Mr. STEVENS. I am stating what I would do if I were the Administration. Now, although I would not discourage trials for treason, Imention this to show that I am convinced that none of these traitors can ever be convicted of treason under our present Constitution and laws. And yet I would rather let every man of them run unpunished forever than to make a law now by which they could be punished. I think our Government would be endangered in its future existence, in its sense of justice, in its character before the world by conduct ef that kind, more than it would by enduring the evil, I think the British Government suffered more from its murder of Lord Russell, although it was done by means of a court condemning him, than it would have done had he been suffered to escape. It was by just such contrivances as this that that judicial murder was effected, and by which the British Government suffered more than it would have done by the escape of 40 traitors. I think our Government better be careful how it tampers with the crime or the remedy. It better treat them as guilty partly of a political offense and partly of. malum in rethan now to attempt to pass laws, because otherwise the malefactors may escape. This professes to be a bill to make indefi mite the prosecution of one of those offenses which of all others should be quieted by lapse of time. Although treason is as high a crime as can possibly be committed, yet there are generally so many engaged in the crime of treason and in rebellion that there must be some quieting law, and in my judgment there ought to be. Now, it does not follow that every traitor will escape who is not prosecuted within 3 years of the time of the commission of the offense. The statute of limitations never runs in any case unless it is possible to enforce the remedy; it only runs from the time when it was possible to enforce it. For instance, I will refer to the men now in Europe, Benjamin, Slidell, and others; I do not suppose that anybody will say that while they were absent be. wond seas the statute of limitation would run. The statute would begin to run when the time arrived that he could be prosecuted. But whether that be so or not, still, during the time of war, during the prosecution of the war, the crime continued; it was a continuing offense, and the offense continued up to the time when peace shall be proclaimed, which it never yet has been. I know that a gentleman in this city has made public a statement which he desired to have considered as equal to the decrees of James and Charles, as over ruling the law. But it is of no more importance than so much waste paper. The question of peace or war is yet to be decided by this body. I say there is no peace. This nation is still in a belligarent condition; and the conquered belligerents are within the power of the conqueror, to be dealt with as captives, not as criminals. Therefore, sir, I can see no necessity for a measure of this sort; but if there were a s, neces. should certainly object to any alteration. of the law as it now exists in regard to treason which would enable the Government to convict where it is confessed a conviction could not be obtained under the law as it stood at the time of the commission of the offense. I should be very glad to see condign punishment inflicted upon many of these men, not capital punishment; for in my youth f read Beccaria, and adopted to a great extent the principles which he maintains. I never realized the sufficiency of the atonement made by the execution of that magnificent leader of the rebellion, the miserable Wirz–a Dutchman, I believe, with a humpback who was obeying the orders of his superiors, and who, in ordinary times when men were tried according to law, would never have been convicted, because his Government was answerable, not he. I do not believe that the starvation of 1000s of Union prisoners is to be atoned for by the execution of one of the keepers