Sti ,1/51 Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2010 with funding from The Library of Congress http://www.archive.org/details/legislativeapproOOnibl E 480 .N58 Copy 1 LEGISLATIVE APPROPRIATION BILL. '-£^05^ > SPEECH OF HON. W. E. NIBLACK, OF INDIANA, III tlie House of Representatives, July ^, 1870. On the report of tlie committee of confer- 1 Sir, I have seen some service on commit- ence on the bill ("H. R. No. 974) making tees of conference, and I appreciate fully appropriations for the legislative, executive, the importance of mutual concessions ia and judicial expenses of the Government adjusting differences between the Houses. for the year ending the 30th of June, 1871. I am uniformly willing to concede much when necessary in matters of expediency Mr. NIBLACK. Mr. Speaker, as I stated a moment ago, I was unable to agree with the committee of conference in regard to this report; but my disagre-finent is con- fined mainly to one item. There are other matters which do not meet the approval of my judgment, but they were such as were merely, or where only a few paltry doUtrs are involved. But sir, matters like tliis proviso, in my judgment, lie beyond the region of compromise. No man ought to consent to compromise away what he re- gards as an important principle underlying the plighted faith of the Government, and ^, , ... . , . , ., affecting the honor of the men who are en- the bill IS very much improved as it comes , . ,, .,, „ ., , gaged in the administration of it. from the committee oi conference over whati it was when it came from the Senate, and I ^y the act of July 17, 1862, provision if it were not for the subject-matter to which ^as made for the confiscation of the prop- I have referred I would have had no hesi- erty of persons engaged in the rebellion and tation in signing the report, and recom- ^""^ ^1^® P^^ishment of treason against the mending it as a fair adjustment of the dif ferences between the two Houses. But, sir, thefe is a proviso to this bill, as it came from the Senate, attached to the appropriation for the Court fo Claims, which I regard as most extraordinary. I am op. posed at all times to settling such an im- portant principle of general legislation a^ this in an appropriation bill ; but I am especially opposed to this proviso on ac- Kjount of the matter embraced in it, and the objects sought to be accomplished by it. It ia, it seems to me, one of those extrava- gant outgrowths of the prejudices and furies engendered by the late war which we have too often seen in this Hall, and which ought liev«r to crystallize into a law. United States. The proceedings necessary for these purposes were defined and pre- scribed in that act. Its provisions were intended to be additional to and iji aid o the war power of the Government. Section thirteen of that act contains the following provision : "Sec. 13. And he it further enacted, Tiiat the President is hereby authorined at any time hereafter, by proclamation, to ext'^ud to persons who may have participated in the existing rebelliou in any State or part thereof, pardon and amnesty, with such exceptions and at such time iud on suuh conditions as he may deem expedient for the public welfare." The President may have possessed this power under the Constitution. Indeed, I [think he did so possess it. But whether ha H. Folkinhoru & Co., prs., D st. near 7th, Washington. .U55 did or not, the section conferred on him plenary powers in matters of amnesty and pardon. It was, too, a recognition of the propriety of using these powers in aid of the war. On the 12th of March, 1863, provision was also made by Congress for the appoint- ment of Treasury agents to look after and to gather up and dispose of certain aban- doned and captured property in the States then declared to be in insurrection and re- bellion. It was not provided that this cap- tured and abandoned property should be confiscated. One great object seemed to be to prevent its loss or destruction, and when sold its pioceeds were to be paid into the Treasury, or rather held by the Govern- ment primarily for the use of the own»-r when properly claimed by him. It was only when no lawful owner appeared for this property that the proceeds were to be re- tained by the Government. Provision was made in this act that persons might go into the courts, and, on establishing their right to any of this property, should receive back the proceeds of what belonged to ihem, de- ducting the amount of expenses, &c., in cases where the property had been sold. That act contained a provision which I will ask the Clerk to read. The Clerk read as follows : " And any person claiming to have been the owner of any such abandoned or cap- tured property may, at any time within two yeais after the suppression of the re- bellion, prefer his claim to the proceeds thereof in the Court of Claims ; and on proof to the satisfaction of said court of his ownership of said property, of his right to the proceeds thereof, and that he has never given any aid or comfort to the piesent re- bellion, to receive the residue of such pro- ceeds after the deduction of any purchase money which may have been paid, together with the expense of transportation and sale of said property and any other lawful ex- penses attending the disposition thereof." Mr. NIBLACK. Now, Mr. Speaker, in pursuance of the act of July 17, 1862, to which I have referred heretofore, President Lincoln, then President of the United States, on the 6lh day of December, 1863, published his proclamation to those engaged in the rebellioD, specifying the terms and condi tions upon which they might come forward and jeceive amnesty and political absolu- tion. I ask the Clerk to read the first clause of that amnesty proclamation. The Clerk read as follows : "I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, do proclaim, declare, and make known to all perilous who have directly or by implication participated in the exist- jiug rebellion, except as hereinafter except- ed, that a full pardon is hereby granted to them and each of them, with restoration of all rights of property, except as to slaves and in property cases where rights of third parties shall have intervened, and upon condition that every such person shall take and subscribe an oath and thenceforward keep and maintain said oath inviolate, and which oath shad be registered for perma- nent preservation, and shall be of the tenor and efiect following, to wit." Mr. KIBLACK. Then, Mr. Speaker, fol- lows the oath required by this proclama- tion, and certain exceptions and reserva- tions are to some classes of the more prom- inent or obnoxious persons as defined by the President. This proclamation, as will be observed, promises to these persons, upon conditions and with the exceptions above referred to, the full restoration of all their rights of property, except that in slaves, and where the rights of third per- sons had intervened. These rights of prop- erty, according to all fair, legal construc- tion, include the right to the proceeds of the property, when sold and wherever found ; and I think that it is especially the case when we come to construe that proc- clamation in connection with the act of March 12, 1863, in regard to this captured and abandoned property, a portion of which I have just had read. Under these provisions of the law and of the proclamation quite a number of per- sons, who had availed themselves of this amnesty, which was afterwards extended by the President during and up to the very close of the war, filed their petitions in the j Court of Claims, and have ever since been prosecuting their claims for the proceeds of their property. The Supreme Court of the United States, in the case of Paddle- ford against the Government, known as the iFaddleford case, has recently decided tha ^on proof of amnesty granted in this proc- of Claims. I will ask now that this pro- >5 lamation, or proof of pardon by th- Piesi- viso shall be read, and I hope every mem- . dent having been given — that is the gen-iber of the House will give it strict atten- ''eral language of the opinion, but the par- ; ticular case I refer to being one under the ' general amnesty proclamation of President Lincoln, the claimant having accepted of tion. The Clerk read as follows : Provided, That no pardon or amnesty granted by the President, whether general the conditions imposed by the President in!"'' special, by proclamation or otherwise, his proclamation-was thereafter to be cen-^*'" ^""^ acceptance of such pardon or am- ^ nesty, nor oath taken, or other act per- sidered in the same light as if he had never formed in pursuance or as a condition participated in the rebellion at all, having thereof, shall be adraisisible in evidence on received entire absolution, and standing in the part of any claimant in the Court of the court as an innocent party, entitled to! J'f-""'. n "^^^^^'^ in support of any claim ^ •" against the United States, or to establish the restoration of his property under the proclamation, or to a return of the jjro- ceeds of his property just as if he had never participated in the rebellion at all. In other words, that all disabilities as to his right to recover back his own property were removed by the proof of amnesty or pardon. They made this decision, not only under the statutes to which I have referred, but in the light of the precedents, both Ameri- can and English, on the subject of pardcju and amnesty. Now, sir, I am informed that there is not a large amount of money in Tolved in this proviso, as the class of claim- the standing of any claimant in said court or his right to bring or maintain suit there- in ; nor shall any such pardon, amnesty, acceptance, oath, or other act as aforesaid, heretofore offered or put in evidence on be- half of any claimant in said court, be used or considered by said court, or by the ap- pellate court on appeal from said court iu deciding upon the claim of said claimant, or any appeal therefrom, as any part of the proof to sustain the claim of the claimant or t;o entitle him to maintain his action in said 'ourt of Claims or an appeal therefrom ; out the proof of loyalty required by the ■welfth section of the act of March 3, 1863, tiutitled "An act to amend an act to estab- lish a court for the investigation of claims against the United States," approved Feb- uary 24, 1855, and by the third section of ants to come in who havs applied within the act entitled "An act to provide for the the two years for the re^toralion of the pro- ceeds of their property is not very large, and as other claimants have been barred for some time past as to all further claims. But the Senate believing that th's opened the door more widely than was intended by ioUeclion of abandoned property, and for the prevention of frauds in insurrectionary districts within the United States, approved March 12, 1863, and by the third section of the act entitled "An act to provide for appeals from ttie Court of Claims, and for other purposes," approved June 25, 1868, shall be made by proof of the matters ro- Congress, and not being willing to submit quired by said sections respectively, irre- to a construction of this law by the courts spe<^tive of the effect of any executive pro- claimation, pardon, amnesty, or other act of condonation or oblivion. And in all of the country, first by the Court of Claims, and afterward by the Supreme Court of the United States — in an effort to override this decision, in an effort to drive all this re- maining class of claimants nowproseoutins their claims in the Court of Claims out of the Court, and to summarily dispose of this cares where judgment shall have been heretofore rendered in the Court of Claims in favor of any claimant on any other proof of loyalty than such as is above required and provided, and which is hereby declared to have been and to be the true intent and meauiiiK of said respective acts, th Su- whole question by legislative action instead P''®™«' ^ourt shall, on appeal, rever.-e such ^,. V, . ,. . , ^ ^. ,. , . , i^'^agment: Avri-provided /'nri/ier, That when- Of by judicial construction, which I have e.e^ any pTrdou shall have heretofore been always understood to be the rule by which granted by the President of the United the rights of parties in courts^ are to be ^ta^t^s to any person bringing suit in the adjudged and decided in this conntrv— i^^"'"' ''^ ^^^'°^^ *"^'' t'^"" proceeds of aban'd- „ , . , ,1 . . , ■ oned or captured property under the said adopted this proviso as an amendment to act, approved March 12, 1863, and the acts our appropriation bill iu regard to the Court amendatory of the same, and such pardon pliftU recite, in substance, that such person time when the war was most flagrant, for took part in th« late rebellion against theitijg purpose of building up another class in Government of the United States, or was'^^^^ ^^^^^ ^j^^ ^^^^^ ^^^.^^ ^^.^ .^ ^.^ ^^_ Builty of any act of rebellion agamst or disloyalty t.)"the United States, and s,uchl'0'-ts to uphold the causeot theGoverHinent pardon shall liave been accepted in writing! aud to strengthen the hands of such origi- by ihe person to wliom the s^me is.-ued, i,jal Union men as may have been in that without an express disclaimer of and pro- ^^^.^.^^ from the commencement of the war. testation against such fact ot guilt contaiu- e.i in such acceptance, su.h pardon and L^rg^ numbers availed themselves of the accf-ptanoe shall be taken and deemed in t- rms and pledg s it extended to them. It Bu li suit in the said Court of Claims, and'pi^,^gj,d ti^, faitb of tbe Governmeut in the on anoeal therefrom, conclusive evidencei , , - , i. • x, ■ „ , ^^ , J i\ , . • J • most solemn form to certain ttjings, among that such person did take part in and givei " ' " aid and comfort to the late rebellion, andjwbich Wf's a complete re^toration of all did net maintain true allegiance to or con-jiigtits of property except in slaves, and sistently adhere to tbe United States : and on proof of such paidon and acceptance wliicli proof may he h^-ard summarily on motion or otherwise, it shall be the duty where the rights of third p^^rsous had inter- ven-d. Every fair-minded man must con- cede that thi-se "rights of properly" in- ot the said Court of Claims forthwith to|cluded the right to recover the proceeds of dismiss the suit of such claimant. Luch property b^-longing to claimants as Mr. NIBLACK. As I have already shown, L^^ ^^^^ ^^^^^ sol^ by the Government, this proclamation of the President to which I have referred was issued in December, 1863, in pursuance of the act of July 7, 1802, granting him express authority to issue such a proclamation. Now, if the proviso which has just been read shall become law, and be literally con- strued by the courts, it will sweep away every vestige of right which any claimant who may have been compromised in any way* and under any circumstances during the war may have to recover his property, or r&ther to the proceeds of it in the Court of Claims. It looks to me like on attempt to do that which, if consummated, will amount to a most remarkable breach ol faith on the part of the Government of the United States. N(>w, I have not in my special keeping, more than others, the honor of this Govern- ment, nor is it my duty specially to defer d the war policy of President Lincoln. But I do feel it incumbent »n me, when a mat- ter of this sort is' presented tome as a mem- ber of this House, to give it every carelul consideration, to endeavor to construe it stiictly in reference to what is right and honorable, not only to every man.'s con- fii'iousness of right, bnl according to what is proper and right by the laws of nations and the laws of war. This proclamation of President Lincoln WAS issued in the interest of pea/'e at. the and all rights of action concerning it. A restoration of the right of propeity neces- sarily restores all rights incident to such property. All the incidents of owner- ship are, in the very nature of things, re- vived. But this proviso of the Senate drives everybody out oi the Court of Claims who may at any time and uuder auy circum- stances have bf-en subjected t(^ disabilities resulting from the war. Ii, as to certain propeity rights, annuls and sets at naught he i^oclamation of Mr. Lincoln, and indeed all presidential pardons. It is i^ an excep- tional and, in many respects, a defenseless class of claimants an estopel the most se- vere, the most unrelenting, and the most fxtraordinary of which I have any knowl- edge. It does not present an issue to be rit-d by the courts or a jury in the usual way, but one to be tried summarily on mo- tion and without regard to the real merits ■)f the case. Ii allows no mitigation and permits no explanation. It is as inexorable s death itself. We all know that very many persons ap- lied for and accepted amnnsty or pardon .vho hfid committed no real offense against he Government. They were simply south- in people who had been surrounded and ubmerged by the armies of the South, and lad fallen witbiii the jurisdiction, as was claimed, of the Coufederate government, abandoned and captured property do not, Out of an abundance of caution merely, in any event, properly belong to the Gov- thi^y either avail-d themselves of the proc- ernment when such property belonged to lamatien of amnesty or sought and obtained private citizens. The claims of private special pardon. Yet all such persons as citizens could only have been divested by these will be crit off by this remarkable proceedings for the confiscation of the prop- proviso of the Penate. The very fact that erty where the treason of the owner is re- they have accepted amnesty or obtained a lied on. No such proceedings having been pardon is takan as conclusive evidence of^taken as to the property in question, it fol- their guilt. Ilows, of couise, that the property of the It may be argued that Mr. Lincoln was [owner has never been divested. The Gov- too lenient in the terms he prescribed in ernment, therefore, holds a large share of his proclamation of amnesty, liut that is, the proceeds of this captured and abandoned not now a question to be considered. Both property, not by any right of propeity, but the Constitution and a law of Congress con- ferred on him the power to issue it. All the Departments of the Government accepted it and have acted upon it. It binds us both in law and in hoLor as to all matters to which it relates. It is enough for us to know that honor and duty alike require us to keep its terms inviolate with those who accepted it in good faith. Now, sir, it is the duty of the courts to construe the laws and to define tbe rights of parties und->r tbem. Th- Supreme Court of the United States, the court of the last resort, ^as decided that under the laW pnr- sons who have received amnesty or pardon may, through the Court of Claims, recover back the proceeds of their propt^ny when it has been sold under the act of March 12, 1863. The case may therefore be stated thus : under certain laws enacted by Cou- gress, which have been executed by the President and construed by the highes judicial tribunal in the Government, a class of claimants who have received amnesty or only by superior force. Now, sir, it is proposed by this proviso of the Senate to withdraw the plighted pub- lic faith to these amnestied and pardoned claimants, to drive them ruthlessly out of court, and to deny to them the money real- ized from their own property. Can we honorably do this ? To me it seems clearly not. I would as soon think of violating a flag of truce, or of compelling a soldier to violate Lis parol, or of solemnly disregard- ing the terms on which an army had sur- rendered. It is not altogether on accouut of the amount of mouey that will be thus withheld that I so feel, but because a great nation, as we claim to be, cannot afford to do such an unmanly act. If ttiis proviso shall become a law, it will be practical repudiation as to a class of our creditors. We might, in my judgment, just as well disregard any other obligation of the Government in which a similar amount of money is involved. This seems to me most strange indeed, as coming from pardon are now entitled to receive back the men who claim to be the peculiar from the Government the proceeds of their guardians of the public faith, and who are own property, which has, without their so much accustomed to denounce repudia- consent, been conveited into mouey. They tion in all its forms. Sir, I will not will- are entitled to this relief, then, by the con- ingly be a party to any su /h proceeding. current actiou of the three several depart- ments of this Government. If this, then, does not con>titut.e a case of plighted faith oo the part of the United States, I would really like to know what will make such a ca?e. It is i^ot the mouey of tbe Government these claimants are seeking to lecover, but simply a return of their own moji«_y. . The proceeds of this and hence I declined to sign the report sub- mitted by my colleagues on the conference committee, and shall feel constrained to vote ag-tinst concurring iu the report. To fail to meet our obligations for want of ability brings no dishonor ; but to go forward in the plenitude of our power, with resources so unbounded, and with the smiles ot Heaven upon us, and to declare by a solemn act of Congress that we with draw our plighted faith, seems to me most monstrous indeed. As other gentlemen may desire to be heard on this question I will not longer de- tain the House. The above conference report wa^ never- theless, concurred in by the following vote : YEAS. Messrs. Allison Messrs. McCarthy Ambler McGrew Ames McKenzie Armstrong Mercur Arnell Eliakim H. Moore Asper Jesse H. Moore Atwood William Moore Banks Daniel J. Morrell Barry Myers Benjamin Negley Benton O'Neill Boles Orth George M Brooks Packard Buffington Packer Burchard Paine Roderick R. Butler Palmer Cake Ptck Churchill Phelps Sidney Clarke Prosser Amasa Cobb Roots Coburn Sargent Conger Sawyer Covode Schenck CuUom Scofield Dawes Shanks Degener William J. Smith Dickey William Smyth Dixon Stevens Donley Stoughton Du^al Strickland Ferriss Strong F^rry Tanner Fiukelaburg Tillman GilfiUan Townsend Harris Twichell Hill Tyner Hoar Upson Hooper Van Horn Kelley Wallace Kellogg Ward Kelsey C. C. Washburn Ketcham W. B. Washburn Knapp Welker Lawrence Wilkinson Logan Willard and Maynard Williams— 92. HAYS. Messrs. Adams Me.-.srs. Marshall Beck Mayham l^iggs McCormick Bingham McNeely Bird Morgan James Brooks Niblack Calkin Potter Messrs. Rice Schumaker Slocum Stiles Trimble Van Auken Van Trump Wells Eugene M. Wilson Winchester Wood and Woodward — 41. Coiiiiflr ReevHB Messrs. Cox Crebs Dickinson ' Eldridge Fitch Getz Griswold Haight Joliu on Thooias L .Tones Kerr Knott Lewis Absent or Not Voting. Messrs. Archer Messrs. Judd Axtell Alexander H. Jones A\er Julian Bailey Latlin Baiuum Lash Beaman Loughridge Beatty Lynch Bennett McCrary Blair McKee Booker Milnes Bowen Morphis Boyd Samuel P. Morrill Buck Morrissey Buckley Mungen Burdett Newsham Burr Perce Benjamin F. Butler Peters Cessna Piatt William T. Clark Poland Clevelaud Fomeroy Clintou L. Cobb Porter Cook Randall Cowles Ridgway Darrall Rogeis Davis Sin ford Dockery Lionel A. Sheldon Dox Porter Sheldon Dyer Sherrod Ela Shober Fai nsworth John A Smith Fisher Joseph S. Smith Fox W C. Smith Garfield Starkwether Gibson Stevenson Haldeman Stokes • Hale Stone Haij.bleton Strader Hamill Swann Hrtmilton Sweeney Hawkins Taffe H^wley Taylor Hay Van Wyck Hays Voorhees Hedin ^^^^ "Wlieeler Hoge Wliituiore Holnian Jotn T. Wilson Hotclikiss Winans and IngersoU 'Witcher— 97. Je>'okes All voting in the affirmative are Repub- lic ns, and all voting in the negative are b»,..ir>fii-^f,fi, Hxcnpt Mr. Hin 'ham. LIBRARY OF CONGRESS lllllllllilli 013 701 759 3 ^