having been done by the executive authorities
in the way even of a plain statement and
representation of the facts, which occurred
right here, within his sight and hearing. In
reference to what the executive is to do, every
case will suggest its own remedy. I will not
now, but when the proper time comes I shall
take occasion to state what I believe to be the
proper spheres of the State and of the Federal
Government, And I will go just as far to
preserve the authority of the Federal Gov-
ernment, within the limits of the Constitution
of the United States, as any man upon this
floor.
Mr. STIRLING. I do not feel disposed to en-
ter into this very much vexed question which
the gentleman from Prince George's (Mr.
Clarke,) has raised, because, so far as the
principle of the thing is concerned, lam per-
fectly willing to leave it where the bill of
rights of Maryland now leaves it, and where
the Constitution of the United States leaves
it. If there is any necessity for putting an
obligation upon the Governor of the State to
protect the rights of the people of the State,
he is now under as much obligation, under
the Constitution of this State, or the Consti-
tution of the United States, as he would be
placed under by any provision which we
could incorporate in it.
It has recently happened, and will happen
in every time of public commotion, and
especially of civil war—it has happened in
the portion of this country under the Gov-
ernment of the United States, and under the
Government of the so-called Confederate
States, that a great many people have been
tried by martial law. Now, I am not going
to enter into the question upon which that
has been defended, that these people were out-
side of the provisions of the Constitution.
But it has never been asserted that either the
President of the United States, or the man
who calls himself the President of the Con-
federate States ever said that they had any
right to override the law; they have always
endeavored to explain their acts as being con-
sistent with the law. Now, whether they
have done so or not I leave to those who are
curious in that matter. I shall leave the
question as to how far the provisions of the
Constitution and bill of rights have been
shaken by the convulsions of this bloody
struggle to the reflections of those who com-
menced it. if they choose to shake the Con-
stitution by the qualms of a political earth-
quake, they must go back to themselves to
solve the question as to bow far the Constitu-
tion has been shaken.
As to the general principle, I suppose eve-
rybody is agreed upon that; that the people
ought to be tried by the established judiciary,
and not by martial law. The question how
far people have put themselves beyond the
reach of that judiciary, bow far they have
become public enemies, is not going to be |
settled by the introduction of additional lan-
guage in this Constitution. The declaration
here is sufficient, as it stands, and the only
effect of putting in what the gentleman pro-
poses is to produce difficulty, for it can result
in no possible good.
Gentlemen upon the other side of the
House have heretofore manifested a great de-
sire to leave this bill of rights in the condition
in which the fathers left it. Some of them
wanted to go back to Magna Charta. Now let
them apply that same principle to this article,
and let the bill of rights on this subject of
military law stand precisely where the old
bill of rights left it. For if it is cot neces-
sary and proper to introduce an amendment
in regard to one provision, it cannot certainly
be proper in regard to another on that prin-
ciple.
Mr. CLARKE. In reply to the gentleman
from Baltimore city, (Mr. Stirling,) I will
state that I stand here, a citizen of Maryland,
protected by the Constitution of the United
States, and the Constitution and laws of the
State of Maryland; and, as I shall show
when I come to discuss the relations of this
question, under the aegis of the decision of
the Supreme Court, as far as that decision
goes. Therefore I am not going to be
drawn into any discussion as to who created
this great civil commotion, and how far they
were justifiable, and how far President Davis,
the so-called President of the Confederate
States, may do this, that or the other, for I
have nothing lo do with that. The Supreme
Court of the United States have decided that
there is war and that those people are alien
enemies; that the loyal man there is just as
much an alien enemy as the man who is taken
with a gun or a sword in his hand. There-
tore I am not going to enter into any discus-
sion about alien enemies, or what they did
or do, or anything in reference to any matter
of justification in reference to our course,
whether they were legal acts this way, that
way, or the other. I am going to discuss
only the rights of the citizens of the State of
Maryland. I had nothing to do with this
impending struggle. My skirts are just as
clear of it as those of the gentleman from
Baltimore city, (Mr. Stirling.)
Mr. STIRLING. I had no intention to refer
to the gentleman from Prince George's (Mr.
Clarke.) I made the reference in a general
way, not to particular individuals.
Mr. CLARKE. I am going to disconnect this
question entirely from what may perhaps be
considered outside party bias. I will say
this: that some of my friends upon this floor
have great veneration and love for anything
ancient, and will not change it for any con-
sideration if they can possibly avoid it. I
am not quite so tied down to the past assome
of them. I voted upon the proposition to let
this first article stand—that the people have
at all times the right of revolution, the un- |
