial law exists by necessity Necessity creates an exception to the rule of the constitution and the constitution itself creates another exception by allowing the suspension of habeas corpus But it is to be observed that the suspension of habeas corpus gives the power to arrest and hold but not to try and punish There have been attempts made to weaken the authority of Milligan s case but they are of little avail 27 It is a decision which can stand severe criticism It received all the light that advocates could give Of the nine judges who composed the court at that time all but one were Northern men and five of the nine had been commissioned by Lincoln They were on the side of the President and their political belief inclined them to support his views of martial law Chase the Chief Justice went so far as to say that whether martial law was constitutional or not it was at any rate sanctified by having had Lincoln s approval Probably the whole court would have been content if the soldiers in Indiana had succeeded in disposing of Milligan and if all the Milligans in the country had been dealt with in a similar way the grief of the learned court would not have been great But they were Americans and when called upon to be lawyers and judges they set aside their feelings and stood by the law and the constitution One of the best arguments in favor of martial law was made by Attorney General Speed 28 He was asked by President Johnson at the close of the war whether the accomplices of Booth in the assassination of Lincoln should be tried by the civil courts or by a military commission under martial law He decided in favor of the military commission and based his opinion on the clause in the constitution which says that Congress shall have power to define and punish piracies etc and offences against the law of nations The law of nations he said is by the constitution a part of the law of the land As the laws of war constitute part of the law of nations they must also be part of the law of the land and must exist whenever there is war and be binding on the citizens and the government Congress may declare war and when declared it must be carried on according to its own peculiar laws By the laws of war the army may capture the soldiers and sailors of the enemy and if accused of offences against the laws of war try and punish them The army may also capture guerillas marauders banditti spies and other secret or open enemies try and punish them according to the laws of war Booth he thought was a secret enemy of the government and his accomplices could accordingly be tried by a military commission He avoided the constitutional provisions in regard to due process of law and jury trial by saying that the constitution gives the government power to carry on war and therefore when war comes the laws of war come with it and are exceptions to those provisions of the constitution He also had to avoid the argument that the laws of war must like the rest of the laws of the land be subject to and modified by the constitution and this he did by saying that the constitutional provisions for jury trial and due process refer only to crimes whereas the clause of the constitution on which he relied speaks of offences against the law of nations If an act were a technical crime according to statute or common law it was of course to be dealt with by the judiciary But if an act were an offence against the law of nations it belonged to the jurisdiction of the army and its military tribunals If this were not so every soldier who killed an enemy in battle would be guilty of murder and would have violated the constitution for he would have deprived a person of life without due process of law So any one who holds a prisoner of war is depriving him of liberty without due process of law And if the army capture a spy and hang him they are depriving him of life without due process of law and also of the privilege of trial by jury But all these acts are lawful because done under the laws of war They belong to the jurisdiction of the laws of war and have nothing to do with jury trial and due process The constitution has established the laws of war and also the rule of jury trial and due process and has assigned to each its own sphere and domain The answer to this reasoning brings us back again to the Milligan case If a man commit an offence which is cognizable in a court and the courts are open he must be tried by a court and due process of law for the simple reason that the constitution commands it Undoubtedly the constitution provides for carrying on war and war is to be waged according to the laws thereof Undoubtedly there are acts such as killing and capturing the enemy which are lawful only under the laws of war and undoubtedly there are offences which are purely offences against the laws of war and cannot be punished by the courts The trial and punishment for spying breaking parol breaking a blockade violating a flag of truce uniting with guerillas and bush whackers belong entirely to the military But proving that the laws of war apply to these does not prove that the laws of war apply to offences for which a remedy is provided in the statute book If the constitution says that no one shall be deprived of life liberty or property without due process of law must not that provision be obeyed whenever it is possible to obey it Although the constitution provides for war the war cannot be carried on so as to violate other parts of the constitution The constitution gives us power to deal with the enemy by the laws of war but it does not give us power to administer the laws of war to our fellow citizens Every offence which can be tried in a court must be tried there and an offence which cannot be tried in a court and is purely military may be left to the army An offence which is both an offence against the laws of war and a crime triable in court should go to the court for the command of the constitution is express in this respect and the right of trial by the laws of war is at best only implied Neither the law of nations nor the laws of war can be allowed to overcome within our own territory the express words of the constitution The constitution is the supreme law of the land and no outside influence or outside law can be paramount to it The laws of war as laid down by Vattel and other European writers may perhaps be liberally construed and administered in monarchical countries but in a country with a written constitution giving only limited powers to the government they must yield to the constitution and suffer change whenever they contradict it Booth murdered Lincoln declaring that it was for the good of his country and he was hunted down and shot as he deserved but his accomplices were tried by a military commission Guiteau murdered Garfield saying that it was for the good of his country and he was tried by the ordinary process of the law There is no difference between the two cases They are both crimes triable only in court A discussion of martial law is never complete until General Jackson s declaration of it at New Orleans is mentioned After he had fought and won the battle of New Orleans and knew though not officially of the ratification of the treaty of peace he undertook to govern the city by martial law The excuse he gave was that the enemy though beaten were still in the neighborhood and might return that the knowledge of peace had demoralized the militia under his command and brought the whole city into a state of turbulence Jackson always believed that the salvation of the country depended on his being absolute master of every one about him and this trait had probably as much to do with the declaration of martial law as any difficulty or danger in his situation A certain Louallier thought his conduct illegal and was bold enough to say so in print He was immediately arrested Judge Hall of the United States district court issued a habeas corpus for his release and Jackson being determined to strike at the root of the matter arrested the judge Afterwards when the judge got back into his court he called Jackson before him and fined him a thousand dollars for contempt Jackson promptly paid the fine and after many years it was refunded to him by act of Congress In passing the act some of Jackson s friends justified him on the ground of necessity which they maintained always decided the right or wrong of martial law Others did not seam to care whether his act was legal or not he was a grand old hero they said and had conquered the British Some admire Jackson because in spite of law and at the risk of his reputation he acted for the safety of his country Others admire Judge Hall because he upheld the dignity of the law against the despotism of a soldier The precedent has become a most valuable one for it can be cited on both sides It is like the other instances of martial law in America In the Revolution Gage the British general at Boston declared martial law five days before the battle of Bunker Hill and even his own countrymen thought it outrageous An attempt was also made to declare it in Virginia during the Revolution and nearly everybody

    Original URL path: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Suspension_of_Habeas_Corpus_during_the_War_of_the_Rebellion (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Sydney George Fisher - Wikisource, the free online library
    by this author are in the public domain in the United States because they were published before January 1 1923 The author died in 1927 so works by this author are also in the public domain in countries and areas where the copyright term is the author s life plus 80 years or less Works by this author may also be in the public domain in countries and areas with longer native copyright terms that apply the rule of the shorter term to foreign works Public domain Public domain false false Authority control VIAF 100311876 LCCN n50003051 ISNI 0000 0001 0928 9072 GND 1055260544 SUDOC 086055666 BNF cb13744205v NLA 35086848 NTA 088031489 NLI 000400458 NUKAT n2007102854 Project Gutenberg 1102 Open Library OL29459A English Wikisource 678359 WorldCat Retrieved from https en wikisource org w index php title Author Sydney George Fisher oldid 5656508 Categories Authors Fi 1856 births Early modern authors 1927 deaths Modern authors Male authors Author PD old 80 1923 PSM contributors Hidden categories Author pages without image Author pages with gender in Wikidata Author pages connected to Wikidata Author pages with authority control data Pages using authority control with parameters Author pages with VIAF on Wikidata Navigation menu

    Original URL path: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Author:Sydney_G._Fisher (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • File:Lundy's Lane Battle.djvu - Wikisource, the free online library
    is a freely licensed media file repository You can help Summary edit Description Lundy s Lane Battle djvu Lundy s Lane battle microform Drummond s dispatch written from Lundy s Lane on the next day to the governor general as commander of the forces at Montreal a rare document which confirms the victory of July 25 1814 Date 1891 Source Archive org Author Sir Gordon Drummond Licensing edit Public domain Public domain false false This media file is in the public domain in the United States This applies to U S works where the copyright has expired often because its first publication occurred prior to January 1 1923 See this page for further explanation This image might not be in the public domain outside of the United States this especially applies in the countries and areas that do not apply the rule of the shorter term for US works such as Canada Mainland China not Hong Kong or Macao Germany Mexico and Switzerland The creator and year of publication are essential information and must be provided See Wikipedia Public domain and Wikipedia Copyrights for more details File history Click on a date time to view the file as it appeared at that time Date Time Thumbnail Dimensions User Comment current 01 14 22 November 2009 2 484 3 528 4 pages 175 KB Mattwj2002 Information Description Lundy s Lane battle microform Drummond s dispatch written from Lundy s Lane on the next day to the governor general as commander of the forces at Montreal a rare document which confirms the victory of July 25 1814 Sou File usage The following 7 pages link to this file User William Maury Morris II Wikisource Proofread of the Month Page Lundy s Lane Battle djvu 1 Page Lundy s Lane Battle djvu 2

    Original URL path: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/File:Lundy%27s_Lane_Battle.djvu (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Lundy's Lane Battle - Wikisource, the free online library
    Falls of Niagara their exertions have been crowned with complete success by the defeat of the Enemy and his retreat to the position of Chippawa with the loss of two of his guns and an immense number of Killed and Wounded and several hundred Prisoners When all have behaved nobly it is unnecessary to hold up particular instances of merit in Corps or Individuals The Lieut General cannot however refrain from expressing in the strongest manner his admiration of the gallantry and steadiness of the 89th Regiment under Lieut Colonel Morrison and Major C lifford who ably and gallantly supplied the Lieut Colonel s place after he was wounded 41st Light Company under Captain G lew and detachment of the 8th or King s Regiment under Captain C ampbell and Royals acting with them also a party of Incorporated Militia by whom the brunt of the Action was for a considerable time sustained and whose loss has been severe To the advance under Lieutenant Colonel P earson consisting of the Glengary Light Infantry under Lieut Colonel B attersby a small party of the 104th under Lieut Colonel D rummond the Incorporated Militia under Lieut Colonel R obinson and detachments from the ist 2d 4th and 5th Lincoln Militia and 2d York under Lieut Colonel P ary 103d the Lieut General offers his warmest thanks They are also due to the Troops which arrived under Colonel S cott during the action viz the ist or Royal Scots under Lieut Colonel G ordon 8th or Kings under Major E vans 103d regiment under Colonel S cott flank compauy 104th with the Norfolk Oxford Kent and Essex Rangers and Middlesex under Lieut Colonel Hamilton The admirable steadiness and good conduct of the 19th Light Dragoons under Major L isle and of the detachment of Royal Artillery under Captain M aclachlan are entitled to particular praise the latter officer having been badly wounded the command of the Artillery devolved to Captain M ackonochie with whose gallantry and exertions Lieut General D rummond was highly pleased Sergeant A ustin who directed the firing of the Congreve Rockets deserves very great credit To the Officers of the general and of his personal Staff to Captain H olland Aid de Camp to Major General R small caps iall Lieutenant General D rummond feels himself greatly indebted for the assistance they afforded him He has to lament being deprived by a wound early in the action of the services of Major General Riall who was most unfortunately made Prisoner whilst returning from the Field by a party of the enemy s Cavalry who had a momentary possession of the Road Lieut General Drummond has also to regret the wounds which have deprived the corps of the services of Lieut Colonel Morrison 89th Regiment and Lieut Colonel Robertson of the incorporated Militia In the fall of Lieut Moorsom of the 104th Regiment serving as Deputy Asst Adjutant General the service has lost a gallant intelligent and meritorious young officer

    Original URL path: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Lundy%27s_Lane_Battle (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • File:On the Relative Motion of the Earth and the Luminiferous Ether.djvu - Wikisource, the free online library
    country of the work in order to be hosted on the Commons If the work is not a U S work the file must have an additional copyright tag indicating the copyright status in the source country PD 1923 Public domain in the United States commons wikimedia org wiki File On the Relative Motion of the Earth and the Luminiferous Ether djvu This tag is designed for use where there may be a need to assert that any enhancements eg brightness contrast colour matching sharpening are in themselves insufficiently creative to generate a new copyright It can be used where it is unknown whether any enhancements have been made as well as when the enhancements are clear but insufficient For known raw unenhanced scans you can use an appropriate PD old tag instead For usage see Commons When to use the PD scan tag Note This tag applies to scans and photocopies only For photographs of public domain originals taken from afar PD Art may be applicable See Commons When to use the PD Art tag File history Click on a date time to view the file as it appeared at that time Date Time Thumbnail Dimensions User Comment current 01 41 9 August 2008 789 1 224 13 pages 1 83 MB Giro720 Information Description en 1 On the Relative Motion of the Earth and the Luminiferous Ether paper about Michelson Morley experiment Source http www aip org history exhibits gap Michelson Michelson html mi File usage The following 16 pages link to this file User William Maury Morris II Wikisource Proofread of the Month Page On the Relative Motion of the Earth and the Luminiferous Ether djvu 1 Page On the Relative Motion of the Earth and the Luminiferous Ether djvu 10 Page On the Relative Motion of

    Original URL path: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/File:On_the_Relative_Motion_of_the_Earth_and_the_Luminiferous_Ether.djvu (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive



  •