Assassination of Lincoln: a History of the Great Conspiracy: Trial of the Conspirators by a Military Commission, and a Review of the Trial of John H. SurrattHarris, T. M. (Thomas Mealey)
History
Assassination of Lincoln: a History of the Great Conspiracy: Trial of the Conspirators by a Military Commission, and a Review of the Trial of John H. Surratt
Harris, T. M. (Thomas Mealey)
Lincoln, Abraham, 1809-1865 -- Assassination; Surratt, John H. (John Harrison), 1844-1916
The President was assassinated at a theatre in the city
of Washington. At the time of the assassination a civil
war was flagrant,--the city of Washington was defended by
fortifications regularly and constantly manned, the principal
police of the city was by federal soldiers, the public offices
and property in the city were all guarded by soldiers, and the
President's house and person were, or should have been, under
the guard of soldiers. Martial law had been declared in the
District of Columbia, but the civil courts were open and held
their regular sessions, and transacted business as in times
of peace. Such being the facts, the question is one of great
importance,--important because it involves the constitutional
guarantees thrown about the rights of the citizen, and because
the security of the army and government in time of war is
involved; important, as it involves a seeming conflict between
the laws of peace and war. Having given the question propounded
the patient and earnest consideration its magnitude and
importance require, I will proceed to give the reasons why I am
of the opinion that the conspirators not only may but ought to
be tried by a military tribunal. A civil court of the United
States is created by a law of Congress, under and according
to the Constitution. To the Constitution and the law we must
look to ascertain how the court is constituted, the limits of
its jurisdiction, and what its mode of procedure. A military
tribunal exists under and according to the Constitution in
time of war. Congress may prescribe how all such tribunals are
to be constituted, what shall be their jurisdiction and mode
of procedure. Should Congress fail to create such tribunals,
then, under the Constitution, they must be constituted
according to the laws and usages of civilized warfare. They may
take cognizance of such offences as the laws of war permit;
they must proceed according to the customary usages of such
tribunals in time of war, and inflict such punishments as are
sanctioned by the practice of civilized nations in time of war.
In time of peace, neither Congress nor the military can create
any military tribunals, except such as are made in pursuance
of that clause of the Constitution which gives to Congress the
power "to make rules for the government of the land and naval
forces." I do not think that Congress can, in time of war or
peace, under this clause of the Constitution, create military
tribunals for the adjudication of offenses committed by persons
not engaged in, or belonging to, such forces.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account