agreed to-yeas 22, nays 16, as follows:

rected to inform the Senate whether Dr. John Law and | lay the whole subject on the table; which was Whiteley Meredith, or either of them, citizens of the State of Delaware, have been arrested and imprisoned in Fort Delaware; when they were arrested and so imprisoned; the charges against them; by whom made; by what orders they were arrested and imprisoned; and that he communicate to the Senate all papers relating to their arrest and imprisonment.

YEAS-Messrs. Anthony, Arnold, Chandler, Clark, Fessenden, Foot, Foster, Grimes, Hale, Harlan, Harris, Hicks, Howard, Howe, King, Lane of Kansas, Morrill, Pomeroy, Sumner, Wade, Wilkinson, Wilson of Massachusetts-22. NAYS-Messrs. Bayard, Carlile, Davis, Harding, HenderWhich was laid upon the table-yeas 29, Saulsbury, Turpie, Wall, Willey, Wilson of Missouri-16. son, Kennedy, Latham, McDougall, Powell, Rice, Richardson, nays 13, as follows:

vert, Corning, Cox, Crittenden, English, Fouke, Granger, Messrs. Ancona, Baily, Biddle, Jacob B. Blair, CalGrider, Haight, Hall, Harding, Holman, Knapp, Law, Lazear, Menzies, Morris, Noble, Norton, Nugen, Odell, Price, Richardson, Sheffield, Shiel, John B. Steele, William_G. Steele, Stiles, Benjamin F. Thomas, Francis Thomas, Val

Laid on the table and printed.

1863, February 26-Mr. PowELL offered the landigham, Ward, Chilton A. White, Wickliffe, Wright, following resolution:

Yeaman-40.

December 1-Mr. RICHARDSON offered the following resolution :

Resolved, That the President of the United States be reKen-quested to inform this House what citizens of Illinois are now confined in the Forts Warren, Lafayette, and Delaware, or the Old Capitol prison, and any other forts or places of confinement; what the charges are against said persons; also the places where they were arrested. That the President be further requested to inform this House of the names of the persons that have been arrested in Illinois and taken to and confined in prisons outside of the limits of said State, and who have been released, what were the charges against each of them, by whom the charges were made, also by whose order said arrests were made, and the authority of law for such arrests.

Resolved, That a committee of three be appointed to investigate the facts in reference to the arrest and imprisonment of Madison Y. Johnson, and that said committee have the power to send for persons and papers, to examine wit-prolonging the term of their imprisonment. Desses under oath, and administer oaths to said witnesses.

Burnham, Calvert, Clemens, Cobb, Cox, Cravens, Crittenden, Dunn, English, Granger, Grider, Hale, Harding, Johnson, William Kellogg, Kerrigan, Knapp, Law, Lazear, Leary, May, Morris, Noble, Norton, Nugen, Pendleton, Price, Robinson, James S. Rollins, Shiel, Smith, Benjamin F. Thomas, Francis Thomas, Vallandigham, Vibbard, Voorhees, Wadsworth, Ward, Chilton A. White, Wickliffe, Woodruff, Worcester, Wright, Yeaman-48.

December 15-Mr. PENDLETON offered the following resolution :

Resolved, That the President be requested to inform this House, if in his opinion not inconsistent with the public interest, whether in any oath of allegiance or parole required to be taken by any prisoner held in custody as a socalled political prisoner, there has been inserted a clause to the effect that he should not bring suit for the recovery of damages for such imprisonment, or that he should not oppose, by speech or otherwise, the war measures of the Ad

ministration.

Which was laid on the table by the following vote-yeas 77, nays 43.

March 3-Mr. MAY offered the following resolution:

Whereas it is represented that Major General Schenck, commanding the forces of the United States stationed in Baltimore, Maryland, has ordered, as a condition to be annexed to the worship of Almighty God by certain religious societies or congregations of the Methodist Church of that city, that the flag of the United States shall be conspicuously displayed at the time and place of such worship: and whereas the said order is a plain violation of the inalienable right to worship God according to the dictates of every one's conscience, as it is asserted by the said congregations, and also by our declarations of fundamental rights and secured by our State and Federal Constitutions: and whereas a minister of the said congregation, the Rev. John H. Dashiell, having, on Monday, the 15th ultimo, removed the said flag from his own premises, which was also the place of worship of one of said congregations, where the said flag had been placed surreptitiously by some evil-minded person, and for so doing was arrested by order of the said General Schenck and held as a prisoner: Therefore,

Be it resolved, That the Judiciary Committee be, and hereby is, instructed to inquire into the allegations aforesaid, and ascertain by what authority the said General Schenck exercises a power to regulate or interfere with the privileges of divine worship, and also to arrest and detain as a prisoner the said minister of the Gospel, as aforesaid; and, further, that said committee be instructed to report upon the same at an early day.

invaded, and in which the civil and judicial powers are in full operation.

2. Resolved, That Congress has no power under the Constitution to delegate to the President of the United States the authority to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, and imprison at his pleasure, without process of law or trial, the citizens of the loyal States.

3. Resolved, That the assumption of the right by the Executive of the United States to deprive the citizens of such loyal States of the benefits of the writ of habeas corpus, and to imprison them at his pleasure, without process of law, is unworthy the progress of the age, is consistent only with a despotic ower unlimited by constitutional obliga tions, and is wholly subversive of the elementary principles of freedom, upon which the Government of the United States and of the several States is based.

The House refused to suspend the rules to get the resolution before the House-ayes 28, noes 79, (yeas and nays not called)

4. Resolved, That the Judiciary Committee be instructed to prepare and report a bill to this House protecting the rights of the citizens in the loyal States, in strict accordance with the foregoing provisions of the Constitution of the United

States.

Which was negatived-yeas 67, nays 90, as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. James C. Allen, William J. Allen, Ancona, Augustus C. Baldwin, Bliss, Brooks, Brown, Chanler, Coffroth, Cox, Cravens, Dawson, Denison, Eden, Edgerton, Eldridge, English, Finck, Ganson, Grider, Hall, Harding, Harrington, Benjamin G. Harris, Herrick, Holman, William Johnson, Kernan, King, Knapp, Law, Le Blond, Long, Mallory, Marcy, McAllister, Mc Dowell, McKinney, Middleton, William H. Miller, James R. Morris, Morrison, Nelson, Noble, Odell, John O'Neill, Pendleton, Perry, Radford, Sam uel J. Randall, Robinson, Rogers, Ross, Scott, John B Steele, William G. Steele, Stiles, Strouse, Sweat, Voorhees, Wadsworth, Ward, Wheeler, Chilton A. White, Joseph W. Whate, Winfield, Wood-67.

NAYS-Messrs. Alley, Allison, Ames, Arnold, Ashley, John D. Baldwin, Beaman, Blaine, Blow, Boutwell, Brandegee, Broomall, William G. Brown, Ambrose W. Clark, Freeman Clarke, Clay, Cobb, Cole, Creswell, Henry Winter Davis, Thomas T. Davis, Dawes, Dixon, Donnelly, Driggs, Dumont, Eckley, Eliot, Farnsworth, Fenton, Frank, Garfield, Gooch, Grinnell, Hale, Higby, Hooper, Hotchkiss, Asahel W. Hubbard, John H. Hubbard, Hulburd, Jenckes, Julian, Kasson, Kelley, Francis W. Kellogg, Orlando Kellogg, Loan, Longyear, Lovejoy, Marvin, McBride, McClurg, McIndoe, Samuel F. Miller, Moorhead, Morrill, Daniel Morris, Amos Myers, Leonard Myers, Norton, Charles O'Neill, Orth, Perham, Pike, Pomeroy, Price, William H. Randall, Alexander H. Rice, John H. Rice, Edward H. Rollins, Schenck, Scofield, Shannon, Sloan, Smithers, Spalding, Stevens, Thayer, Tracy, Van Valkenburgh, Ellihu B. Washburne, William B. Washburn, Whaley, Williams, Wilder, Wilson, Windom, Woodbridge-90.

1864, February 29-Mr. PENDLETON offered the following resolution:

Resolved, (as the sense of this House,) That the military arrest, without civil warrant, and trial by military commission without jury, of Clement L. Vallandigham, a citizen of Ohio, not in the land or naval forces of the United States or the militia in actual service, by order of Major General Burnside, and his subsequent banishment by order of the President, executed by military force, were acts of mere arbitrary power, in palpable violation of the Constitution and laws of the United States.

First Session, Thirty-Eighth Congress. 1863, December 17-Mr. HARRINGTON offered this resolution :

Whereas the Constitution of the United States (article one, section nine) provides: "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when, in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it:" and whereas such provision is contained in the portion of the Constitution defining legislative powers, and not in the provisions defining executive power; and whereas the Constitution (article four of Amendments) further provides: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, YEAS-Messrs. James C. Allen, Ancona, Augustus C. Baldhouses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches win, Brooks, Chanler, Coffroth, Cox, Dawson, Denison, and seizures, shall not be violated," &c.; and whereas the Eden, Eldridge, Finck, Ganson, Harding, Harrington, Her Thirty-Seventh Congress did, by act, claim to confer upon rick, Holman, Hutchins, Kernan, Knapp, Law, Long, the President of the United States the power, at his will Marcy, Mc Dowell, McKinney, William H. Miller, Morrison, and pleasure, to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas Nelson, Noble, John O'Neill, Pendleton, Radford, Samuel J. corpus throughout the United States, without limitations Randall, Rogers, Ross, Scott, Stebbins, John B. Steele, Wilor conditions; and whereas the President of the United liam G. Steele, Stiles, Strouse, Stuart, Sweat, Voorhees, WiStates, by proclamation, has assumed to suspend such priv-liam H. Wadsworth, Chilton A. White, Winfield-47. ileges of the citizen in the loyal States; and whereas the NAYS-Messrs. Alley, Allison, Anderson, Arnold, Baily, people of such States have been subjected to arbitrary ar- John D. Baldwin, Baxter, Francis P. Blair, jr., Blow, Boutrests without process of law, and to unreasonable search well, Boyd, Brandegee, Ambrose W. Clark, Freeman Clarke, and seizures, and have been denied the right to a speedy Clay, Cobb, Cole, Creswell, Henry Winter Davis, Dawes, trial and investigation, and have languished in prisons at Deming, Dixon, Donnelly, Driggs, Dumont, Eckley, Eliot, the arbitrary pleasure of the Chief Executive and his mili- Farnsworth, Frank, Grinnell, Hale, Higby, Hooper, Hotchtary subordinates: Now, therefore, kiss, Asahel W. Hubbard, John H. Hubbard, Jenckes, Julian, Kelley, Francis W. Kellogg, Orlando Kellogg, Loan, Marvin, McBride, McClurg, Moorhead, Morrill, Daniel Mor ris, Amos Myers, Leonard Myers, Norton, Charles O'Neill, Patterson, Perham, Pomeroy, Price, William H. Randall, John II. Rice, Schenck, Scofield, Shannon, Sloan, Smithers,

Resolved by the House of Representatives of the United States, That no power is delegated by the Constitution of the United States, either to the legislative or executive power, to suspend the privileges of the writ of habeas corpus in any State loyal to the Constitution and Government not

Which the House refused to table-yeas 33, nays 84, and then rejected-yeas 47, nays 77, as follows:

Starr, Stevens, Thayer, Thomas, Upson. Van Valkenburgh,
Elihu B. Washburne, William B. Washburn, Whaley,
Williams, Wilder, Wilson, Windom, Woodbridge-77.

January 25-Mr. McDOWELL offered the following resolutions, which were laid over under the rule:

Be it enacted, dc., That upon all arrests under section 6,

of chapter 200, of an act approved the 17th of July, 1862, bail shall be admitted, and such bail, on the demand of the party so arrested, may be taken before any judge of the Resolved, 1. That the House fully recognizes the great fund-rior court, or chief or first judge of court of common pleas United States, any chancellor, judge of a supreme or supeamental provision of the Constitution of the United States of any State, who shall exercise their discretion therein, rewhich guarantees the freedom of speech to every American garding the nature and circumstances of the offence, and of citizen and that neither the President, nor any person act- the evidence and the usages of the law. ing in a subordinate capacity to him, has the rightful authority to arrest and imprison a citizen of the loyal States for the utterance of sentiments distasteful to the men in power. 2. That we recognize in the freedom of the press the great bulwark of civil liberty; and that those persons temporarily intrusted with power have not the rightful authority, in those States not in rebellion, to subvert this great constitutional guarantee by issuing military orders, or by a resort to any other means unknown to the laws of the country.

Messrs. James C. Allen, Ancona, A. C. Baldwin, Bliss, J. S. Brown, Chanler, Cox, Cravens, Dawson, Denison, Eden, Eldridge, English, Finck, Grider, Griswold, Harrington, Herrick, Holman, P. Johnson, Kalbfleisch, Law, Lazear, Long, Mallory, Marcy, McKinney, Middleton, J. R. Morris, Morrison, J. O'Neill, Pruyn, S. J. Randall, Robinson, Rogers, J. B. Steele, Wheeler, C. A. White, Winfield, Feaman-40.

June 20-Mr. Ross offered the following resolution, which went over under the rule:

this bill, which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary:

3. That the right to security of person from arrest in the loyal States, when no crime is charged, is a sacred right guaranteed to every citizen; and that neither the President, nor any one acting by his authority, has the legal right to arrest, imprison, or transport our people without "due process of law," requiring affidavit, warrant, arrest, and trial by a jury of the country, impartially selected.

4. That the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is a fundamental and inherent right belonging to the American people, solemnly guaranteed by express provision of the Constitution, that cannot be denied to the citizens of the loyal States, where the courts are open and the administration of justice is unobstructed, and "invasion and rebel

lion" do not exist.

5. That the Constitution of the United States is one of expressed and limited powers, and that neither Congress nor the Executive have the "lawful right" to interfere with the established rights and domestic institutions of the several States.

6. That we reaffirm our unalterable devotion to the Constitution of the United States, and to each and every provision thereof, as framed by the fathers, including those provisions relating to the rights of property and the inviolability of contracts, as understood and interpreted by the Supreme Court of the United States.

March 21-Mr. ELDRIDGE offered this resolution, which was laid over under the rule:

Resolved, That the President of the United States be respectfully requested, and that the Secretary of State and the Secretary of War be directed, to report and furnish to this House the names of all persons, if any there are, arrested and held in prison or confinement in any prison, fort, or other place whatsoever, for political offences, or any other alleged offence against the Government or authority of the United States, by the order, command, consent, or knowledge of them or either of them, respectively, and who have not been charged, tried, or convicted before any civil or criminal (not military) court of the land, together with the charge against such person, or cause for such arrest and imprisonment, if there be any, and the name of the prison, fort, or place where they are severally kept or confined. Also, whether any person or persons, for any alleged like offence, have been banished or sent from the United States, or from the States not in rebel--the party first to take a prescribed oath of allegiance. Another section provides: That any order of the President, or under his auof the present rebellion, shall be a defence in thority, made at any time during the existence

Section 2 directs the Secretary of State and the Secretary of War to furnish to the judges of the circuit and district courts of the United States and of the District of Columbia, a list of the names of all persons, citizens of loyal States, held as State or political prisoners of the United States, in any fort, arsenal, or other place; and provides that where a grand jury has adjourned without finding an indictment against any such person, the judge shall forthwith make an order that any such prisoner desiring a discharge be brought before him to be discharged, and every officer of the United States is directed immediately to obey this order, under penalty of fine and imprisonment

lion to the rebellious States; and the names, times, alleged offence or cause thereof; and whether with or without trial; and if tried, before what court.

April 4-The resolution, on motion of Mr. EDWARD H. ROLLINS, was laid upon the table-all courts to any action or prosecution, civil yeas 62, nays 40. The NAYS were

or criminal, pending, or to be commenced, for any search, seizure, arrest, or imprisonment, made, done, or committed, or acts omitted to be done, under and by virtue of such order, or under color of any law of Congress, and such defence may be made by special plea, or under the general issue.

Resolved, That all persons not in the military or naval service of the United States who have been arrested and imprisoned by the agents of the Government without process of law, and released without trial or examination, are entitled to the same pay and mileage for the time they were deprived of their liberties as members of Congress; and the Committee of Claims are hereby instructed to report a bill at an early day for that purpose. Same day, in SENATE-Mr. MORRILL offered

Third Session, Thirty-Seventh Congress. THE ACT OF INDEMNITY OF MARCH 3, 1863. Section 1 provides: That, during the present rebellion, the President of the United States, whenever, in his judgment, the public safety may require it, is authorized to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in any case throughout the United States, or any part thereof. And whenever and wherever the said privilege shall be suspended, as aforesaid, no military or other officer shall be compelled, in answer to any writ of habeas corpus, to return the body of any person or persons detained by him by authority of the President; but upon the certificate, under oath, of the officer having charge of any one so detained that such person is detained by him as a prisoner under authority of the President, further proceedings under the writ of habeas corpus shall be suspended by the judge or court having issued the said writ, so long as said suspension by the President shall remain in force, and said rebellion continue.

Suits begun in State courts may be transferred to United States Courts under circumstances described. Any suit described in this act may be carried on writ of error to the Supreme Court of the United States, and all suits or prosecutions for any arrest or imprisonment or other trespasses or wrongs, shall be commenced within two years.

This bill passed the House of Representa

tives, March 2, 1863-yeas 99, nays 45, as imprisoned; and that for them redress might be had in the courts of the United States, by resort to the peaceful, regfollows: ular, and ordinary administration of the law. It is framed upon the idea that the citizen was arrested without the existence of crime on his part, or even probable cause to suspect it, and that in making such arrests, the substance, as well as the form, of those provisions of law intended to secure personal liberty were entirely disregarded. It makes no exception of those cases in which the arrests have been made with malice, and the imprisonment have been inflicted with circumstances of brutality and cruelty, in which the "public good" has been made the cloak wherewith to cover the gratification of political animosity or private hatred. It distinguishes in nothing between the cases in which an honest mistake has been followed by its immediate correction, and cases in which malignity has been enabled, by false pretences, to procure the arrest and to prolong the imprisonment, to the loss of property, the destruction of health, and, in some instances, the insanity, suicide, or lingering death of the unhappy victim. It distinguishes in nothing between the active officer, zealous in the full discharge of his official duties, and the base miscreant who volunteers to assume the degrading character of spy and informer, that he may, with more effect and security, use the falsehood which the venom of his heart prompted him to invent. It proposes to condone all of fences, to protect all offenders, and to take away all redress for injuries, however great, or with whatever circumstances of aggravation or bad motive inflicted.

If these acts had been done in all cases from the purest

motives, with an eye single to the public good, with as litthe aggression as possible on private rights, with all circummisun-spection and care that only those who were really guilty should suffer such confinement as would prevent the commission of an unlawful act-if the public good were in fact subserved by them-it might be proper to protect the President, and those acting under his authority, from criminal prosecution and penal sentence; it might be proper to protect them from pecuniary loss, by the payment, from the public Treasury, of the damages assessed against them. Even then, whilst admitting that circumstances like these would in seasons of great public dangers negative all wrongful intent in the commission of these illegal acts, it would be the duty of the Representatives of the people to affirm that at all times the President of the United States, before all other men, should adhere most strictly to the forms of legal procedure when directing his powers against the personal liberty of the citizen. It could never be proper to indemnify the President, and those acting under his authority, at the expense of the citizen whom they had injured, or to add to their security by the destruction of his remedies.

The Constitution of the United States guards most carefully the rights of the citizen; it was ordained "to estab lish justice, insure domestic tranquillity," and to "secure the blessings of liberty;" and so steadily was this object kept in view, that in addition to the reservation of all powers not granted, there are special prohibitions of seizures without warrant, detentions without indictment, imprisonment without a speedy and public trial, and deprivation of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; and there are clauses which extend the judicial power of the United States to all controversies between citizens of different States, and secure a trial by jury in all cases in which the value in controversy exceeds twenty dollars. Congress has hitherto uniformly maintained, and, as far as was neces sary, has perfected by its legislation these guarantees of personal liberty, and the courts have enforced them by the assessment of damages for their infraction. This bill proposes to deprive the courts of the power to afford such protection. It will, if carried out into practical and general operation, release the people from the duty of appealing to such peaceful and legal means of redress, and will provoke more summary and less constitutional measures. Yet this bill, without precedent in our history, suggesting such grave questions of constitutionality and expediency, believed by many members to be utterly subversive of the rights of the citizen and of the express provisions of the Constitution, by the force of mere numbers and against the remonstrance of the minority, was passed within one hour of its first introduction, without having been printed, without having been referred to any committee, select or standing, and without any opportunity for consideration or discussion.

The undersigned, members of the House of Representstives, do therefore most solemnly remonstrate against this action of the House, and respectfully ask that this ther protest may be entered upon the Journal.

They protest against the refusal of the House to permit consideration and discussion of the bill as an arbitrary exercise of power by the majority, unjust to the members, unjust to their constituents, and derogatory to its character as a deliberative legislative body.

They protest against the passage of the bill

1. Because it purports to deprive the citizen of all existing, peaceful, legal modes of redress for admitted wrongs,

YEAS-Messrs. Aldrich, Arnold, Ashley, Babbitt, Baker, Baxter, Beaman, Bingham, Jacob B. Blair, Samuel S. Blair, Blake, William G. Brown, Buffinton, Campbell, Casey, Chamberlain, Clark, Colfax, Frederick A. Conkling, Roscoe Conkling, Conway, Cutler, Davis, Dawes, Delano, Dunn, Edgerton, Eliot, Ely, Fenton, Samuel C. Fessenden, Thomas A. D. Fessenden, Fisher, Flanders, Franchot, Frank, Goodwin, Gurley, Hahn, Hale, Harrison, Hooper, Horton, Hutchins, Julian, Kelley, Francis W. Kellogg, William Kellogg, Killinger, Lansing, Leary, Lehman, Loomis, Low, McIndoe, McKean, McKnight, McPherson, Marston, Maynard, Mitchell, Moorhead, Anson P. Morrill, Nixon, Olin, Patton, Timothy G. Phelps, Pike, Pomeroy, Porter, John H. Rice, Riddle, Edward H. Rollins, Sargent, Sedgwick, Segar, Shanks, Shellabarger, Sherman, Sloan, Spaulding, Stevens, Stratton, Francis Thomas, Trimble, Trowbridge, Van Horn, Van Valkenburgh, Van Wyck, Verree, Walker, Wall, Wallace, Washburne, Wheeler, Albert S. White, Wilson, Windom, Worcester-99.

NAYS-Messrs. William Allen, William J. Allen, Ancona, Biddle, Calvert, Cravens, Crisfield, Delaplaine, Dunlap, English, Granger, Grider, Hall, Harding, Holman, Johnson, Kerrigan, Knapp, Law, Mallory, May, Menzies, Morris, No ble, Norton, Nugen, Pendleton, Perry, Price, Robinson, Shiel, Smith, John B. Steele, William G. Steele, Stiles, Benjamin F. Thomas, Vallandigham, Voorhees, Wadsworth, Ward, Chilton A. White, Wickliffe, Wood, Woodruff, Yeaman-45.

Same day, the bill passed the SENATE, without a record of yeas and nays, owing to a derstanding respecting the putting of the vote. March 3-Mr. BAYARD moved that the Secretary of the Senate be directed to request the House of Representatives, to return to the Senate the above report of the Committee of Conference; which was rejected-yeas 13, nays 25, as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Bayard, Carlile, Davis, Henderson, Latham, Nesmith, Powell, Rice, Richardson, Saulsbury, Turpie, Willey, Wilson, of Missouri-13.

NAYS-Messrs. Anthony, Chandler, Clark, Dixon, Doolittle, Foster, Grimes, Harlan, Harris, Hicks, Howard, Howe, King, Lane of Indiana, Lane of Kansas, Morrill, Pomeroy, Sherman, Sumner, Ten Eyck, Trumbull, Wade, Wilkinson, Wilmot, Wilson of Massachusetts-25.

While this subject was pending before Congress, the House, December 8, 1862, passed an indemnity bill-yeas 90, nays 45, against which, on the 22d of December, thirty-six members of the House moved to enter on the journal this protest:

Resolved, That the following protest of thirty-six members of this House against the passage of the House bill No. 591 be entered upon the Journal:

On the 8th day of December, A. D. 1862, and during the present session of Congress, Mr. STEVENS, of Pennsylvania, introduced the bill No. 591, entitled "An act to indemnify the President, and other persons, for suspending the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, and acts done in pursuance thereof." and after its second reading moved that its consideration be made the special order for the Thursday then next ensuing, which motion being objected to, he moved the previous question, and this being sustained, under the operation thereof the bill was read a third time, and passed.

This bill involves questions of the gravest importance. It provides that all suspensions of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, all arrests and imprisonments upon whatever pretexts or by whomsoever made, under the authority of the President, however arbitrary or tyrannical or unjust, are confirmed and made valid; and that all persons who advised or executed or assisted in the execution of any such acts are discharged from all liability, whether to the State or to individuals "in respect thereof;" and that all proceedings against them of any nature, whether for the recovery of damages or for the infliction of punishment " commenced or to be commenced," are discharged and made void. It also provides that the President may, during the existence of this rebellion, at any time and anywhere throughout any of the United States, and as to any person, suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.

The bill is framed upon the idea that the acts recited were illegal, and without just cause or excuse; that they were violations of the rights of the persons arrested and

and thus constrains him tamely to submit to the injury in- | present rebellion, it shall not be lawful for any officer or flicted or to seek illegal and forcible remedies. servant of the United States to arrest or detain any citizen of the United States who may be supposed or alleged to be wrong-disloyal thereto, or for any other cause, except upon oath or affirmation of some person or persons well known to be loyal to the United States, and particularly describing in said oath or affirmation the act of disloyalty or other cause for which the said citizen should be arrested and detained. SEC. 2. That any and every officer or servant of the United States who shall arrest or detain any citizen of the United States in contravention of the provisions of the first section of this act shall, on conviction thereof in any court having jurisdiction in the case, suffer a fine of not less than $10,000, or imprisonment in the penitentiary for a term not less than five years.

SEC. 3. That all persons arrested under the provisions of this act upon the charge of disloyalty to the Government of the United States, or for any other cause, shall have the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus; and the said writ shall not be suspended at any time so far as the same may relate to persons arrested as aforesaid.

2. Because it purports to indemnify the President and all acting under his authority for acts admitted to be fal, at the expense of the citizen upon whom the wrongful acts have been perpetrated, in violation of the plainest principles of justice, and the most familiar precepts of constitutional law.

3. Because it purports to confirm and make valid, by act of Congress, arrests and imprisonments which were not only not warranted by the Constitution of the United States, but were in palpable violation of its express prohibitions. 4. Because it purports to authorize the President, during this rebellion, at any time, as to any person, and everywhere throughout the limits of the United States, to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, whereas by the Constitution the power to suspend the privilege of that writ is confided to the discretion of Congress alone, and is limited to the places threatened by the dangers of invasion or insurrection.

5. Because, for these and other reasons, it is unjust and
unwise, an invasion of private rights, an encouragement to SEC. 4. That nothing in this act shall be so construed as
lawless violence, and a precedent full of hope to all who to prevent the arrest of any person, a citizen of any or
would usurp despotic power and perpetuate it by the arbi- either of the States now in rebellion against the Govern-
trary arrest and imprisonment of those who oppose them.ment of the United States, who may be charged with trea-
6. And finally, because in both its sections it is "a delib- son or disloyalty thereto: Provided, That all arrests of
erate, palpable, and dangerous" violation of the Constitu- such persons shall be made as provided in the first section
tion," according to the plain sense and intention of that in- of this act, or upon the precept of the President of the
strument," and is therefore utterly null and void.
United States.

W. A. Richardson,
J. C. Robinson,

George H. Pendleton, C. A. Wickliffe,
Charles J. Biddle,
J. A. Cravens,
Elijah Ward,
Philip Johnson,
John D. Stiles,
D. W. Voorhees,
G. W. Dunlap,
Hendrick B. Wright,
H. Grider,
W. H. Wadsworth,
A. Harding,
Charles B. Calvert,
James E. Kerrigan,
Henry May,
R. H. Nugen,
George H. Yeaman,
B. F. Granger.

P. B. Fouke,
James R. Morris,
A. L. Knapp,
C. L. Vallandigham,
C. A. White,
Warren P. Noble,
W. Allen,
William J. Allen,
8. S. Cox,
E. H. Norton,
George K. Shiel,
8. E. Ancona,
J. Lazear,
Nehemiah Perry,
C. Vibbard,
John Law,

THE ACT SUSTAINED BY THE COURTS.

The important case of George W. Jones, exMinister to Bogota, vs. William H. Seward, has been decided in New York by the Supreme Court. Mr. Jones was arrested on a telegraphic dispatch from Secretary Seward, and imprisoned at Fort Lafayette. When released he brought a suit for $5,000 damages for false imprisonment. Mr. Seward, by counsel, moved to transfer the case to the United States Circuit Court, under the act of March, 1863. The mo

The motion to enter this protest was tabled-tion was denied, and the General Term decided yeas 75, nays 41. an appeal which was taken to it. The majority The above bill of Mr. STEVENS was amended of the judges affirm the act; one, Clerke, disin the Senate, and finally passed that body-sented." yeas 33, nays 7, as follows:

YEAS-Messrs. Anthony, Arnold, Browning, Chandler, Clark, Collamer, Cowan, Dixon, Doolittle, Fessenden, Foot, Foster, Grimes, Hale, Harlan, Harris, Henderson, Hicks, Howard, King, Lane of Indiana, Lane of Kansas, Morrill, Pomeroy, Sherman, Sumner, Ten Eyck, Trumbull, Wade, Wilkinson, Willey, Wilmot, Wilson of Massachusetts-33. NATS-Messrs. Bayard, Carlile, McDougall, Powell, Turpic, Wall, Wilson of Missouri-7.

The House non-concurred in the amendments, and a Committee of Conference having met, agreed upon a report, which was agreed to in both Houses as stated before.

Which was rejected-yeas 7, (Messrs. Carlile, Kennedy, Powell, Richardson, Saulsbury, Turpie, Wall,) nays 29.

NAYS-Messrs. Anthony, Arnold, Chandler, Clark, Davis, Dixon, Doolittle, Fessenden, Foot, Grimes, Harris, Henderson, Hicks, Howard, Howe, King, Lane of Indiana, Lane of Kansas, Morrill, Pomeroy, Sherman, Sumner, Ten Eyck, Trumbull, Wilkinson, Wilson of Massachusetts-27.

George W. Jones vs. William H. Seward.

of the act of Congress passed March 3, 1863, affords a valid LEONARD, J.-The question is not whether the 4th section defence to the action. The true question is this: Is it in the power of Congress to give the circuit court jurisdiction of the case?

to all cases in law and equity arising under the ConstituThe Constitution extends the judicial power of the Union tion, laws, and treaties of the United States.

The defence in this case arises under the act of Congress,

and the validity of that act, considered in the light afforded be determined at the trial. It has been decided that a case by the Constitution, will be one of the principal subjects to

arises within the meaning of the Constitution as well when the defendant seeks protection under a law of Congress, as when a plaintiff comes into court to demand some right conferred by law.

It has been objected that the original jurisdiction of all actions may be drawn into the Federal courts, by similar enactments of Congress, and that the case arises within the meaning of the Constitution only after a trial and judgment in this court, when the action can be referred by a writ of error or appeal, and brought before the Federal courts for review.

The power of transferring causes to the United States Circuit in a similar manner, where the question involved was of an appellate and not original jurisdiction, has long

been sustained.

Bank of the United States (9 Wheaton, 821): "We perceive
Chief Justice Marshall says, in the case of Osborn vs. The
no ground on which the proposition can be maintained, that
Congress is incapable of giving the circuit courts original

jurisdiction, in any case to which the appellate jurisdiction
extends."

VOTE ON ARRESTS.

Congress has enacted that the defendant may interpose Feb 23-Mr. CARLILE moved this substitute in his defence the orders, &c., of the President, and has for the bill: directed the transfer of cases involving such a defence, in the manner prescribed, into the circuit court.

From and after the passage of this act, and during the

According to the statements of the defendant such a case