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
rules of prison discipline, they may be punished, but not
without trial. The commander who should order every prisoner
charged with improper conduct to be shot or hung would be
guilty of a high offense against the laws of war, and should
be punished therefor after a military trial. If the culprit
should be condemned and executed, the commander would be as
free from guilt as if the man had been killed in battle. It
is manifest from what has been said, that military tribunals
exist under and according to the laws of war, in the interest
of justice and mercy. They are established to save human life
and to prevent cruelty as far as possible. The commander of an
army in time of war has the same power to organize military
tribunals and to execute their judgments that he has to set
his squadrons in the field and fight battles. His authority
in each case is from the laws and usages of war. Having seen
that there must be military tribunals to decide questions
arising in time of war betwixt belligerents who are open and
active enemies, let us next see whether the laws of war do
not authorize such tribunals to determine the fate of those
who are active but secret participants in the hostilities. In
Mr. Wharton's "Elements of International Law," he says: "The
effect of a state of war, lawfully declared to exist, is to
place all the subjects of each belligerent power in a state of
natural hostility. The usage of nations has modified this maxim
by legalizing such acts of hostility only as are committed by
those who are authorized by the express or implied command
of the State, such as the regularly commissioned naval and
military forces of the nation, and all others called out in
its defense, or spontaneously defending themselves in case of
necessity, without any express authority for that purpose."
Cicero tells us in his offices, that by the Roman feudal law no
person could lawfully engage in battle with the public enemy
without being regularly enrolled, and taking the military oath.
This was a regulation sanctioned both by policy and religion.
The horrors of war would indeed be greatly aggravated if every
individual of the belligerent States were allowed to plunder
and slay indiscriminately the enemies' subjects without being
in any manner accountable for his conduct. _Hence, it is in
land-wars irregular bands of marauders are liable to be treated
as lawless banditti, not entitled to the protection of the
mitigated usages of war as practiced by civilized nations._
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