The commission thus organized in Banquo's case sat upon him that very night at a convenient place beside the road where it was known he would be traveling; and they did precisely what the attorney-general says the military officers may do in this country-they took and killed him, because their employer at the head of the government wanted it done and paid them for doing it out of the public treasury. But of all the persons that ever wielded this kind of power, the one who went most directly to the purpose and the object of it, was Lola Montez. She reduced it to the elementary principle. In 1848, when she was minister and mistress to the king of Bavaria, she dictated all the measures of the government. The times were troublesome. All over Germany the spirit of rebellion was rising; everywhere the people wanted to see a first-class revolution, like that which had just exploded in France. Many persons in Bavaria disliked to be governed so absolutely by a lady of the character which Lola Montez bore, and some of them were rash enough to say so. Of course that was treason, and she went about to punish it in the simplest of all possible ways. She bought herself a pack of English bull-dogs, trained to tear the flesh and mangle the limbs, and lap the life-blood; and, with these dogs at her heels, she marched up and down the streets of Munich with a most majestic tread, and with a sense of power which any judge advocate in America might envy. When she saw any body whom she chose to denounce for "thwarting the government," or "using disloyal language," her obedient followers needed but a sign to make them spring at the throat of their victim. It gives me unspeakable pleasure to tell you the sequel. The people rose in their strength, smashed down the whole machinery of oppression, and drove out into uttermost shame king, strumpet, dogs and all. From that time to this neither man, woman, nor beast, has dared to worry or kill the people of Bavaria. All these are but so many different ways of using the arbitrary power to punish. The variety is merely in the means which a tyrannical government takes to destroy those whom it is bound to protect. Every where it is but another construction, on the same principle, of that remorseless machine by which despotism wreaks its vengeance on those who offend it. In a civilized country it nearly always uses the military force, because that is the sharpest, the surest, as well as the best looking instrument that can be found for such a purpose. But in none of its forms can it be introduced into this country; we have no room for it; the ground here is all preoccupied by legal and free institutions. Between the officers who have power like this and the people who are liable to become its victims, there can be no relation except that of master and slave. The master may be kind and the slave may be contented in his bondage; but the man who can take your life or restrain your liberty, or despoil you of your property at his discretion, either with his own hands or by means of a hired overseer, owns you and he can force you to serve him. All you are and all you have, including your wives and children, are his property. If my learned and very good friend, the attorney-general, had this right of domination over me, I should not be very much frightened, for I should expect him to use it as moderately as any man in all the world; but still I should feel the necessity of being very discreet. He might change in á short time. The thirst for blood is an appetite which grows by what it feeds upon. We cannot know him by present appearances. Robespierre resigned a country judgeship in early life because he was too tender hearted to pronounce sentence of death upon a convicted criminal. Caligula passed for a most amiable young gentleman before he was clothed with the imperial purple, and for about eight months afterwards. It was Trajan, I think, who said that absolute power would convert any man into a wild beast, whatever was the original benevolence of his nature. If you decide that the attorney-general holds in his own hands or shares with others the power of life and death over us all, I mean to be very cautious in my intercourse with him; and I warn you, the judges whom I am now addressing, to do likewise. Trust not to the gentleness and kindness which has always marked his behavior heretofore. Keep your distance; be careful how you approach him, for you know not at what moment or by what a trifle you may rouse the sleeping tiger. Remember the injunction of scripture, "Go not near to the man who hath power to kill; and if thou come unto him, see that thou make no fault, lest he take away thy life presently; for thou goest among snares and walkest upon the battlements of the city." The right of the executive government to kill and imprison citi. zens for political offenses has not been practically claimed in this country, except in cases where commissioned officers of the army were the instruments used? Why should it be confined to them? Why should not naval officers be permitted to share in it? What is the reason that common soldiers and seamen are excluded from all participation in the business? No law has bestowed the right upon army officers more than upon other persons. If men are to be hung up without that legal trial which the Constitution guarantees to them, why not employ commissions of clergymen, merchants, manufacturers, horse-dealers, butchers, or drovers, to do it? It will not be pretended that military men are better qualified to decide questions of fact or law than other classes of people; for it is known on the contrary that they are, as a general rule, least of all fitted to perform the duties that belong to a judge. The attorney-general thinks that a proceeding which takes away the lives of citizens without a constitutional trial is a most merciful dispensation. His idea of humanity as well as law is embodied in the bureau of military justice, with all its dark and bloody machinery. For that strange opinion he gives this curious reason: that the duty of the commander-in-chief is to kill, and unless he has this bureau and these commissions he must "butcher" indiscriminately without mercy or justice. I admit that if the commander-in-chief or any other officer of the government has the power of an Asiatic king, to butcher the people at pleasure, he ought to have somebody to aid him in selecting his victims, as well as to do the rough work of strangling and shooting. But if my learned friend will only condescend to cast an eye upon the Constitution, he will see at once that all the executive and military officers are completely relieved by the provision that the life of a citizen shall not be taken at all until after legal conviction by a court and jury. You cannot help but see that military commissions, if suffered to go on, will be used for most pernicious purposes. I have criticized none of their past proceedings, nor made any allusion to their history in the last five years. But what can be the meaning of this effort to maintain them among us? Certainly not to punish actual guilt. All the ends of true justice are attained by the prompt, speedy, impartial trial which the courts are bound to give. Is there any danger that crime will be winked upon by the judges? Does any body pretend that courts and juries have less ability to decide upon facts and law than the men who sit in military tribunals? The counsel in this cause will not insult you by even hinting such an opinion. What righteous or just purpose, then, can they serve? None whatever. But while they are utterly powerless to do even a shadow of good, they will be omnipotent to trample upon innocence, to gag the truth, to silence patriotism, and crush the liberties of the country. They will always be organized to convict, and the conviction will follow the accusation as surely as night follows the day. The government, of course, will accuse none before such a commission except those whom it predetermines to ruin and destroy. The accuser can choose the judges, and will certainly select those who are known to be the most ignorant, the most unprincipled, and the most ready to do whatever may please the power which gives them pay, promotion and plunder. The willing witness can be found as easily as the superserviceable judge. The treacherous spy and the base informer-those loathsome wretches who do their lying by the job-will stock such a market with abundant perjury, for the authorities that employ them will be bound to protect as well as reward them. A corrupt and tyrannical government, with such an engine at its command, will shock the world with the enormity of its crimes. Plied as it may be by the arts of a malignant priesthood, and urged on by the madness of a raving crowd, it will be worse than the popish plot, or the French revolution-it will be a combination of both, with Fouquier Tinville on the bench, and Titus Oates in the witness box. You can save us from this horri ble fate. You alone can "deliver us from the body of this death.” To that fearful extent is the destiny of this nation in your hands. ARGUMENT OF DAVID DUDLEY FIELD, ON THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE ENFORCEMENT ACT." [U. S. v. Cruikshank, 2 Otto.] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, OCTOBER TERM, 1874. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.-Congress can grant and secure to citizens of the United States, those rights alone, which are, either expressly or by implication, within its jurisdiction. The violation of rights which are within the exclusive protection of the States, are not indictable under an act of Congress. ANALYSIS OF MR. FIELD'S ARGUMENT. 1. The amendments to the Constitution growing out of the war. 2. The legislation to enforce the amend ments. 3. The offenses charged in the indictment. 4. Object and design of the war amend ments. 5. Theory of the prosecution. 6. Meaning of the term "appropriate legislation." 7. The express and implied prohibitions of power within the Constitution. 8. Limitations upon the mode of enforcing delegated powers. 9. The legislation to enforce the amendments invalid. 10. The tendency towards the centralization of power. 11. Rule of interpretation as to the new amendments. 12. Two propositions which embrace the theory of the defense. 13. Congress has no right to anticipate the action of a State. 14. Failure to provide a remedy not equivalent to the deprivation of a right. 15. A prohibition of the exercise of power, does not confer upon Congress the power prohibited. 16. Mode in which Congress may legally enforce prohibitions upon the States. 17. Constitutional mode of enforcing the amendments. 18. How State laws may be prevented from becoming operative. 19. The legislation assumes that Congress has powers which it does not possess. 20. Second proposition.-Theory and object of government. 21. Practical results of the theory of the prosecution. 22. Rules of interpretation adopted. heretofore The Greek legends and poetry teach that the golden age is in the past. The wonderful march of improvement which marks the closing century as the most important which has yet occurred; the universal dissemination of knowledge, which has done so much for the welfare of the race; the remedies which are being contrived, under a progressive civilization, to perfect and protect the recognized rights and liberties of the individual against the encroachments and |