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
This is a proposition too plain for argument. But it does not
follow that because such military tribunals cannot be created
by Congress under this clause that they cannot be created at
all. Is there no other power conferred by the Constitution
upon Congress or the military under which such tribunals may
be created in time of war? That the law of nations constitutes
a part of the law of the land must be admitted. The laws of
nations are expressly made laws of the land by the Constitution
when it says that "Congress shall have power to define and
punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and
offences against the law of nations." To define is to give the
limits or precise meaning of a word or thing in being; to make
is to call into being. Congress has power to define, not to
make, the laws of nations; but Congress has power to make rules
for the government of the army and navy. From the very face of
the Constitution, then, it is evident that the laws of nations
do constitute a part of the laws of the land. But very soon
after the organization of the federal government, Mr. Randolph,
then attorney general, said: "The law of nations, although not
specifically adopted by the Constitution, is essentially a
part of the law of the land. Its obligation commences and runs
with the existence of a nation, subject to some modifications
on points of indifference." The framers of the Constitution
knew that a nation could not maintain an honorable place among
the nations of the world that does not regard the great and
essential principles of the law of nations as a part of the law
of the land. Hence Congress may define those laws but cannot
abrogate them, or, as Mr. Randolph says, may "modify on some
points of indifference."
That the laws of nations constitute a part of the laws of the
land, is established from the face of the Constitution upon
principle and by authority. But the laws of war constitute
much the greater part of the law of nations. Like the other
laws of nations, they exist and are of binding force upon the
departments and citizens of the government, though not defined
by any law of Congress. No one that has ever glanced at the
many treatises that have been published in different ages of
the world by great, good, and learned men, can fail to know
that the laws of war constitute a part of the law of nations,
and that those laws have been prescribed with tolerable
accuracy. Congress can declare war. When war is declared it
must be under the Constitution, carried on according to the
known usages and laws of war among civilized nations. Under the
power to define these laws, Congress cannot abrogate them, or
authorize their infraction.
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