should I leave no other inheritance to my children, by the blessing of God, I will leave them the inheritance of free principles and the example of a manly, independent, and constitutional defence of them.??

MR. CRITTENDEN ON THIS CASE.

To like purport, the Washington correspondent of the New York Independent writes as follows:

Mr. CRITTENDEN thus spoke in reference to Gen. Burnside to arrest him that he should

this case:

"It is yet doubtful what will be done with Mr. Vallandigham. It is reported here that Mr. Seward says it was a great mistake for have been brought before the courts and tried for treason. If this is Mr. Seward's position, he exhibits his unusual sagacity. The time has not yet arrived when there is a necessity for arresting citizens and trying them by courtmartial in the states where the conflict of arms does not rage. If Gen. Burnside may with propriety ignore the civil courts in Ohio, so may Gen. Dix in New York, and the next step will be, perhaps, the arrest of every editor in New York who offends Gen. Halleck by criticisms upon his course. For it must be remembeaed shat it is the General who arrests, who is sole judge of the necessity, and if a half dozen officers can be found who believe that criticisms upon the General-in-chief tend to evil in the army, then your Washington correspond ent and the editors of the Independent may soon be sentenced to the Dry Tortugas! There are no liberties for the citizen if the new military doctrine prevails. The better course is to stick to law and order, and in the peaceful states to prosecute men in the civil courts for treasonable acts. The experience of 1862 certainly shows this. The President hesitates, and wisely. He doubtless dislikes to seem to shrink from a collision with the copperheads. If Val

"Neither on this nor any other occasion has it been my habit to make an outcry and clamor; but when usurpations of power are made dangerous, and when encroachments upon my liberty and the liberty of my constituents, and upon the Constitution intended to guard the liberties of us all are made, I would have every man have spirit enough to declare his opinions and offer his protests. Without this freedom of speech there can be no lasting liberty-the republic cannot exist. If every man should close his lips, and not venture even a word against violated rights, who could maintain a free Goverument? Nobody. A people who cannot discuss the public measures of the nation, and apply the necessary rebuke to secure correction of wrongs, cannot be a free people, aud do not deserve to be. But it is not necessary that it be done with passion. You are a portion of the people of the United States; act in a manner becoming your high character. Sedition does not become it; clamor does not become it. Action, at the proper time and in the proper manner, according to legal and constitutional provision, is what we want, and what the world has a right to ex-landigham goes free again, all will agree that pect."

THE ABOLITIONISTS FELT UNEASY.

it was a blunder that the arrest was made; but the President cannot evade the blunder, and he is forced to decide upon its merits."

The following was from the Anti-Slavery The Administration Condemned by its own Standard:

"I think there can be doubt that Gen. Burnside committed a blunder in paying any attention to his (Vallandigham's) stump speeches. He should have been indicted and tried in the courts. That is the better way in a free State. For one, I am not going to desert the cause of free speech and good government. Let men like Vallandigham be punished in and by the courts. If any body gets down where there are no courts on the border, where the war rages, let the military power govern him, but it is not quite time yet to let Gen. Burnside direct the newspapers and the politicians of Ohio. If he may do so, the next step will be for Gen. Wool to suppress the newspapers of New York. Those who justify the military arrest of Vallandigham for making excited stump speeches could not deny to Gen. Halleck the right to suppress every newspaper in the country through his subordinates. Gen. Burnside is the sole judge, according to this military theory, and of course Gen. Wool would be the only judge in New York. Let us not admit too much against our own liberties in this terrible attempt to suppress the pro-slavery revolution.""

Organs.

[From the Evening Post, May 14.]

BURNSIDE AND VALLANDIGHAM.

"General Burnside's response to the Circuit Court, from which a writ of habeas corpus was asked in the case of C. L. Vallandigham, arrested for treasonable words spoken, and tried by a military commission, is published on another page. It is so patriotic in spirit, so decided in its expressions of loyalty, and so nobly bold in taking the responsibility, that we almost dislike to question its propriety.Yet, we think dangerous fallacies run through it, which ought to be exposed. General Burnside will himself be among the first to rectify his positions as soon as it is made manifest to him that they are wrong.

He assumes that because he and his soldiers may not indulge in 'wholesale criticisms of the policy of the government,' because it would be an offence in him and his officers to undermine the confidence of the men in the perfect wisdom and integrity of the administration, therefore no citizen has a right to utter such criticisms. But he forgets that persons in the military and naval service of the United States' are subject to military law, while the

ordinary citizen is subject exclusively to civil law. Military law is a part of the law of the land as much as the civil law; but it is applicable only to a particular class, and administered only by special tribunals. Soldiers in service, cadets at West Point, servants of officers and citizens within the actual lines of the army may be guilty of offences created by that law and tried by its courts; but we doubt whether it can be extended to others in any case. Mr. Vallandigham does not belong to either of these categories.

"Abuses and licenses of course adhere to this unlimited freedom of public criticism; but these are apparently inseparable from the use, and without the abuse we should scarcely have the use. It is a question, too, who is to draw the line between the use and the abuse outside of the courts established for the election and punishment of all offences. If Vallandigham's peace nonsense is treasonable, may not Greeley's be equally so? If he cannot arraign the conduct of the war, can Mr. Schalk. who has written a book on strategy which is the severest arraignment of it yet printed? If he may not question the justice or the propriety of Burn

sand other journals venture to hint a doubt of the superhuman military abilities of General Halleck? We know it may be said that his motives are bad and treasonable, while those of the others are loyal; but tribunals and commissions cannot inquire into motives. Deeds are tangible, but not thoughts..

"Neither does it seem to us that martial law as it is called by the English and French writers, and the "state of seige" by the French-side's orders, may the Evening Post or a thoua different thing from military law--has been proclaimed to exist in the department of the Ohio. Or, even if it has been proclaimed, we doubt whether any authority under it can be exercised against persons who are not immediately within the scope of active military operations. It is at least an arbitrary application of military government-the government of mere force which substitutes the will of the commanding general for the common or municipal law, and which ought not to be resorted to except in cases of absolute necessity. When domestic turbulence and riot prevent the exercise of the ordinary jurisdictions, when the presence of contending armies drives out the inhabitants, when the behests of law are set at naught by an entire district, there is occasion for the strong hand of military power. But in other social conditions the appeal to it is unnecessary and in all probability hurtful.

:

Vallandigham's offences, moreover, have been as yet confined to the use of foolish words. He calls Mr. Lincoln bad names; he denounces the Republican party; he abuses Burnside's new military orders, and his example and his instructions are exceedingly pernicious. But, alas, we cannot, in the spirit of Anacharsis Kloot's demand, hang all the dastards and scoundrels at discretion. Vallandigham has not, that we hear, committed any overt act of treason; he has not resisted the laws, though he has perhaps counselled resistance; and until he does, his silly babbling, like Brooks' and Wood's, must be allowed to pass for what it is worth. It is not likety to persuade more than a few ignorant or malignant men to do wrong. Besides, no governments and no authorities are to be held as above criticism or even denunciation. We know of no other way of correcting their faults-spurring on their sluggishness, or restraining their tyrannies-than by open and bold discussion. How can a popular government, most of all, know the popular will, and guide its course in the interests of the community, unless it be told from time to time what the popular convictions and wishes are? Despotisms, like that of Louis Napoleon or the Czar of Russia, have no need of this inspiration and control from the people, because they are not administered in the interests of the people, and look to those of a single man or a family, which can very well manage its own affairs. But a republic lives alone in its fidelity to the sentiments of the whole nation.

"Our article is already too long, or we should like to add a line of the punishment meted out to this Western demagogue. He has been sentenced, it is said, to two years' confinement to the Tortugas Islands. It is a penalty which will make him a martyr, and rouse his old friends and others to earnest expressions of sympathy. He ought merely, at most, to have been sent beyond our lines, to the rebel friends whom he so much admires and serves, and the change would have been a gain to us, if no great gain to them. Nor, supposing the rightfulness of the jurisdiction, could any one have complained of a sentence which mercifully confines the culprit to the agreeable society of this kind."

[From the New York Tribune, May 15.]

"VALLANDIGHAM.

"General Jackson was doubtles a man of more than average sagacity, yet we do not think he showed it in writing, after taking ample time for cool reflection, that, had he been military commandant in Connecticut in December, 1814, he would have hung the leading members of the Hartford Convention under the second section of the Article of War. We will not here discuss the legality of such execution; but we insist that it would have been most impolitic and unwise. The Hartford Convention did very much to save a timid and feeble administration from falling into general contempt and odium. It gave the country its first look over the precipice of disunion, and impelled it to shrink back shuddering, resolved to bear any temporary ills rather than plunge into the yawning vortex beneath. For a supporter of Madison and the war, to have shot or hung the leading Hartford Conventionists, would have been not merely harsh but ungrateful.

"The copperhead spirit never had a freer development than in the recent Connecticut etection, where it harmed none but those it sought to serve. Had the democrats of that State simply renominated their former candidates and held their tongues they must have

triumphed. But they placed a prominent copperhead in the front, and had such men as Toucey, Mayor Wood, Brooks, Richardson, Schnabel and Perrin to aid him in the canvass and that settled their coffee. Their adversaries had no power to beat thrm, but they were perfectly able to beat themselves, if the government would only let them. And they did.

"The action that has taken place since your meeting was held convinces me that it is the intention of the President to crush opposition to their acts by means of force and terror. For this purpose they have established and do now actually enforce martial law in several loyal states, and they will doubtless do the same in New York and everywhere else unless they are made to know that the people will not submit to it.

"Mr. Clement L. Vallandigham is a proslavery Democrat of an exceedingly coppery hue. His politics are as bad as can be. If there were penalties for holding irrational, unpatriotic and inhuman views with regard to poÎitical questions, he would be one of the most flagrant offenders. But our federal and state constitutions do not recognize perverse opinions nor unpatriotic speeches, as grounds of infliction of the speeches themselves, and then the hearer suffers the penalty, not the speak-pose that many of those who clamor for its esSo we don't exactly see how Mr. V. is to be lawfully punished for making a bad speech, unless by compelling him to make it to empty seats.

er.

4

"To many persons the words "martial law'' do not convey any very definite idea. They know that it is something very harsh and rigorous, and summary, but they suppose that it bears some resemblance to all other laws of which they have ever heard or read, in this respect at least; that it defines offenses and fixes their punishment. And I cannot but suptablishment are ignorant that it is nothing in the world but the absolute and unrestrained will of a military chieftain. Permit me, then, to give a description of martial law upon the authority of the highest judicial tribunal of our country. The language is that of Judge Woodbury in delivering the opinion of the court in a case determined by the Supreme Court of the United States:

"By it," says the court, "every citizen, instead of re-. posing under the shield of known and fixed laws as to his liberty, property, and life, exists with a rope round his neck, subject to be hung up by a military despot at the next lamp-post under the sentence of some drum-head Court-martial."

"We fully agree with General Burnside that Vallandigham ought not to make such speeches -that he ought to be ashamed of himself-but then he will make them and won't be ashamed so what will you do about it? "Send him to the Dry Tortugas," says the General--probably as a hint to him to "dry up." "Send him over into Dixie," the President is said to suggest as an alternative. But this is the worst joke Mr. Lincoln has yet made. They don't trouble themselves to try and sentence opposition orators down that way-they kill them on sight, and save a world of trouble. Mr. Vallandigham must be aware that any person making just such speeches in Dixie against the war for secession, as he makes on our side against the war for the Union, could not live out the first day's experiment. He would be shot by the first rebel that could obtain a loaded musket, and that would be the end of him. Sending copperheads down to Jeffdom, where they have speeches only on the side the "powers that be," would set a dozen such tongues wagging for every one so silenced. Beside, "carrying coals to Newcastle" has never been considered poli-purpose for which the establishment of martial tic nor statesmanlike.

VIEWS OF JUDGE DUER ON THE USURPATIONS
OF THE ADMINISTRATION.

Martial Law Cannot be Established in the
Loyal States-The Courts to be Upheld by
Force if Necessary.

"OSWEGO, May 29.
"GENTLEMEN: I received some time ago your
letter inviting me to attend the public meeting
called to vindicate the right of the people to
express their sentiments upon political ques-
tions. It was not in my power to be present at
the meeting, and illness has prevented me un-
til the present moment from answering your
letter. I answer it now, though late, both to
explain my apparent incivility, and also be-
case I think that in the present crisis no loyal
citizen ought to shrink from the expression of
his opinion.

.

"It is true that the Republicans have reason to believe that they will be safe from the horrors of this law under a Republican administration. No Republican or Abolitionist has yet been arrested, imprisoned, or banished, and they may reasonably calculate that none ever will be. Such persons are permitted to stigmatise the Constitution as a league with hell, and insist that the war shall be prosecuted, not to restore the Union, but to destroy it, without being regarded as guilty of any "disloyal practice." The only sufferers, so far, have been Democrats. Indeed, the very

law is sought by the managers of the clubs and leagues is to destroy the Democratic party.And we find it declared in an official document emanating from the War Department, that to support the Democratic party is to support the

cause of the rebels.

•

"This terrible engine, then, is to be set in motion by one political party for the persecution of another, arming neighbor against neigbor, and setting issues in every household. The machinery is prepared. Already the secret societies are in motion, bound by what oaths, I know not. That they who design these things design all their dreadful consequences, I dot believe; but they know little of human nature and little of history who cannot discern them. Under a single despot there is equality; from a single despot there may be hope of escape. But the worst form that despotism can assume is that of the tyranny of party over party; and if anything can add to its horrors it

is when the dominant faction is inflamed by fanaticism and led by priests.

"What matters it that these men are conscientious, that they act under a sense of duty, of religious duty? I do not impeach their motives. The more conscientious they are, the worse. All factions are conscientious, and it is this that makes their tyranny, of all tyran-tation to support the judiciary in opposition to nies, the most insufferable.

:

rested or imprisoned by military men, or by provost marshal's or other officers, acting under the authority of the President, and the court before whom the question shall be brought shall determine that he is entitled to his liberty, then, if in spite of this decision, force shall be used to detain him, there ought to be no hesimilitary usurpation and I should regard it as a base and cowardly not to do so unless in the face of such a force as should make resistance quite hopeless. If it be said that such action would impede the successful prosecution of the war, I answer that it is better that a nation should lose a portion of its territory than its liberty. And if for this cause the rebellious states shall succeed in establishing their independence the fault will be that of the administration; and the people, driven to choose between two evils, will have wisely chosen that which beyond all comparison is the least.

"What we can and ought to do, beyond the mere expression of our sympathy, in aid of our oppressed countrymen in Ohio, Kentucky, and Indiana, is a subject upon which it may be as well at present to say nothing. Let us wait the course of events. We have an immediate question to determine for ourselves, and that is whether we will permit the establishment of the same species of government in our own state; a government which not only no Englishman and no Frenchman would endure, but against which the very lazzaroni of Naples would revolt. I do not speak of exceptional The times require, in a very high degree, cases of an extreme public necessity, such as the exercise of the virtues of courage and of we may imagine, though their occurrence is prudence. Moderation in our counsels will not at all probable; but I speak of systematic give us strength and unity in action. Let us acts, done under claim of right, without ne- accept as our leader him whom not less merit cessity, upon false pretences-acts which are than position designates (the chief magistrate not only flagrantly unconstitutional, but utter- of our state), and follow him and support that ly subversive of liberty and of law, and of moderate and patriotic, but not feeble or unwhich the manifest tendency, if not the pur- manly policy which he has recommended and pose, is not to maintain the Union but to de-enforced with so much dignity and success, and stroy it. I am sure that we will not submit to this, and we ought to say so plainly. I have no faith in any petitions, protests, or remonstrances that fall short of this. There is danger in leaving the President ignorant of our purpose. I am not sanguine enough to hope for anything from his sense of justice or respect for the law. The powers that control him, whether spiritual or terrestrial, will do to us whatever we will suffer, but are not likely to attempt that which they know we will not suffer.

་

I shall yet hope that the Union may triumph over both classes of its enemies-the southern secessionist and the northern abolitionist. I remain, gentlemen, very respectfully your servant, WILLIAM DUER.

"To Gideon J. Tucker, John Hardy, and Andrew Mathewson, Esqs."

[From the New York World.]

"The man who stands by and says nothing when the peril of his government is discussed, cannot be misunder

stood."

PRESIDENT LINCOLN'S DEFENSE. "At the same time I deprecate all resistance "The President not only admits that citizens that is not strictly constitutional. Let us not have been deprived of their liberty on mere only submit to but support all proper authori-partisan conjectures of their possible intenty. The President claims the constitutional tions, but he confesses that these conjectures power to establish martial law over the body have had nothing to rest upon. of the people in the loyal states. We deny it. Let the courts determine the question. The judicial authority is vested in the courts, and not in the President, the Congress, or the Army. It is as much the duty of the President as of any private citizen to submit to that authority. If he resists it he becomes an usurper, and may himself be lawfully resisted. And on the other hand, if any court or judge, acting under the forms of law, shall sanction his monstrous assumptions, let us in turn subsubmit; not because there may not be judicial as well as executive usurpation, and the same right in extreme cases to resist the one as the other, but on account of the condition of the country, and the double dangers that assail us. In this way there may be occasional acts of tyranny, as has been already, but upon the whole the restraint of the judiciary will be found adequate to our protection, if the President himself will respect it,

"But if any citizen of this state shall be ar

"Was anything so extraordinary ever before uttered by the chief magistrate of a free country? Men are torn from their homes and immured in bastiles for the shocking crime of— silence! Citizens of the model republic of the world are not only punished for speaking their opinions, but are plunged into dungeons for holding their tongues! When before, in the annals of tyranny, was silence ever punished as a crime?

"Citizens who disapprove of the acts of the administration are denied eyen the refuge of a digniffed silence, and, on malicious and partisan conjectures of the motives of such silence, they are deprived of their liberty. Few among us ever expected to live to see such things done; and nobody, we are sure, to see them so unblushingly confessed. What must be Mr. Lincoln's appreciation of the public sentiment of