The Writ of Habeas Corpus states that “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” (U.S. Constitution. Art. I, Sec. 9). In simpler terms, this means that the government, or its officials, is forbidden to arrest a citizen without allowing the case to be presented to a judge or court. The dictionary defines a writ as “a form of written command in the name of a court or other legal authority.” Since the signing of the Magna Carta in 1215, Habeas Corpus has been a pillar of law in America (“FAQs: What Is Habeas Corpus.”). It is such a massive support for North America that Alexander Hamilton stated in The Federalist No. 84 that it is, “the favorite and most formidable instruments of tyranny” (Turley). Although Habeas Corpus has provided a structure for America’s government, in 1863, during the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln suspended it. Since then, scholars have been debating whether or not Lincoln had the power to suspend the Writ in the first place. However, if the evidence of rebellion, how the suspension helped control the threat against the nation’s capital, and Lincoln’s reasoning for the suspension is considered; the suspension of Habeas Corpus was completely justified.
When the Civil War first broke out, Lincoln had very little doubts that the suspension of civil liberties was necessary nor constitutional. However, when he began to face a “full-fledged insurrection” in the South with the support of Maryland Confederacy sympathizers, Lincoln began to worry about the rebellion (Ewers). This is because the riot was occurring in Baltimore, Maryland, which is the state between Washington, D.C., and the rest of the Union. As the riots, started by the Copperheads (Confederacy sympathizers) got progressively worse, Lincoln ordered a group of Massachusetts soldiers South to protect D.C. during the first month of the war. When the soldiers arrived, they were attacked by an angry mob as they passed through Baltimore. The soldiers panicked and fired into the crowd. 12 civilians, along with 4 soldiers were killed; these were the first casualties of the Civil War (Ewers). During this act of rebellion, letters addressing government officials were sent between each other. The letter that best described the Copperhead’s rebellion Thomas H. Hicks, who was the governor of Maryland at the time, and sent to the Secretary of War, Simon Cameron:
“Since I saw you in Washington last I have been in Baltimore City, laboring in conjunction with the Mayor of that city to preserve peace and order, but I regret to say with little success. Up to yesterday there appeared promise, but the outbreak came; turbulent passions of the riotous element prevailed; fear for safety became reality; what they had endeavored to conceal, but what was known to us, was no longer concealed but made manifest; the rebellious element had the control of things. We are arranging and organizing forces for the protection of the city and to preserve order, but want of organization, and of arms, prevented success. They had arms; they had the principal part of the organized military forces with them, and for us to have made the effort, under the circumstances, would have had the effect to aid the disorderly element. They took possession of the armories, have the arms and ammunition, and I therefore think it prudent to decline, (for the present.) responding affirmatively to the requisition made by President LINCOLN, for four regiments of Infantry” (Schanberger).
In the letter to the Secretary of War, Hicks writes that the government’s attempt to promote and “preserve war and peace” has failed greatly. He also draws a very vivid picture of the rebellion in Baltimore, writing “they had arms; they had the principal part of the organized military forces with them” and “they took possession of the armories, have arms and ammunition”. Hicks also urges Simon Cameron to agree to stop responding to the rebellion in order to prevent further destruction to the city. This letter is strong evidence that there was, in fact, a rebellion occurring in the nation and if Lincoln would have allowed it to get any worse, it would result in the Confederacy overtaking the North. Furthermore, Southern sympathizers were beginning to cut telegraph wires and burn bridges behind Union lines in Maryland. Lincoln had the right to be concerned with what might happen to the capital if he allowed the rebellion to continue. He had to find a way to prevent it. “Lincoln decided that drastic measures were necessary to forstall disaster, for no government could function if its capital was surrounded by enemy territory” (McPherson 152).
In April 1861, vaguely uncertain of his rights, Lincoln gave the order to suspend the writ of Habeas Corpus. This allowed the Army to arrest and detain without trial those considered “disloyal.” The suspension of Habeas Corpus was limited, at first, to the rail lines between D.C. and Philadelphia, but it soon spread to the rest of the Union. Although he made this order, in a letter to Congress Lincoln sent out July 4th, he explained how he understood how “the legality and propriety of what has been done under it, are questioned; and I have been reminded from a high quarter that one who is sworn to ‘take care that the laws be faithfully executed’ should not himself be one to violate them– Of course I gave some consideration to the questions of power, and propriety, before I acted in this matter– (Ewers).” In this quote, Lincoln is stating that although he is unsure if the president has the power to suspend Habeas Corpus, but he knew that if he hadn’t, the rebellion would be to much for him to control later. However, though he knew of the controversy the suspension of the writ of Habeas Corpus, later in the same letter, Lincoln stated,
“But, in this case, I was not, in my own judgment, driven to this ground– In my opinion I violated no law– The provision of the Constitution that ‘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’ is equivalent to a provision — is a provision — that such privilege may be suspended when, in cases of rebellion, or invasion, the public safety does require it. I decided that we have a case of rebellion and that the public safety does require the qualified suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, which I authorized to be made….But the Constitution itself, is silent as to which, or who, is to exercise the power; and as the provision plainly was made for a dangerous emergency, I can not bring myself to believe that the framers of that instrument intended that in every case the danger should run its course until Congress could be called together, the very assembling of which might be prevented, and in as was in- of which might be prevented, as was intended in this case, by the rebellion– (Schanberger).”
One of the first people to be arrested after the suspension was John Merryman. Merryman’s case is one of the best known Habeas Corpus cases of the American Civil War. The case also shows how the suspension of Habeas Corpus helped protect the Union from the Confederacy rebellion. John Merryman was a lieutenant in the Baltimore County Horse Guards and a Maryland state legislator. After Merryman’s arrest, The Sun Papers published an article about the night Merryman was arrested. The article outlined that,
“On one Friday night, Lieut. Abell, with a squad of the forces stationed at the house of Mr. M. about two o’clock on Saturday morning, took him into custody and awaited the passage of the of the down train, in which they reached this city shortly before 8 o’clock. He was then placed in a hack and taken to Fort McHenry. While in the custody of the military he declined to hold any conversation with those on the train. The charge upon which he was arrested is said to have been a participation in the burning of the bridges on the Northern Central railway, between Cockeysville and the Maryland line, after the departure of the Cockeysville camp. Mr. M. is still detained at Fort McHenry.”
As written in the news article, Merryman was arrested because he had participated in the rebellion by burning bridges on the Northern Central railway. Merryman was also accused of recruiting and training soldiers for the Confederate Army and of helping to cut telegraph wires. He was indicted for treason and confined at Baltimore’s Fort McHenry, charged with seeking to hinder U.S. troop movements from Baltimore to Washington, which was threatened by Confederate forces. In this case, the suspension of Habeas Corpus provided the Union with the opportunity to detain the people who were destroying the surrounding cities of the capital. The suspension also protected the government and its people from government officials, like Merryman, who has committed treason. The suspension of Habeas Corpus was the only thing that kept the Union from becoming taken over by the Confederacy.
Hearing of Merryman’s arrest, Chief Justice Taney intervened. He issued a Writ of Habeas Corpus to Fort McHenry’s commanding officer, Major George Cadwalader. By issuing a Writ of Habeas Corpus, Taney hoped for Merryman to be released, or at least an explanation from Lincoln for why he decided to arrest the prisoners in the first place. However, obeying orders from the President, Cadwalader refused to acknowledge the petition. Furious, Taney wrote his opinions, known later as Ex Parte Merryman. In this, Taney stated, “that only Congress has the power to suspend the Writ, and then, only in cases of extreme emergency.” He, then, condemned the President for overstepping his Constitutional limits, as he had no right to suspend the Writ. Abraham Lincoln read Taney’s opinion, but decided not to honor it. Lincoln believed that the state of affairs warranted emergency action, and since Congress was in session, he had to act immediately himself. In response to Taney’s opinion, Lincoln wrote, “Are all the laws but one to go unexecuted and the government itself go to pieces lest that one be violated” (Schanberger). As the war progressed, the arrests continued, and Lincoln suspended the Writ as far north as Maine. On March 3, 1863, Congress authorized the President to suspend the Writ. In the minds of Lincoln’s supporters, the suspension of the Writ was necessary to keep the Union strong, and essentially preserve the chance of survival of the United States. However, the Confederacy leaders condemned Lincoln, called him a dictator, and “a man who stop at nothing to gain total power (“National Monument and Historic Shrine Maryland”). ”
Like stated in Lincoln’s letter to the Congress, most people believed that the choice to suspend the writ of Habeas Corpus was in the hands of Congress. Some even question why Congress agreed to Lincoln’s choice in the first place. But, if the Congress’ point of view is considered, then the reasoning behind their decision to support Lincoln becomes clear. Congress is only in session a few days a year. And if the government waited too long, the riots could’ve taken an even worse turn, allowing the confederacy to overtake Maryland and the nation’s capital, Washington D.C. Corresponding to what Lincoln wrote in his letter, “I can not bring myself to believe that the framers of that instrument intended that in every case the danger should run its course until Congress could be called together” (Sahanberger). This shows how Lincoln understood that him making the decision to suspend Habeas Corpus was need in order to protect the nation against Copperhead and their rebellion
Was he a dictator, or were these actions necessary to hold together the country in its most perilous hour?