Tried by War - Lincoln as Commander in Chief [1861-865]
A President with limited military experience assumes power as commander in chief
and, through strategic insight and will, changes the course of the war.
WAR TIME CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES - CASES of NOTE
Clement Vallandigham - Since he was of Southern ancestry, Vallandigham idealized the Southern way of life, and he assumed leadership of the faction of Midwest Democrats, called Copperheads, who opposed the prosecution of the war against the South — a war they viewed as beneficial only to Eastern interests.
Vallandigham was a diehard Copperhead and a vigorous defender of state rights. Though personally opposed slavery, he felt the national government could not constitutionally compel the states to end what was called the “peculiar institution.”
On May 1, 1863, Vallandigham gave a speech in which he labeled the Union war as “wicked, cruel, and unnecessary.” This conflict, waged by “King Lincoln,” was a “war for the purpose of crushing out liberty and erecting a despotism.” He then called for Lincoln’s removal from office. Enraged by his words, Vallandigham’s supporters burned the offices of a Republican newspaper, the Dayton Journal. Burnside then had Vallandigham arrested and charged him with uttering “disloyal sentiments and opinions, with the object and purpose of weakening the power of the Government in its efforts to suppress unlawful rebellion.”
…In Lincoln’s opinion, the framers of the Constitution had been wise to include a provision allowing for the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus, which was necessary to prevent “sudden and extensive uprisings against the government.” Lincoln explained to the Albany Democrats that Vallandigham’s [former Ohio Congressman Clement Vallandigham] arrest was not, as they mistakenly believed, premised on his criticism of the administration.
The Democrats had charged the administration with arresting Vallandigham in an effort to silence him, and the Atlas and Argus had opined [expressed the opinion] that “[t]he arrest is a threat against every public man who refuses to advocate the extreme measures of the Abolition Cabinet”; but Lincoln declared that Vallandigham had been arrested for his avowed hostility to the Union’s war efforts, his laboring to prevent the raising of troops, and his encouragement of desertions from the army. Furthermore, Vallandigham’s efforts, aimed at damaging the army and leaving the Union without an adequate military force to suppress the rebellion, were intolerable to the administration and antithetical [opposed] to the Union’s attempt to preserve the nation.
Lincoln explained that experience showed that armies could not be maintained unless those who deserted were punished by death. He believed that Vallandigham’s efforts to encourage desertions were equally detrimental to the nation and should likewise be punished by death. Then came the most-remembered passage of Lincoln’s reply: “Must I shoot a simple-minded soldier boy who deserts, while I must not touch a hair of a wily agitator who induces him to desert? … I think that in such a case, to silence the agitator, and save the boy, is not only constitutional, but, withal, a great mercy.” …
Source: Frank J. Williams, “When Albany Challenged the President,”
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.