Page:Attainder of treason and confiscation of the property of Rebels - 1863.pdf/31

23 we live in troublous times, when our country is in need of the services of all her loyal sons―in times when we should not be too fastidious about mere forms of decorum and professional courtesy—when he who can say a word or do a deed for his country's cause should not withhold his hand. I have not so learned Christianity as to understand how one can be faithful to his God who is not engaged to his country, and who, after his duty to his God, will not, in every hour of her peril and of her need, rush to her service.

W. D. WILSON.

, N. Y., March 24th, 1862.

, March 29, 1863.

, D. D.

Dear Sir—I have read your discussion of the punishment of treason, in the form of a letter addressed to me, with great interest and satisfaction. You are entirely correct in saying that your views accord with mine on that subject, and it gives me pleasure to learn, that my suggestions have been of service to you in your investigation of it.

Our fathers, in framing our Constitution, have provided for us a humane, yet efficient mode of punishing treason. In this, as in everything else, they have done well. To enable us to understand the mode they have marked out for punishing this highest of crimes, we must bring to view and keep before us the modes in which it was punished in England when our Constitution was adopted.

At that time, treason was punished in England in two ways: one, by trial and conviction of the traitor in a court of law; the other, by an Act of Parliament denouncing his guilt and punishment.

These Acts of Parliament, called "Bills of Attainder," were passed against traitors, both living and dead, and denounced