Page:Attainder of treason and confiscation of the property of Rebels - 1863.pdf/16

8 involved in the sentence. The sentence, by its very execution, "works" these consequences,

Now let us look at the other clause of the Constitution in which attainder is spoken of. [Art. III, § 3.] Here "treason" is defined, and it is declared, that "no person shall be convicted of treason except by the testimony of two or more witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court."

To be punished for treason, therefore, in this country, one must be convicted, either by proof, or "confession in open court." It cannot be done by, 1st, Outlawry; or, 2d, By bill; as under the English law.

It must be remembered, however, that it is the punishment for treason that we are speaking of, and to which these restrictions of the Constitution apply, and not the mere arrest of one suspected of treason. There is no restriction imposed upon the power or right to arrest and detain any persons who are guilty of treason, or are suspected on sufficient grounds, any more than in the case of other offences.

The next clause of the Constitution goes on to say, "Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture, except during the life of the person attainted,"

It seems not unlikely, that the framers of the Constitution, in accordance with the general policy of our Government, meant in this clause to declare, that the punishment for treason, whatever that might be, should not involve or "work" evil consequences to the guilty, any further than they might, 1st, be expressly declared in the words of the sentence passed upon him by the Court; or, 2d, necessarily involved in the execution of that sentence. These consequences, as we have seen, were of two classes—"forfeiture of rights," and "corruption of blood." One of which, viz., corruption of blood, is wholly abolished by our Constitution.

Under the English law, the traitor was put to death with circumstances of unusual cruelty; his bowels were taken out, while he was alive, and burnt in his presence, with other elements of barbarous ferocity which need not be recalled here. And so far were these notions of corruption of blood carried, that the children must lose forever their right of inheritance through the guilty man, who was regarded as a broken or lost link in the chain that connected them with the past.