F(^^? 
 
SPEECH 
 
 OF 
 
 HON. J. W. NESMITH, OF OREGON, 
 
 ov 
 
 . RECONSTRUCTION; 
 
 DELIVERED ' ^"T^ 'V O 
 
 
 IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, JANUARY 18, 1866. 
 
 WASHINGTON: 
 PRINTED AT THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE OFFICE. 
 
 1866. 
 
.A/46 
 
RECONSTRUGTION. 
 
 The Sena^B resumed the consideration of the fol- 
 lowing resolution introduced by Mr. IIowk, of Wis- 
 consin: 
 
 Whereas the people of Virginia, of North Carolina, 
 of South Carolina, of Georgia, of Florida, Alabama, 
 Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, Arkansas, and Tennes- 
 see have heretofore declared their independence of 
 the Government of the United States, have usurped 
 authority denied to every State by the supreme law 
 of the land, have abjured duties imposed upon every 
 State by the same law, and have waged war against 
 the United States, whereby the political functions for- 
 merly granted to those people have been suspended; 
 and whereas such functions cannot yet be restored 
 to those people with safety to themselves or to the na- 
 tion; and whereas military tribunals are not suited 
 to the exercise of civil authority: Therefore, 
 
 Be it rcfolvcd by llie Senate and House of licpresent- 
 atives in Congress assembled. That local governments 
 ought to be provisionally organized forthwith for the 
 people in each of the districts named in the preamble 
 hereto. 
 
 Mr. NESMITH. Mr. President, the nation 
 having passed successfully through the most 
 terrible ordc:il offour)'earsof civil war, and hav- 
 ing vindicated its supremacy over every foot of 
 its vast territory, as the din of battle is hushed, 
 and the fierce passions of the combatants have 
 subsided, we are no longer called upon to de- 
 vise means for the support of great armies, but 
 the higher duty devolves upon us of restoring 
 the country to a state of peaceful prosperity and 
 happiness. In the discharge of this important 
 duty let us not be animated by feelingsof hatred 
 and revenge toward those so recently in hostil- 
 ity to the national authority, but rather cultivate 
 that spirit of friendship and forbearance so 
 essential to our future prosperity as a great, 
 united, and prosperous people, destined to the 
 enjoyment of a free Government of our own 
 construction. 
 
 The ravages of war, which have wrought such 
 havoc with all our material interests, have been 
 unequal to the task of destroying or subverting 
 our form of government, and we emerge from 
 the conflict with a Constitution intact, while the 
 mass of our people are only the more strongly 
 d#\'oted to its principles by reason of the perils it 
 has survived. It now becomes our duty to re- 
 pair the damages resulting from attempts at dis- 
 organization. In the dischargeof that duty we 
 cannot, if we would, relieve ourselves from the 
 obligations which we are under to "guaranty 
 to every State in this Union a republican form 
 of government." 
 
 As diverse sentiments are entertained relative 
 to the mode of discharging this duty, I propose 
 to examine the President's plan of restoration, 
 involving the speedy admission of Senator.'^ and 
 Representatives from the southern States, and 
 then the opposit6 or different plan of what is 
 popularly called reconstruction, under some 
 kind of act to be passed by Congress, in which 
 new conditions of admission shall be exacted. 
 Upon examining both these plans, and con- 
 trasting them with each other, we shall be able 
 to form a clear opinion as to our duty in this 
 juncture of our public affairs. 
 
 The President has required several things of 
 the southern people, and has recommended oth- 
 ers for their acceptance; and he has done all 
 this in his capacity of Commander-in-Chief of 
 the Array and Navy of the United States, and 
 also in his civil capacity as Chief Executive of 
 the Republic. 
 
 As Commander-in-Chief, it was his duty to 
 
put down the rebellion and all its works, and he 
 has done so thoroughly. At least what was left 
 undone by his predecessor toward this end he 
 has done most faithfully and skillfally. Armed 
 resistance no longer continues anywhere within 
 the limits of the United States, nor is there the 
 slightest probability that it wall be renewed. 
 
 But there were rebel State goveriynents 
 throughout the so-called confederate States. 
 These have been subverted, utterly removed 
 from the face of the earth. Regarded as revo- 
 lutionary and illegal in character, they were 
 made to give way before the power of the United 
 States, until not a vestige of them is now left. 
 All those hostile organizations are defunct. 
 They are dead, and will know no resurrection. 
 The President, believing them to be wholly in- 
 valid in point of law, and criminal in purpose, 
 refused them the slightest recognition, and has 
 wiped them out effectually and finally. This 
 was his duty, and he has performed it well. 
 
 But other things beyond this were required 
 to vindicate the authority of the United States 
 and to stamp the rebellion as illegal and wrong- 
 ful. The President has therefore required those 
 States to repudiate their ordinances of seces- 
 sion in express terms, and this has been done 
 by most of those States in reorganizing their 
 governments upon a loyal foundation. Their 
 constitutional conventions have declared those 
 ordinances to be null and void. In one or two 
 
 ' cases, I believe, they have simply repealed them, 
 but the practical effect is in substance the same. 
 A further requirement made by the President, 
 and acceded to by the people of the South, has 
 been the repudiation of all rebel indebtedness 
 incurred in behalf of the rebellion. I believe the 
 rebel indebtedness, or at least most of it, had its 
 
 • payment conditional upon the accomiDlishment 
 of southern independence. It was expressly 
 madepayable when the confederate States should 
 become independent of the United States, and 
 their independence should be recognized. Upon 
 the whole, I conclude the confederate creditors 
 hold about the worst securities known upon the 
 face of the earth. There is no such government 
 as incurred that debt in existence, and never will 
 be ; the time fixed for payment has become im- 
 possible, and lastl}', at (he instance of President 
 Johnson, the whole debt has been repudiated, as 
 unauthorized and unlawful, by pojjular conven- 
 
 tions. Little sympathy need be felt in the case for 
 the creditoi's of the South, whether foreign or do- 
 mestic. They loaned their money upon a sjiec- 
 ulation and took the chances of the war. In fact, 
 the confederate loans were in the nature of a 
 gambling transaction ; they were in substance 
 bets upon the issue or result of the war. If the 
 confederacy triumphed, the loan-holders would 
 make immense fortunes upon small sums in- 
 vested. If it fa^Jed, they were to lose their 
 investments, for by the express terms of their 
 contract they were only to be paid in case the 
 rebellion should be successful. 
 
 From this statement of the position of the 
 confederate creditors, how unnecessary appears 
 the proposed amendment to the Constitution of 
 the United States to prevent the payment of the 
 confederate debt. A debt three times dead al- 
 ready is to be killed a fourth time by an amend- 
 ment to the Federal Constitution. The debtor — 
 the confederate government — is dead, and has 
 left no effects ; the time of payment has become 
 an impossible date, and President Johnson has 
 had an express repudiation of it put in all the 
 new southern constitutions. I think, therefore, 
 the subject is disposed of, if it be possible to 
 dispose of and settle any subject whatever which 
 has once been involved in public debate. 
 
 But I will proceed with my statement of the 
 President's policy of restoration, in order to 
 bring out all the leading points which it involves. 
 The rebel State governments being entirely re- 
 moved from the southern country, and the civil 
 and military authorities^cf the spurious confed- 
 eracy put down, the scene presented in that sec- 
 tion was one of unorganized States. The ter- 
 ritory and the people remained, and over both 
 the authority of the Government of the United 
 States was reestablished ; but the latter was seen 
 mainly in the exhibition of the war power by 
 which the rebellion had been smitten, and its 
 political as well as martial machinery leveled 
 to the dust. The President explains very hand- 
 somely and clearly in his annual message the 
 views by which he was j^rompted at that time. 
 For the moment, his will was law from the Po- 
 tomac to the shores of the Gulf. He held in 
 hand the largest army of modern times, an im- 
 mense naval force, and stood as the representa- 
 tive of a flushed and triumphant nation. It is a 
 maxim that "power is ever grasping" and am- 
 
 f* 
 
bitious of its own perpetuity; but when the 
 ruler of a great nation, in times when turbu- 
 lence seems to have relaxed the bonds of gov- 
 ernment, refuses to usurp questionable author- 
 ity over a fallen foe, Avhose acts are so justly 
 open to universal condemnation, lie gives the 
 strongest possible evidence of his patriotism 
 and honesty of puqiose, and furnishes a new 
 guarantee of both the justice and strength of a 
 republican Government. 
 
 No greater mass of power was ever held un- 
 der circumstances of such transcendent im- 
 portance by one man since the creation of the 
 eartli. But our patriot President was equal to 
 the crisis. The occasion did not find him un- 
 prepared for the duties which it imposed. He 
 remembered his oath to support the Consti- 
 tution of the United States. He remembered 
 that he was one of the people, pledged by his 
 birth, by his early struggles, by the professions 
 and conduct of a prolonged and illustrious ca- 
 reer, to the republican principle of govern- 
 ment by the people and for the people, and to 
 the rejection of all forms of arbitrary and un- 
 constitutional rule. While he was determined 
 to secure the proper fruits of victory, he had 
 no heart for works of persecution and venge- 
 ance, nor any disposition to transcend his powers 
 and establish despotic principles in the admin- 
 istration of the Government. What then did 
 he do, and what does he now propose? Let 
 him be judged by his acts, openly performed 
 in the face of the world, and by the recommen- 
 dations of policy which he makes to Congress 
 and to the people. 
 
 Well, sir, he called into requisition the ex- 
 ecutive power of pardon, and he has used that 
 power efliciently in the work of restoration. 
 Through this power he has dealt with indind- 
 uals engaged in rebellion. He has restored 
 many such to their rights, forfeited under the 
 laws of their country, and screened them from 
 prosecution and punishment. But was this 
 done rashly, blindly, and without discrimina- 
 tion or just conditions imposed? No, sir, noth- 
 ing of the sort ! There was no precipitancy 
 and" no blundering ! His general amnesty proc- 
 lamation conformed to the policy of his pred- 
 ecessor, Mr. Lincoln, but he reserved from its 
 operation large classes of cases for special ac- 
 tion upon individual application? for pardon : 
 
 and in all cases where executive clemency has 
 been extended, an oath has beeVi required as a 
 guarantee of future conduct and of allegiance 
 to the Government of the United States. 
 
 Through his exercise of the pardoning power 
 the authority and dignity of the L'nited States 
 have been asserted, and those who have been 
 unfaithful to the Government made to acknowl- 
 edge their fault, to sue lor clemency, and most 
 solemnly to pledge their fealty to the LTnited 
 States. The general submission of the south- 
 ern people since the close of the war rendered 
 a magnanimous policy toward them possible 
 and proper ; and I believe the President has 
 acted with great discretion and wisdom in ex- 
 tending amnesty and pardon to the great mass 
 of the southern people, while withholding it 
 thus .far from particular classes or prominent 
 offenders among them. 
 
 But his policy for restoring loyal State gov- 
 ernments has been equally important. He did 
 not choose to continue military occupation of 
 the South, with its enormous expense and other 
 attendant evils, any longer than was necessary. 
 Troops were therefore gradually withdrawn and 
 disbanded, and now the number remaining in 
 that section is comparatively inconsiderable. 
 For military rule civil rule has been substituted', 
 and that in the only way in which it could be 
 properly done — by the action of the people them- 
 selves. They were invited to reorganize their 
 State governments,, and they have done so, 
 fully and completely. To this end delegates to 
 ' constitutional conventions were chosen, consti- 
 I tutions formed, and subsequent elections for 
 I members of Legislatures, for Governors, and 
 1 other officers have been held. Perfect State 
 I governments have been reestablished by the ac- 
 I tion of the people themselves in nearly all the 
 ! States in question, which are republican in form, 
 j and clearly entitled to the protection of the 
 United States under the guarantee clause of the 
 Constitution. 
 I I deny all power in Congress, or the Pres- 
 [ ident, or in both combined, to make a State 
 ! constitution, or to dictate any provision which 
 shall be contained in it. A constitution must 
 be wholly made by the people over whom it is 
 established, and can be made or amended by no 
 j other persons whatever. Thus have been made 
 the new constitutions of the southern States, 
 
6 
 
 and their validity rests immovably upon the 
 ground that they are thus popular in origin, 
 while ioyal in object and republican in form. 
 
 It is true that the proceedings for forming 
 the new constitutions were initiated by pro- 
 visional governors appointed by the President 
 and acting under his direction. But this can- 
 not affect the validity or merit of the constitu- 
 tions made. The provisional governors sim- 
 ply invited the people to act in their sovereign 
 capacity in reorganizing governments for them- 
 selves, which was both necessary and proper 
 under the circumstances' which then existed. 
 There were no local authorities or officers com- 
 petent to call conventions, or give them pro- 
 tection while in session, although a clear ne- 
 cessity for convening existed, if civil rule was 
 to supplant military rule in that section of the 
 country. Therefore the provisional governors, 
 who represented the military power of the Uni- 
 ted States for the time being, in order to the 
 withdrawal of that power and to the restora- 
 tion of valid and loyal State governments, were 
 authorized to invite the people to select dele- 
 gates to constitutional conventions in their re- 
 spective States. Those conventions met and 
 formed constitutions which are unquestionably 
 good and lawful, not because the making of 
 them was instigated or invited by provisional 
 governors, but because (as before stated) thej' 
 were in fact made by the people over whom they 
 are established, and made in accord with the 
 Government of the United States. I am not 
 now speaking of the exceptional cases of Lou- 
 isiana, Virginia, and Arkansas, but of the other 
 States of the South in which there was no pre- 
 tense of loyal government at the close of the 
 war, and where it was necessary, therefore, that 
 some authority, some official or volunteer asso- 
 ciation, or person, should initiate their establish- 
 ment by setting in motion the sovereign popular 
 power which was alone competent to the work. 
 
 There is no soundness in the objection some- 
 times made that the southern constitutions, or 
 some of them, were not submitted to a popular 
 vote for adoption or rejection. The people of 
 any State may authorize delegates, selected by 
 them, to form a constitution, which shall be 
 legal to all intents and purposes ; and the peo- 
 ple of some of the States of the Union are now 
 living under constitutions thus made. 
 
 For instance, the Pennsylvania constitution 
 of 179.0, which yet exists in an amended form, 
 was not submitted to a popular vote, but was 
 simply proclaimed by the convention which 
 made it. It is very well that new constitutions 
 should, in ordinary cases, be submitted to a 
 popular vote ; and this is necessary where a law 
 under which a convention assembles provides 
 for such submission. But it is most absurd 
 to say, as some have said, that a constitution 
 cannot take effect and have authority unless 
 adopted by a popular vote ; for it is perfectly 
 plain and undeniable, that though the people 
 cannot strip themselves of their sovereignty, 
 they may delegate to a representative body the 
 exercise of sovereign powers. In fact the peo- 
 ple would no longer be sovereign if they should 
 be stripped of the power of appointing dele- 
 gates or representatives to act for them in the 
 making of a constitution. 
 
 In the case of Kansas the true objection was 
 not simply that the Lecompton constitution had 
 not been submitted to a vote of the people. In 
 fact a part of it was submitted. The true ob- 
 jection was that the people of Kansas did not 
 select the men who made the constitution, and 
 that, therefore, it could not be taken as their 
 "act and deed," unless they should accept or 
 ratify it by a direct vote. But where the peo- 
 ple do in fact select delegates to a convention, 
 and confer upon them, expressly or impliedly, 
 the power or authority to frame a constitution, 
 the convention may enact a constitution, which 
 will be valid without any additional sanction or 
 further proceeding. 
 
 But one point further connected with the Pres- 
 ident's plan of restoration (and it is a most im- 
 portant one) remains to be noticed. It is the 
 securing of emancipation to the black race in 
 the South as a result of the war, and as a guar- 
 antee of future quiet and harmony to the na- 
 tion. Emancipation, now fully accomplished, 
 both in law and fact, rests upon the following 
 foundations : 
 
 1. The proclamation of Pi-esident Lincoln 
 of January 1, 1863. 
 
 2. His subsequent amnesty proclamation, so 
 far as the same was accepted or acted upon by 
 individuals in the southern country. 
 
 3. The direct action of military force during 
 the war, in conformity with executive policy, 
 
and, to some extent, under the authority of 
 laws enacted by Congress. 
 
 4. The amnesty proelamation of President 
 Johnson, of 18G5, and subsequent special par- 
 dons granted by him : amnesty and pardon be- 
 ing extended upon conditions which involved 
 emanciptltlon and furnished securities for car- 
 rying out the previous policy of the President 
 and Congress on that subject. 
 
 5. The adoption, by the Legislatures of the 
 several reorganized States, of the proposed 
 amendment to the Constitution prohibiting sla- 
 
 'very generally and for all future time within the 
 United States, and conferring upon Congress 
 adequate power to enforce the prohibition. 
 
 Upon the last two heads the President speaks 
 as follows in his annual message: 
 
 " In exercising that power [the power of pardon] I 
 have taken every precaution to connect it with the 
 clearest recognition of the binding force of the laws 
 of the United States, and an unqualified acknowledg- 
 ment of the groat social change of condition in regard 
 to slavery which has grown out of the war." 
 
 The executive power of amnesty and pardon 
 was ample to cover and justify what was done. 
 In other words, it was competent for the Presi- 
 dent to attach conditions to pardons, granted. 
 He proceeds in his message to say : 
 
 • "The next step which I have taken to restore the 
 ! eonslitutional relations of the States has been an in- 
 vitation to them to participate in the high office of 
 amending the Constitution." * * * * "It 
 is not too much to ask, in the nameof the whole peo- 
 ple, that on the one side the plan of restoration shall 
 proceed in conformity with a willingness to cast the 
 disorders of the past into oblivion, and that, on the 
 other, the evidence of sincerity in the future main- 
 tenance of the Union shall bo put beyond any doubt 
 by the ratification of the proposed amendment to the 
 Constitution which provides for the abolition of sla- 
 . Tery forever within the limits of our country." 
 
 This "invitation" to the southern States 
 has been complied with by them. They have, 
 through their Legislatures, adopted the consti- 
 tutional amendment, and thus made it a part 
 of the fundamental law of the United States. 
 
 I have thus gone over several features of the 
 President's policy of restoration, so far as the 
 same relates to the action of his department of 
 the Government; and however much nice crit- 
 ics, captious men, or interested agitators may 
 be disposed to find fault with it and condemn 
 it, either in whole or in part, I believe the great 
 mass of the people of this country will heartily 
 approve and indorse it. In fact, the evidences 
 
 of such approval come to ns from every quar- 
 ter; they multiply daily, and cheer and invig- 
 orate the friends of reunion and of constitu- 
 tional rule. What, then, remains for Congress 
 to do to perfect restoration, to carry out the 
 policy which the President has begun? In his 
 annual message the President addresses Con- 
 gress as follows: 
 
 " The amendment to the Constitution being adopted, 
 it would remain for States whoso powers have been 
 so long in abeyance to resume their places in the two 
 branches of the national Legislature, and thereby- 
 complete thework of restoration. Here it is foryou, 
 fellow-citizens of the Senate, and for you, fellow-cit- 
 izens of the Ilouse of Representatives, to judge, each 
 of you, for yourselves, of the elections, returns, and 
 qualifications of your own members." 
 
 The meaning of this important passage cannot 
 be misunderstood. The language is remarka- 
 ble and peculiar in form. It is addressed to the 
 members of each House separately and dis- 
 tinctly, and suggests to them the performanctr 
 of a duty under the provision of the Constitu- 
 tion which makes the respective Houses judges 
 of questions relating to membership. This ia 
 a power to be exercised by each House for itself, 
 quite independent of and uninfluenced by the 
 other House. 
 
 The duty is judicial in its nature and not 
 legislative, and one of the gravest character. 
 And the power is so clear, and its exercise so 
 necessary to the restoration of the Union, that 
 the President, as it was proper for him to do, 
 has in emphatic language called the attention 
 of Congress to its performance. And in address- 
 ing the members of each House, in their sepa- 
 rate capacity, he has used language suited to 
 the inculcation of the constitutional duty, and 
 distinguished it from all those duties which are 
 to be performed by the two Houses in their joint 
 or legislative capacity. 
 
 In his communication to the Senate of De- 
 cember 18, in answer to a resolution of inquiry, 
 the President further says : 
 
 " From all the information in my possession, and 
 from that which I have recently derived from the 
 most reliable authority, I am induced to cherish the 
 belief that sectional animosity is surely and rapidly 
 merging itself into a spirit of nationality, and that 
 representation, connected with a properly adjusted 
 system of taxation, will result in a harmonious resto- 
 ration of the relations of the States to the national 
 Government." 
 
 We have here, in these extracts, the opinion 
 
 of the President upon the question of what 
 
8 
 
 stould be done at this juncture by Congress, or 
 rather by the respective Houses of Congress, in 
 the work of restoration. The representation of 
 tJie southern States is to be restored by appro- 
 priate action of each House under a clear con- 
 stitutional power, the exercise of which will be 
 completely efficacious to the object in view. 
 
 Thus the Union can be restored in its integ- 
 rity, and all questions connected with its res- 
 toration disposed of forever. 
 - "^^Tiy, then, should not the Senate and House, 
 respectively, proceed to consider the questions 
 of membership which are brought before them, 
 and decide them upon the same principles of 
 wisdom, magnanimity, and patriotism, which 
 have characterized the President's conduct and 
 policy with reference to the southern States ? 
 "What good object is to be subserved by keep- 
 ing open the question of restoration, and delay- 
 ing to the country the enjoyment of the fruits 
 of ^ictory and peace? These questions do not 
 concern the peojile of the South alone. They 
 are interesting and important to the people of 
 the whole country. It is desirable, in the judg- 
 ment of intelligent and i^atriotic men every- 
 where throughout the land, that all the relations 
 between the sections which were inteiTupted by 
 the war shouldbe restored at the earliestpossible 
 moment. 
 
 Let commerce revive; let trade resume its 
 ceaseless activity; let social intercourse suc- 
 ceed to estrangement and division, and let the 
 political bonds of union be renewed in all the 
 strength and brightness of former times. 
 
 But there are men who are dissatisfied with 
 the prospect of these results. There are men 
 who decry the President's policy and pronounce 
 it a failure. There are men who are not sat- 
 isfied with complete victory in the war ; with 
 emancipation secured by constitutional pro- 
 visions, repudiation of rebel indebtedness, and 
 complete submission of the southern people to 
 the laws and jurisdiction of the Federal Govern- 
 ment ; and their sincere, generous, and earnest 
 proffer of allegiance and devotion to it. They 
 seek to delay reunion, and to impose further 
 conditions upon the southern people as the price 
 of conceding it. What those conditions shall 
 be does not very clearly appear, as scarcely any 
 two men among the objectors agree entirely in 
 their definition and statement. But some of 
 
 them are sufficiently evident already, and may 
 be made the topics of immediate discussion. 
 They are to be presented through laws enacted 
 by Congress, and in propositions for the amend- 
 ment of the Constitution of the United States. 
 But, before they are discussed, it will be 
 proper to notice briefly some of the reasons 
 which appeal to Congress in favor of the Presi- 
 dent' s policy of immediate restoration. 
 
 The recognition of the reorganized State gov- 
 ernments, by the admission of Senators and 
 Representatives, is due to the loyal men of the 
 South who assisted in their formation and now 
 adhere to them, not only as instruments of lo- 
 cal government, but also for securing renewed 
 representation in the Government of the United 
 States. This class of men, our brothers and 
 friends, have a merit above and beyond that 
 which belongs to men of the North. Their 
 devotion to the Government was maintained un- 
 der appalling difficulties. They have suffered 
 severely, and they now look to immediate 
 restoration as necessary to their interests and 
 welfare. Their appeal is not to be resisted or 
 postponed unless overwhelming considerations 
 of necessity or policy demand it. These State 
 governments have been organized in concert 
 with the President of the United States, and in 
 accordance with a policy projiosed by him as 
 the Chief Magistrate of the nation. So far as 
 he could reasonably act on behalf of the people 
 of the United States, in the work of reconstruc- 
 tion, we are bound in good faith to sustain the 
 arrangements made at his instance, and accept 
 Representatives from the reorganized States. 
 
 By prompt recognition, we conciliate the peo- 
 ple of the South, and attach them more firmly 
 to ourselves for the future. In this case, mag- 
 nanimity is safety ; for we will obtain by it ad- 
 ditional security against future dangers. We 
 will "consolidate the Union;" that is, we will 
 strengthen it, render its bonds firm, repress dis- 
 affection, and reaiove all possibility of foreign 
 inti'igue in that section hereafter. 
 
 By immediate recognition we will promote 
 and insure the prosperity of both sections. 
 Capital will go more promptly into the South 
 for investment ; production there will be incited ; 
 trade and.commcrce will revive, and sources of 
 revenue to the public Treasury -nill be opened 
 and enlarged. 
 
9 
 
 Eecognitlon relieves us from a vast burden 
 of expense in maintaining civil and military 
 establishments of government, and from the in- 
 convenience and scandals arising from conflict- 
 ing jurisdictions in administration. 
 
 Recognition and representation in Congress 
 establish and maintain a republican principle 
 vital to our system and sanctified to us by the 
 struggles of our fathers. "\Vo tax the South, 
 and we shall tax it heavily hereafter. The 
 public necessities and the principle of equal 
 taxation make this a necessity. But it will be 
 unjust, odious, and anti-republican, to tax them 
 without admitting them to representation in that 
 Government by which the taxes are imposed. 
 
 Finally, by recognition and renewed repre- 
 sentation in Congress, we restore all the great 
 interests of the country, and they will again 
 have a due voice in the Government, and j^ar- 
 ticipate in the debates by which its policy is 
 shaped and determined. And it will be partic- 
 ularly useful, as well as just, that upon questions 
 afifecting the southern people their Represent- 
 atives shall be heard before the laws by which 
 they are to be bound shall be enacted. 
 
 It is further to be remarked that these re- 
 organized State governments can be recognized 
 with much more propriety than those set up or 
 proposed during the war under Mr. Lincoln's 
 one-tenth plan. In the first place, they are 
 established after the return of jDeacc, and not 
 during the pressure of military operations. 
 
 They are, to a great extent, free from the 
 objection urged against the Lincoln States, 
 of being formed within the theater of actual 
 war, and therefore, of necessity, mere creations 
 and creatures of military power. In the next 
 place, they are established in each State by a 
 clear majority of the people and not by a minor- 
 ity, thus conforming, in a most vital particular, 
 to true republican principles. 
 
 Some people think, or pretend to think, that 
 the southern States have been out of the Union, 
 and that an act of Congress is necessary to re- 
 admit or restore them. It is true that a part 
 of the people South voted to go out of the 
 Union, and took up arms to sustain that reso- 
 lution. That is undeniably true. But we said 
 that they should not go out, and we made war 
 to compel them to remain. The contest be- 
 tween them and us was to determine whether 
 
 their resolution or ours, upon this very point 
 of going out, should prevail. They were beaten 
 in the war; their object frustrated, its realiza- 
 tion prevented. They did not get out of the 
 Union because they failed in the war. Success 
 would have taken them out ; failure left them 
 in. That is the simple truth and the whole truth 
 upon this subject, and the conclusion follows 
 that no act of Congress is necessary to their 
 restoration. 
 
 I see, therefore, no objection upon grounds of 
 principle to the President's policy of re.'storation 
 so far as he has carried it, nor to its consumma- 
 tion and complete fulfillment by the admission of 
 Senators and Representatives by Congi-ess. On 
 the contrary, the reasons which support that pol- 
 icy are numerous, weighty, and decisive. 
 
 In contrast with the policy advocated by the 
 President is that known as the radical policy, 
 which proceeds upon the hypothesis that negro 
 suffrage is a certain and sure remedy for all the 
 evils which afflict the State. I look upon the 
 remedy as worse than the disease, as it imposes 
 a lasting and permanent evil for one of a tem- 
 porary character. An attempt to dilute and 
 weaken the intelligence upon which the safety of 
 our free institutions is founded can only be fol- 
 lowed by disastrous results. 
 
 If the inherent and superior intelligence of the 
 white man is incapable of directing and perpetu- 
 ating our form of Government, God defend us 
 from an appeal to African auxiliaries for the con- 
 summation of that grand result. 
 
 The right of suffrage impliedly carries with 
 it the right of governing by holding office, and 
 against the lodgment of such powers in the 
 hands of the late slaves I enter my solemn pro- 
 test. I admit that it is not the fault of the Afri- 
 can, the Indian, or the Asiatic, that his skin is 
 not white, or that he does not exhibit those 
 great characteristics which qualify him to gov- 
 ern the white race, and I am not disposed to 
 inflict punishment upon the African because, 
 while our white ancestors were contending for 
 civil and religious liberty, his were the nude 
 barbarians engaged in eating or selling those 
 whom the fortunes of war placed within their 
 power upon their native deserts. God made 
 the distinction in creating the races, and by an 
 immutable law he made their permanent com- 
 mingling an impossibility. Where the white 
 
10 
 
 race predominates it governs, and in Africa and 
 Hayti, where the negro is the dominant race, 
 he governs, and sedulously excludes the white 
 man from any participation. And while I do 
 not propose toreenact the ordinances of Provi- 
 dence, I am an advocate of the maintenance of 
 the distinction of the races, socially and po- 
 litically. 
 
 Notwithstanding the denunciations which 
 have been hurled against the sentiment, I still 
 believe that this is a white man's Government, 
 framed by white men, and for white men ; In- 
 stituted by their wisdom and defended by their 
 valor. In saying this, I do not mean to be un- 
 derstood as asserting that the negroes, the In- 
 dians, or any other inferior races should be ex- 
 cluded from the natural rights of life, liberty, 
 and the pursuit of happmess ; but I do mean to say 
 that the hardy, persevering, industrious, brave, 
 and intelligent Anglo-Saxon race and their de- 
 scendants, who brought civilization and the arts 
 into the New "World, and who have organized, 
 defended, and perpetuated free government 
 here, are not to be overridden and have a gov- 
 ernmental policy dictated to them by any semi- 
 barbarous inferiors, who have never evinced the 
 intelligence here, nor in their own country, 
 necessary to better their own condition ; who 
 have never had inventive genius to improve 
 upon the rudeness of the most barbarous 
 life ; who have never had the courage to assert 
 and maintain a respectable Government any- 
 where. 
 
 A stroke of the pen and sword combined has 
 stricken the fetters from the limbs of the slave, 
 but has left him, in jDoint of intelligence, but 
 little the superior of the brute creation or the 
 inanimate objects by which he is surrounded. 
 The stroke of neither the pen nor sword can 
 relieve the emancipated slave of his servile 
 instincts and fit him at once for the judicious 
 exercise of the right of suffrage. He is as igno- 
 rant and passive to-day as he was before a drop 
 of the white man's blood was shed to secure 
 his emancipation, and he will be no better to- 
 morrow. By forcibly thrusting upon him the 
 right of suffrage, of which he has no adequate 
 comprehension, you cither leave him the dupe 
 of his old master, to be voted at his will, or force 
 bim into an unequal contest with your own race, 
 who, since anything has been known of them, 
 
 have either enslaved or exterminated every other 
 race with which they have come in contact. 
 
 It seems to me unreasonable that we should 
 be called upon at this day to discuss a question 
 of extending suffrage to a race who are noto- 
 riously unfit to exercise it intelligently and 
 wisely. But surprise at this fact will be les- 
 sened when we consider that those who are most 
 anxious to secure negro suffrage, who are most 
 ardent and boisterous in its favor, are precisely 
 those persons who know least about the negro, 
 and are least qualified to judge and deterniine 
 any question of policy concerning him. There 
 is no extensive sentiment anywhere in the south- 
 ern States in favor of negro suffrage. What is 
 thought on that subject in this city of Wash- 
 ington was determined recently by an almost 
 unanimous vote of the qualified citizens against 
 it. Advancing northward, we find constitu- 
 tional provisions established in most of the cen- 
 tral States to preclude all legislative action upon 
 the subject. Only when we arrive in the ex- 
 treme North, where this race is scarcely known 
 as an element of population, do we find any con- 
 siderable sentiment in favor of degrading the 
 elective franchise to the level of negro intelli- 
 gence and capacity. And even in recent elec- 
 tions held in Connecticut, Wisconsin, and Min- 
 nesota, decided majorities were given against 
 the extension of suffrage to the small number 
 of negroes resident in those States. Upon the 
 Pacific coast, lam sure, the people are opposed 
 to suffrage by negroes, by Asiatics, or by In- 
 dians found within their borders, and they will 
 long remain so. In short, if negro suffrage were 
 submitted, at this hour, to a vote of the whole 
 electoral population of the United States, I be- 
 lieve they would decide against it Ijy a vote of 
 four to one. Even the negroes themselves do 
 not demand or ask it, except where they are 
 instigated or influenced by white men whose 
 trade is agitation and whose purpose is mis- 
 chief. It is clear, then, that public opinion 
 does not demand from Congress any legislation 
 or action whatsoever looking to negro suffrage. 
 The cry for it is the clamor of .faction and not 
 the voice of the people. 
 
 It is equally clear and certain that Congress 
 has no rightful power to determine a question 
 of suffrage in any State ; that an attempt to do 
 so would be a usurpation, and directly opposed 
 
11 
 
 to the fundamental division of powers between 
 the States and the Federal Government. 
 
 But negro suflrage would not be desirable or 
 useful, but, on the contrary, pernicious, even if 
 no impediment existed in public opinion, or in 
 constitutional law. It would inevitably degrade 
 and corrupt elections, and that to an extent 
 fearful to contemplate. Electoral privilege is 
 a trust as well as a right. It is, in fact, a pub- 
 lic duty rather than a personal privilege ; a duty 
 of the gravest importance, and requiring inde- 
 pendence, intelligence, and virtue in a high de- 
 gree to its proper exercise. Its strongest and 
 most persistent advocates are to be found among 
 politicians who perceive the true relation be- 
 tween cause and effect ; that ignorance can be 
 made to count hugely at elections, and that 
 party organizations, and public men who would 
 not be upheld by the intelligence of the coun- 
 try can, by its aid. riot in place and wield the 
 scepter of public power. 
 
 With all th« justice, patriotism, and magna- 
 nimity which we may claim for the States now 
 represented upon this floor, how few of them 
 have become convinced of the propriety of con- 
 ferring the right of suffrage upon the few and 
 comparatively intelligent negroes to be found 
 within their borders? If the experiment under 
 such favorable circumstancesbecomes of doubt- 
 ful propriety with our own States, where is the 
 justice or propriety of our forcing it upon other 
 States, where the African has not had time to 
 commence his recovery from the debasing ef- 
 fects of the most degraded servitude? 
 
 The propriety of universal suffrage among 
 our own race has long been a debatable ques- 
 tion among the warmer friends of republican 
 institutions, and while it is difhcult to fix any 
 boundaries for the intelligence which shall au- 
 thorize its exercise, it is conceded by all that 
 there is danger in conferring it upon those who 
 are ignorant of our Government and institu- 
 tions. Examples are not wanting of the re- 
 strictions which have been imposed by States 
 against its universality. The Indian, with all his 
 native sagacity and the noble attributes awarded 
 to him by Utopian writers, has been almost uni- 
 versally denied its exercise. In times of polit- 
 ical excitement parties have been enabled to 
 foist amendments upon State constitutions 
 whkh excluded white persons of foreign birth 
 
 whose political sentiments were not in unison 
 with the progressive and transcendental theo- 
 ries of intolerant majorities. 
 
 But, sir, admitting, for argument's sake, the 
 propriety of conferring the right of suffrage 
 indiscriminately upon everything that walks 
 upright upon two feet, what right has Congress 
 to meddle with this question within the States 
 of the Union? . 
 
 By an appeal to arms you have reduced the 
 citizens of the southern States to a condi- 
 tion of obedience to the Constitution and laws 
 of the United States. You and I denied their 
 pretended assumption of the right to take 
 their States out of the Union. They appealed 
 to arras as the last resort to enforce their pre- 
 tended rights of secession. We metthcra openly 
 and squarely upon that issue, and wrung from 
 them a verdict, at the cost of hundreds of thou- 
 sands of lives and thousands of millions of dol- 
 lars. In this verdict they now acquiesce ; and 
 are we, in the moment of victory, to be guilty 
 of the folly of turning around and conceding 
 all their claims by admitting that they are no 
 longer States of the Union, bound to observe 
 its Constitution and yield obedience to its laws, 
 and reciprocally entitled to Its protection and 
 rights? Such action would be a surrender to 
 the rebels, by legislation, of more than they have 
 been able to wring from us by arms, and would 
 be a practical ratification of their secession ordi- 
 nances, and a dissolution of the Union by act 
 of Congress. 
 
 Why should we involve ourselves in the para- 
 doxical absurdity of denying the right of seces- 
 sion, of fighting them for four years to enforce 
 that denial, and- when they admit their failure 
 by the last arbitrament, turn round and admit 
 that thejjihave accomplished their purpose, and 
 are to-day outside the Union ? The rebellion 
 having been a failure on the part of those who 
 inaugurated It, it would seem the height of folly 
 on the part of those who resisted it so success- 
 fully to dignify It with all the consequences 
 of a success. If, as I believe, they have not 
 achieved the object for which they began the 
 war, and their insurrection has been suppressed, 
 it would seem that nothing has occurred to 
 change their political relations to the Union, 
 and they must be still States composing its in- 
 tegral parts. Every department of this Gov- 
 
12 
 
 ernment has so recognized them in some form 
 or other, and I take it that they are as much 
 States in the Union to-day as though their citi 
 zens had never committed treason against it. 
 The crime of treason can only be committed 
 by individuals, and whether they are pardoned 
 or punished for the offense cannot affect the 
 condition of the body-politic of which they may 
 happen to be members. 
 
 It is a well-known fact that in many of those 
 States a minority of the people assumed to sever 
 the connection of the State with the Union, and 
 that the majority were forced to succumb in 
 some instances to de facto governments forced 
 ■upon them by a minority of their own citizens, 
 aided by rebel forces drawn from other revolted 
 States. In this view of the facts, if we are to 
 admit that States thus situated have been taken 
 out of the Union, it becomes an interesting 
 qi;estion to know exactly how small a minority, 
 aided by troops from other States, maybe able, 
 under the influence of such auxiliaries, to effect 
 a legal consummation of the proposed act. It 
 might also be the subject of inquiry to know to 
 what extent the loyaFand non-seceding major- 
 ity were bound by such acts under duress. • It 
 is said that troops from neighboring States sur- 
 rounded the convention at Little Rock, in Ar- 
 kansas, and by threats and intimidation forced 
 members elected as Union men to vote for the 
 ordinance of secession. If Lee, in one of his 
 advances into Pennsjdvania, had, by the same 
 means, effected the same results with a Legis- 
 lature or convention at Harrisburg, and subse- 
 quently the people in Pennsylvania, or a ma- 
 jority of them, 'had been conscripted and placed 
 in the rebel army ; after the invaders had been 
 driven from the State as they have been from 
 the southern States, would any man claim that 
 Pennsylvania was no longer a State of this 
 Union ; and that in consequence of her soil be- 
 ing invaded and her peoi^le overcome by rebel 
 hordes, that her relation to the Union was 
 changed, and that in consequence of these re- 
 sults her altered relations to the Union were 
 such as to authorize Congress to interfere in her 
 internal policy, or alter her suffrage laws? If 
 it is claimed that such a secession from the 
 Union, under such circumstances, was null 
 and void, and ought not to alter the relations 
 of Pennsylvania toward the Union, I answer | 
 
 that all acts of secession are equally null 
 and void, and cannot change the relations 
 which a State bears toward the Federal Con- 
 stitution. 
 
 The ridiculous and absurd acts of the pre- 
 tended and fugitive Legislatures of Kentucky 
 and Missouri, by which those bodies pretended 
 to sever the relations of their respective States 
 with the Federal Union, were as valid as the 
 similar attempts at the same thing by the con- 
 ventions of South Carolina and Mississippi. If 
 they were not, and if Missouri and Kentucky 
 are not to-day as effectually out of the Union 
 as any other States, I should like to have some 
 oasuist upon the question of legal and constitu- 
 tional secession explain the reason why. Yet 
 no one seems to question the right of Missouri 
 or Kentucky to be represented here, and I sup- 
 pose that their cases are exceptional because 
 they did not legally secede. 
 
 "Well, sir, if those States did not legally se- 
 cede, would it not be well to inquire into the 
 legality of the similar attempts upon the part of 
 other States, and if it should turn out that none 
 of them have seceded legally, the natural infer- 
 ence would be that none of them could legally 
 be denied that representation upon this floor 
 and that immunity from Federal interference in 
 their internal affairs which the Constitution of 
 the United States awards to them. 
 
 Mr. President, I have been astonished, when 
 I have read the speeches of men who are sup- 
 l^osed to be endowed with common sense, to ob- 
 serve the subterfuges and expedients to which 
 they have resorted to prove by specious and 
 silly arguments that the southern States have 
 actually seceded and dissolved this Union. The 
 advocates of the finality of secession, in their at- 
 tempts to prove that it has been consummated, 
 notwithstanding its unconstitutionality, com- 
 placently adduce what they suppose a parallel 
 in the case of murder, and suppose that they are 
 demolishing all arguments against their theory, 
 by complacently, and with apparent triumph, 
 asserting that the laws prohibit murder, there- 
 fore murder cannot be committed. I pity the 
 statesman or lawyer who is driven to such sub- 
 terfuges of the pettifogger to sustain so trans- 
 parent a fallacy. Murder, like other crimes, is 
 punished by a local law, and its perpetration 
 is constantly occurring and being punished. 
 
13 
 
 The restriction finds a place in our great funda- 
 mental law which declares that — 
 
 "This Constitution, and the laws of the United States 
 which shall bo made in pursuanco thereof, and all 
 treaties made, or which shall be made, under the au- 
 thority of the United States, shall bo the supreme law 
 of the land; and the judses in every State shall be 
 bound thereby, anythincr in the constitution or laws of 
 any State to the contrary' notwithstanding." 
 
 This is an asser;ijn of the supremacy of the 
 Constitution, and when its violation is attempted 
 the courts have never admitted the success of 
 such attempts, but have invariably stamped them 
 as nullities, and void, because of their legal im- 
 possibility. I should hope that there are but few 
 men in our country who are unable to compre- 
 hend the distinction between a criminal statute 
 and a great constitutional restriction. 
 
 It is urged as an objection against the rec- 
 ognition of those States that their Legislatures 
 might not be in unison with some other States. 
 The same objection might be urged against the 
 internal policy of any of the other States of this 
 Union, and only furnishes an argument in favor 
 of the obliteration Of all States, lea\'ing the le- 
 gislation of what is now called the United States 
 to be consummated by a great centralized Gov- 
 ernment established here at the national cap- 
 ital. I have never been an advocate of State 
 rights except when they were exercised in sub- 
 ordination to that paramount law known as the 
 Constitution of the United States. I know that 
 the States lately in rebellion are not the only 
 ones which have at times attempted to assert 
 such right in derogation of the Constitution. 
 We have had some late and costly experience 
 in the way of ultra State- rights doctrine. Let us 
 avoid the other extreme, and escape the evils 
 likely to result from an attempted consolidation 
 of all the rights of the States in a centralized 
 Government. 
 
 "While the southern people were engaged in 
 armed hostility to the Government and the Con- 
 stitution, no one was more anxious than myself 
 to see their spurious government overthrown, 
 and their military power broken, in order that 
 the Constitution and laws of the United States 
 might reassert their sway. To accomplish these 
 ends I urged the adoption of a vigorous con- 
 scription law, with an abolition of exemption 
 and commutation clauses, which, if adopted, 
 would have crushed the military power of the 
 South at an early period. I desired to infuse 
 
 a vigor into the war which met with the stem 
 reprobation of extreme partisans of all classes 
 upon this lloor. Now that our armies liave 
 been triumi)hant everywhere, and the people of 
 those States lately in revolt are suing for mercy 
 and pardon, it is not in my nature to inflict hu- 
 miliating outrages upon them, or to demand 
 that they should be reduced to an equality with 
 their late slaves. 
 
 It is but natural, when wc contemplate the 
 enormity of the crime committed by those peo- 
 ple in their mad attempt to destroy such a Gov- 
 ernment as ours, and which the most of their 
 leaders were sworn to support, that we should 
 desii-e to inflict upon them such punishments as 
 are demanded by broken laws and a violated 
 Constitution ; and I do not pretend to say that 
 the great leaders in those terrible crimes which 
 have plunged the country into mourning and 
 involved us in a debt of gigantic proportions 
 should escape at least some of the legal conse- 
 quences of their own deliberate acts. Yet we 
 should, as far as the mass of the people are con- 
 cerned, extend to them that godlike attribute 
 of mercy, and remember that Christianity, com- 
 bined with modern civilization, has long since 
 exploded the idea that the wholesale shedding 
 of blood is a panacea for crimes against the State. 
 Let us not leave a record behind us parallel to 
 the state trials of England and the reign of 
 terror in France, when it was supposed that the 
 most terrible punishments worked the most salu- 
 tary reforms. James II, with a facetious bru- 
 tality, characterized the wholesale slaughter 
 which followed the abortive attempt of the Duke 
 of Monmouth to revolutionize England, in IG80, 
 as "the campaigns of the Lord Chief Justice 
 Jeffreys in the west." The name of that cruel 
 and weak-minded monarch has been handed 
 down to posterity coupled with the most blood- 
 thirsty and atrocious villainies that ever dis- 
 graced the forms of human justice, and the name 
 of Jeffreys is only remembered to be detested 
 and execrated in every clime where civilization 
 has extended. The terrible examples of blood- 
 shed in France, during the reign of terror, have 
 met with a like condemnation. It is gratifying 
 to all friends of popular freedom and constitu- 
 tional liberty, when we reflect that in our late 
 contest, where all the worst passions of human 
 nature were aroused, and when our soldiers, as 
 
14 
 
 prisoners, had been treated with a barbarity 
 utterly indefensible, that when our enemies were 
 subdued and within our power there was no 
 clamor for blood. 
 
 Humanity and reason have with our people 
 maintained a' sway which in almost any other 
 country have at some time been usurped by ha- 
 tred, vengeance, and bloodshed. Such an ex- 
 hibition of magnanimity and mercy is alike 
 creditable to our people and our institutions. 
 
 Mr. President, inasmuch as the people of 
 the South had no just cause for the commence- 
 ment of the rebellion, let us be careful not to 
 furnish them with one for the justification of 
 similar attempts in the future, by forcing upon 
 them taxation without representation, and thus 
 placing them where they can avail themselves 
 of the precedent sanctified by the struggles of 
 our revolutionary fathers. Though they have 
 been confessedly in the wrong, and have com- 
 mitted a great crime, let us not violate our own 
 sense of justice by heaping upon them the very 
 outrages which justified the Colonies in resist- 
 ing a similar tyrannical exercise of power upon 
 the part of Great Britain. 
 
 Look at this great question as you will, and 
 from any stand-point, the conviction is forced 
 upon your mind that we are to constitute in the 
 future one great nation, and must live together 
 as one people, professing the same religion, 
 speaking the same language, and bound to- 
 gether by the traditions of the past and the hopes 
 
 of the future. If this be true, is it not better 
 for us to forget and forgive the past than to re- 
 vive and keep alive the hateful animosities which 
 have come so near causing our mutual destruc- 
 tion ? I trust and believe that the time will come 
 when all the fierce passions and hatred engen- 
 dered by the war will have subsided, and when 
 we shall become a more united people than 
 before, with homogeneous institutions, bound 
 together by a common sentiment of love and 
 admiration fo* free government and constitu- 
 tional liberty. Posterity will view, through the 
 medium of impartial history, the acts and 
 achievements of the public men of the present 
 age, and the time in which we now live and act 
 our part will be referred to as the most porten- 
 tous of any period of the past. The terrible 
 crisis through which we have just passed will 
 be referred to as demonstrating the power of a 
 republican form of government, and as conclu- 
 sive proof that the people have the capacity to 
 administer and preserve it. Let us, then, in 
 the language of the President, "cast the dis- 
 orders of the past into oblivion. ' ' Let the chil- 
 dren of those who have met upon the field of 
 carnage imitate the generosity of their fathers, 
 who could shake hands and share the rude com- 
 forts of the bivouac with those so lately their 
 mortal enemies ; and let us hope that both sec- 
 tions may cultivate and foster that spirit of con- 
 cord which shall make our Union in reality 
 "one and inseparable." 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 013 744 735 6 ^ 
 
 peRnulTffe* 
 pH8J