(J unci /bb bia A pH8J E 668 .W71 Copy 1 RECONSTMCTIOI. Speech of Hon. GEO. H. WILLIAMS, delivered at Portland, Oregon, September 23d, 1867. •W7/ LIBRARY Or CON. '" -'VED DOCUMEV : -. DIVISION t^^ RECONSTRUCTION. Speech of Hon. GEO. H. WILLIAMS, delivered at Portland, Oregon, September 23d, 1867. Fellow Citizens, To you I made ray salutatory upon my arrival from Washington, and now as I am about to return, I come to make ray valedictory speech. I have just com])leted a journey during which, with one or two exceptions, I have addressed the people of every county in this State. I have been to refresh ni}'' eyes once more with its diversified and beautiful scenery, and to renew my personal associations with its patriotic and happy people. Everywhere I have found the signs of prosperity. Intelligence and virtue keep pace with wealth and population. The watch fires of the Union cause are burning brightly for Freedom, Humanity and Justice. To Heaven our gratitude is due, for while civil war has afflicted man}'' parts of our country with bloody strife and bitter penury, " peace has been within our borders and plenteousness in all our habitations." Coincident with the breaking out of the rebellion there was a political organization formed from men of all parties, which has since been called the Union ])arty, and to the patriotism, power and courage of this organization, this 8tate is to-day indebted for its unbroken peace and the nation for its con- tinued existence. Steps were taken, as you all know, to aid Southern Secession by the establishment of a Pacific Republic which would have involved us in war, but these steps were defeated in the start by the timely substitution of Sumner for Johnson in the command of the troops on this coast, and the energy and zeal of the friends of the Government in coming together to resist any attempt to dissolve the Union. Antagonistic to the Union men was the Democratic partj^ — once a liberal and jji'ogressive, now a bigoted and conservative party. Characterized in earlier days b}^ hostility to monopolies, class legislation, and the unjust and artificial distinctions of society, it claimed that the blessings of Grovernment like the dews of Heaven should descend alike upon all; and its party shibboleth was the electric words of Andrew Jackson that " The Federal Union must and shall be preserved." Calhounism however found its way into the party and worked like poison. Contrary to the teachings of the Fathers that Slavery was a political, social and moral evil, it came to teach the ethics pf Callioun that Slavery was a political, social and moral blessing, and then it came to teach (^Facilis est descensus avenii) that the Slave holding States had a right to desti-oy the Union and set u]) a Southern Confeder- [4] I aey upon its ruins whose chief corner stone should be the institution of Slaver}^. When tlie Southern Democracy that supported Breckinridge in 18G0, plunged the nation into a war for disunion, it was sympathized with and encoui-aged by the Democratic organization of the North, excepting individuals. Gov. Orr said in a speech delivered in Charleston on the 2d of last April, that his Democratic friends in the North and West pledged their faith that if the " war was comn:»enced it would be north of Mason and Dixon's line and not in the South." Buchanan's administration, as you know, after the rebel flag was raised, took the ground that " The Federal Government could not coerce a Sovereign State." On this coast the party did not hesitate to define its position. In June, 18(51, the Dem- ocratic Coiivcntion of California "Resolved, That we are opposed to the employment of force by the General Grovernment against the Seceded States for the purpose of compelling obedience and submission to Federal authorit}''." Resolutions of similar import were elsewhei'e adopted. Suppose that a majority of the people on this coast and elsewhei'c had adopted Buchanan's policy or the doctrine of the resolution I have just read instead of rallying around the standard of the Union cause ; is there any one so stupid as not to see that now instead of a nation, we should have its " dishonored fragments," and our flag, instead of flashing defiance to every power upon earth, as it now does, would be trailing its starry folds under the derision and contempt of all mankind. Suggested by this brief review is the very pertinent enquiry: How can you safelj" put jouv confidence in a party whose policy three or four years ago would have destroyed or acquiesced in the destruction of the Nation ? Not long prior to my departure for Washington, I addressed you upon the questions then before the countrj-, but I come now to speak of other and different issues. Then there was a terrific war in the land. Hundreds of thousands of men in arms were fighting for the overthrow of the Government and the future destiny of the Republic hung upon the doubtful fortunes of the battle field. I then argued that it was the duty of every man to support the Government, to give to the administration of Abraham Lincohi a practical and efiicient support, and to do all he could by his voice and vote to impart success to the Union cause. Democracy denounced these argu- ments with vigorous hostility, and declared that " the war for the Union w^as an unconstitutional and unnecessary war — that the administration of Lincoln was guilty of usurpation and tyranny and that any effort to sup- press the rebellion bj^ force Avould be a failure." History has already passed i^s judgment u])on these issues, and it stands irreversibly recorded that the Democratic party was as false in its arguments and predictions during the war as it was unfriendly to the cause of a bleeding country. When the enemies of the Union were defeated in battle the country was called upon to meet those questions left unsettled, and others of a difficult nature growing out of the struggle. Depending upon military power for their existence, the Confederate Governments when that power foiled passed away like the baseless fabric of a dream. Territory, and people dwelling upon that territory were left, but there were no organizations oi any kind, and the wdiolo insurrectionary region was very jnuch as the earth was described to be at the beginning, " without form and void." Business, commei'ce and currency were gone. Disappointment, destitu- tion and tears spread their gloomy pall over the hind. To add to which, there were three or four millions of slaves set free and thrown by the. convulsions of the war penuyless, houseless, and friendless, upon th( s charities of the nation. To deal with this cauldron of seething passion and chaos of elements was no easy thing. When the rebel armies sui 1 r [5] ^■cndered Congress was not in session, therefore it became the duty of the President to take the first and immediate actiou in view of that event. Two legitimate ways were open for him to pursue. One was to convene Congress in extra session, as President Lincohi did at the commencement of the war, and the otiier was to provide iu the exercise of his military- power as Commander-in-Chief of the Army, for temporary military Gov- ernments to protect the public peace until the next regular session of Congress. President Johnson, instead of pursuing either course, under- took to organize civil Governments for each of the rebel States. Much animated controversy has occurred upon this subject in Congress and elsewhere, but no clause or provision of the Constitution has been or can be found conferring authority upon the President to set up an3-where or under any circumstances a civil Government. President Johnson, how- ever, made proclamation appointing (iovernors, providing for Conventions, declaring who should be eligible as delegates, and what ])art of the people should be electors, and tlien dictating wliat the Constitutions when made should contain. Whatever the motives of the President were, all this was clearly an usurpation of power. When the o9th Congress assembled, on the 1st Monday of December, 18G5, these Johnson Governments Yxixd gone into operation and developed their nature and eftects. Elections had been held at which all the State offices were filled witli men who had been prominent and active iu the rebellion. Senators and Representatives in Congress were chosen, most of whom had been members of the Confed- erate Government or officers in tlie rebel arm}", among whom were A. H. Stephens, Vice President of the Southern Confederacy, H. V. Johnson and W. A. Graham, Senators in the rebel Congress; Cook, Wofford, McGowan and others, who had been Generals in the rebel army. Union men were not only denied political privileges and preferment, but they were pro- scribed in business and put under the social ban and in every wa}' treated as aliens and enemies. ISTotwithstanding the adoption of the Constitutional Amendment abolishing Slavery which was onl}^ a recogni- tion of the result produced by the war, the most odious and wicked features of the Slave code were re-enacted, and Garret Davis of Kentucky in a speech which he delivered in the Senate, giving expression to rebel sentiment upon this question, declared that " Notwithstanding the Consti- tutional amendment or any legislation by Congress, Slavery existed and always would exist in the Southern States." Congress therefore, when it assembled, was not only required to pass upon the validity of these Johnson Governments, but to judge of their loy- alty and justice in view of these effects. To make sure of the facts. Con- gress when it assembled, raised a joint committee of the two Houses, with power to examine persons and papers, and before this committee witnesses from all classes were called to testify, including Lee, De Bow, and other advocates and supporters of the rebellion. President Johnson made the raising of this committee the occasion of a savage attack upon Congress, and in a public speech denounced it as an " irresponsible central directory," when its sole purpose was to obtain evidence as to the temper, feelings and conduct of tiie people in the South, and thereupon to make such recom- mendations to Congress as such evidence seemed to require. I think it proper to say something here of the disagreement between the President and Congress bj^ which, no doubt, the distraction and difficulties ;of the country have been jn-otracted. Much effort has been made by the Demo- cratic party in its su])port of Johnson, to throw the blame upon Congress, but I affirm that it is chargeable to the vacillation or perfidy of the Presi- dent. I submit in proof oi" this assertion in the first place an extract from [ 6 ] a letter addressed by the President to W. L. 8hat"key, of Mississippi, dated August 15tb, 18(55, as follows : "If 3'ou could extend the elective franchise to all persons of color who can read the Constitution of the United States in English and write their names, and to all persons of color who own real estate, valued at not less than two hundred and tifty dollars, and pay taxes thereon, you would cijin- ])letely disarm the adversary and set an example the other States will fol- low. This 3^ou can do with perfect safety, and you thus place the South- ern States, in reference to free persons of color, upon the same basis with the free States. 1 hope and trust your convention will do this, and, as a consequence, the radicals, who are wild upon negro franchise, will be com- pletely foiled in their attempt to keej) the Southern States from renewing their relations to the Union by not accepting their Senators and Repi*e- sentatives.* ANDREW JOHNSON, President of the U. S." Notice the date of this letter if j'ou please, and you will see that several months before Congress assembled, and while Union men and Union jour- nals were expressing their confidence in the President, he was confeder- ating with Sharkey, of Mississippi, and others " to disarm the adversary," and " to completely foil the radicals." Who was the " adversary " to be disarmed, but the Union ])arty of the country, and who were the "radi- cals" to be foiled, but the men who had given to Andrew Johnson their confidence, and by their votes made him Vice President r* Was there any ])rovocation for this letter in what Congress did raoaths after it was writ- ten ? I think it is evident that at the date of this letter Johnson had formed the design of building up a new political party to defeat the men by whom be had been elected, which design was more fully developed in that abortive miscegenation of politicians which assembled in Philadelphia in August, 1866. Negro suffrage in Mississippi, now so terrible to Johnson's supportci'S, was to be the means by which the " adversary " was to be dis- armed and his partisan purposes accomplished. Some people question the sincerity of Johnson during the rebellion, but it appears to me that he has changed. Nobody will deny that his so-called •■ policy" is in clear conflict with his views and opinions prior to its adoption. On the 9th of June, 18(^4, Johnson among tjther things said in a speech ^ at Nashville : " AVhy all this carnage and devastation ? It was that treason migiit bo put down and traitors punished. Therefore I saj'that traitors should take a back seat in the work of restoration. If there be but five thousand men in Tennessee loyal to the Constitution, \oyii\ to freedom, loyal to justice, these true and faithful men should control the work of reorganization and reformation absolutel}*. I say that the ti-ailor has ceased to be a citizen, and in joining the rebellion has become a pul>lic enemy. He forfeited his right to vote with loyal men when he renounced his citizenship and sought to destro}^ our Government. Treason must be made odious, and traitors must be punished and impoverished. Their great plantations must be ►seized, and divided into small farms, and sold 1o honest, industrious men." On the 21st of April, ]8()5, he said : " It is not promulging anything that T b.ave not heretofore said to say tliat traitors must be made odious, that l-eason must be made odious, that [7] f. raitors must bo punislicd and impoverished. * =" * * And 1. say that, after makiiii; treason odious, every Union man and the Govern- ment should be remunerated out of the pockets of those who have inflict- ed this great surtering u])on the countr3^" President Johnson, it will bo seen by these extracts, takes the ground " that traitors should take a back seat in the work of restoi-alion— " that " loj-al men should absolutely control the work of reorganization," that "traitors had ceased to be citizens and forfeited the right to vote," that the}- ought to be punished and impoverished and their social power de- stroj'ed, that their property ought " to bo seized and every Union man and the (iovernment remunerated out of their pockets;" positions in ad- vance of which neither Stevens or Sumner has ever gone. Who will pre- tend to say that a policy that proclaims universal pardon to traitors and puts the reorganization of the rebel States into their hands is in keeping with these declarations 'i No doubt the Union inen of the country gener- ally agreed with Johnson at the time ho made these speeches, that " trait- ors should take a back seat in the work of restoration," and a great out- cry has been made against Congress because it did not abandon this posi- tion when the President did. Congress when it assembled in December, 1805, did not at once set aside the Johnson Governments, but proceeded with other legislation which the circumstances of the country immediately required. The Act for tlic relief of Freedmen and Refugees was passed. War had devastated the South and made thousands of people, white and black, homeless and destitute, and this Act was demanded by humanity to save them from suffering and starvation. Great paius have been taken by the Democrats to make it appear that this legislation was exclusively for *the freedmen, but the bill by its terms applied equally to " refugees and freedmen," and its benefactions reached need}^ persons of every class and color. According to official reports, from the Ist of .Tune, 1865, to the 1st of April, 1866, there were issued in Alabama 879,353 rations to whites, and 364,215 to blacks, and in Arkansas during the same time there were issued 1,004,862 rations to whites, and 715,572 to blacks, and in other parts of the South the charities of this Bureau were largely divided. Johnson vetoed this Bill, not because it disturbed his State Governments, for it did not, but because it Avas a pai't of the Johnson-Sharkey programme of the tight with Congress. President Johnson said to Congress in his annual message of Dec. 4th, 1865, "that good faith requires the security of the freedmen in their liberty and in their property, their right to labor and the right to claim the just return of their labor." Congress therefore passed the Civil Rights Bill, which gave to "every person born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, the right to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties and give evidence, to in- herit, purchase, lease, sell, hold and convey real and personal property, and to full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of person and property as enjoyed by white citizens," and this Bill, too, was vetoed. Common sense ought to teach any man that freedom to the blacks of the South without the rights conferred by this Bill would be a mockery and a curse. Following and including these there were more than a dozen vetoes ; this accidental President assuming that ho had more wisdom and patriotism as to nearly all the leading subjects of legislation before Congress, than the 33 Sesators and 120 Representatives whoso united judgment and action he was trying to overrule and defeat. All this shows who was the aggressor in the contest between the President and Congi-ess. Lfter the examination of a vast amount of evidence and thorough discus- [8] 1 sion Congress came to the conclusion that some constitutional guarantee!: for the future safety and peace of the country were necessary, and there- fore Article 14 was submitted to the several kStates for ratification. I shall not discuss this Article in extenso, because it has been considered and passed upon by the people. All its provisions are reasonable and just, but there is one which seems to have escaped general notice, aud to which I will call 3^our attention. Sec. 4 says that "neither the United States nor any State shall pay any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave." Many facts were elicited to show that there was a wide spread conviction in the South that the Slaveholders ought to be indemnified for their Slaves made free, and without going into detail I refer for proof to the proceedings of the Georgia Convention which, to a resolution acquiescing in the destruction of Slaver}'', attached the following proviso : i<- Provided, That acquiescence in the action of the Government of the United States is not intended to operate as a relinquishment, or waiver, or estoppel, of such claim for compensation of loss sustained by reason of the emancipation of his slaves, as any citizen of Georgia may hereafter make upon the justice and magnanimity of that Government." Jeff. Thompson, in a letter dated June Gth, 1867, estimates the Slave prop- erty of the South before the rebellion at four thousand millions of dollars. Suppose the 22 Senators and 61 Eepresentatives from the rebel States had been admitted at once to their seats in Congress, who can tell with what success by the dexterous use of a part of this vast fund, they might have prosecuted the claim? Who can say that those interested and their sym- pathizei'S may not at some future day have the ascendency in the Govern- ment? Will not the property holders and tax payers of the country jus- tify Congress in taking the necessary steps for the constitutional extinc- tion of this immense and dangerous claim? President Johnson was of course opposed to the Constitutional Amendment. He took an appeal to the people, and " swung round the circle " to support that appeal, but the people decided against him. He ought to have acquiesced in that decision, but he did not, and through his advice and influence with the co-operation of the Democratic party, the rebel States were induced to reject the amend- ment with expressions of hatred and contempt for Congress — a decision which they have since deeply regretted. I desire to say in reference to that amendment that it pi'offered an adjustment of our national difficulties without enforcing upon any State the enfranchisement of the black man. Congress said in effect to the rebel States, '* Agree to this and regulate suf- frage for yourselves," but they would not do it. Tennessee accepted the proposition, and her Senators and Eepresentatives were promptly admit- ted, and so no doubt it would have been with the other rebel States if they had followed the example of Tennessee. Some have claimed that Congress in submitting this amendment recognized the reorganization of the rebel States. This is the position of the President, but Congress has never assented to it. I think it is the opinion of a majority of Congress that the ratification of three-fourths of the loyal States made the amendment a part of the Constitution, because the rebel States had deprived themselves of the legal capacity to act thereon by the voluntary destruction of their State Governments, but Congress demanded the assent of these States as far as they were able to give it, as an evidence of their willingness to ac- quiesce in and abide by the terms of reconstruction proposed by Congress. Twenty-four out of the tAventy-seven loyal States ratified this amendment. . What I have said as to the views of Congi-ess upon this, also applies to th' :-inendmeiit abolishinp; Slaveiy. One great question is, as to the power of Congress to impose any terms of restoration upon tlie rebel States, and this involves that other question, about which so much has been said, as to whether these States were in or out of the Union. Our political oppo- nents say to us, "You took the ground during the rebellion tliat the States could not go out, and now you say they are out of the Union." I deny that the Union party has ever assumed that these States were out of the Union, in any other sense than Johnson and the Democratic party have assumed that tiiey were out of the Union. President Johnson in all his proclamations appointing Provisional Governors used this language. I quote I'rom the proclamation as to North Carolina: "And whereas the rebellion, which has been waged by a portion of the people of the United States against the properly constituted authorities of the Grovernment thereof, in the most violent and revolting form, butAvhosc organized and revolting ibrces have novv' been almost entirely overcome, has, in its revolutionary progress, deprived the people of the State of North Carolina of all civil government; and whereas it becomes necessaiy and proper to carry out and enforce the obligations of the United States to the people of North Carolina, in securing them in the enjoyment of a re- publican form of government." This record commits Johnson and the Democrats who supported him to the following positions : 1st. That the rebellion deprived the rebel States " of all civil Grovern- ment." 2d. That the new State Glovernments to be organized there were not to emanate from the people, but were to be provided for them and put in ope- ration by the United States. Johnson upon the grounds stated in this proclamation proceeds to ap- point Governors, regulate the elective franchise, and dictate Constitutional provisions to the rebel States. Congress stands upon the same grounds and exercises the same if not greater power, and therefore if Congress assumes that these States are out of the Union, Johnson and the Demo- cratic party assume the same thing. Nobody, however, takes that ground. We of the Union party say, as Johnson does, that the rebellion deprived the rebel States of "all civil government," and then we say, where there is no " civil Government," of course there is no " Kepublican form of Govern- ment," and the contingency contemplated by the Constitution has arisen, and the United States must perform their duty. Congress and the Presi- dent do not differ so much as to the facts, but the President claims that the Executive is the " United States," while Congress claims that the Con- stitution means by the " United States" the Legislative Department of the GTOvernmeut. I will riot ai'gue this question more than to say that the President is the Executive officer of the Glovernment — he cannot make or unmake law; he is " to take care that the laws be faithfully executed," and, to Congress belongs all the functions of legislation. When a Territory applies for admission into the Union as a State, its Constitution is submit- ted to GJongress. If Congress approves, the State is admitted ; if Congress disapproves, the Territory does not become a State. The President has nothing to do about it. So with the rebel States. They are without " civil Governments," and in that res})ect no better off than Territories. CJonoTCss, therefore, by analogy, n\ust authorize or sanction new Constitu- tions of State Governments, or they will remain as incapable of action in i the Union as Territories are. 1 will refer to an authority on this point [10] that ought to bo eouclusive with the Democratic party. Chief Justilfe Taney, in delivering the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States in Luther vs. Borden, Isr, Howard, after citing the 4th Section of the 4th Article of the Constitution, that the " United States shall guarantee to every State in the Union a Republican form of Government," &c., says : " Under this article of the Constitution it rests with Congress to decide what Government is the established one in a State. For as the United States guarantee to each State a Republican Government, Congress must necessarily decide what Government is established in the State before it can determine whether it is Republican or not. * * * And when the Senators and Repi-esentatives of a State are admitted into the Councils of the Union, the authority of the Government under which they are appointed, as well as its Republican character, is recognized by the proper Constitutional authority, and its decision is binding on ever}^ other Department of the Government, and could not bo questioned in a judicial tribunal. I contend that this authority establishes the exclusive jurisdiction of Congress under Sec. 4 of Ai'ticle 4 of the Constitution, and any decision by Congress as to the existence or form of a State Government is " bind- ing " upon the l^resident. I understand the same doctrine in effect was announced by the Supreme Court in the late application by Georgia and Mississippi for injunctions to restrain the execution of the Military Re- construction Act. When Congress undertakes to act under Sec. 4 of Ar- ticle 4, it does not assume that the State is out of the Union, for the lan- guage of the Section is, the " United States shall guarantee to every State in the Union a Republican form of Government." This assumes that a State may be m the Union and not have a Republican form of Government. Secretary Seward at one time recognized the control of Congress; for on the 24th of July, 1865, he telegraphed to Governor Sharkey, of Missis- sippi, as follows : " The government of the State will be provisional only until the civil government is recognized with the approval of Congress." A]kI afterwards he telegraphed Governor Marvin, of Florida, as follows: "It must, however, be distinctly understood that the restoration to which your proclamation refers will be subject to the decision of Congress." Congress in refusing to recognize the rebel States until they accepted its terms, only did what President Johnson had done. From time to time while their conventions were in session, he telegraphed what they must do or he w^ould not recognize them, one of which teiegTams, for example, I will read, as follows : His ExcELLENCYj James Johnson — Frovisional Governor of Georgia : Your several telegrams have been received. The President of the United States cannot recognize the people of any State as having resumed the relations of loyalty to the Union that admits as legal, obligations cotracted or debts created in their name, to promote the war of the i-ebellion. William H. Seward. •^ Washington, October 28, 18G5. ^ [11] Congress lifis been bitterly denounced because it did not, as it is alleged, ••'admit loyal Senators and .Representatives from the rebel States to their seats in Congress. There were few persons chosen, as to Avhoni this ques- tion could arise, but to have admitted Senators and Representatives from the rebel States would have been to admit the validity aud suflieiency of the Johnson Governments by which tliey were elected. Chief Justice Taney says, in the decision referred to, that " when the Senators aud Eepreseatatives of a State are admitted into the councils of the Union the authorit}^ of the Government under which they are ap- ].ointed as well as its Eepublican charactei*, is recognized by tlie proper Constitutional authority." Congress could not do this as to the Johnson Governments without endangering the honor and peace of the nation, and the lives and safety of the Union men of the South. When the Constitutional amendment was rejected by the South, it became necessary for Congress to take other steps, and after mature deliberation the Military Reconstruction Bill was ])assed over the Presi- dent's veto. This bill was intended to give the people of the South ])eace and protection. It provides that it shall be the duty of the military authorities of the nation in the rebel States " to protect all persons in their rights of person and property, to suppi-ess insurrection, disorder and violence, and to punish or cause to be punished all disturbers of the public peace and criminals 5" and it further provided that under military protec- tion all male citizens above the age of 21 years, with the exception of a few leading traitors, shall freely participate in the reorganization of the State Governments. I have long been of the opinion that the great blun- der in reconstruction was the atteuipt of the President to set up civil authority amid the fiery passions and battle smoke of civil war, instead of temporary military governments. Whei*e hatred, confusion and anar- chy prevail as they did in the South, the power that undertakes to govern must be independent of the w^arring elements surrounding or it will become a mere instrument by which the stronger will tyrannize over the weaker faction. This has been the simple history of the Johnson Gov- ernments. Two questions arise as to this Militarj- Bill — oneisas to its constitutional- ity, and the other as to its necessity. All that I have said touching the Con- stitutional amendment as to the jurisdiction of Congress over the rebel vStates applies to this bill. Congress is invested by the Constitution with power " to suppress insurrections," and this of course involves the right to decide when and where an insurrection exists and as to the means necessary for its suppression. When, therefore. Congress decided that there was an insurrection in the South, it could of course employ the military force of the nation for its suppression, and I claim that it can continue to employ that force until in its judgment the in- surrection is at an end. The mere bi-eaking down of the military or- ganizations of the insurrection does not necessarily bring it to an end, for after that, combinations of individuals may exist, and the temper and actions of the people may be such as to defy the Government, des- troy the public peace and prevent the enforcement of law. I take the gi-ound, however, that the rebel States as to Congress presented a " clean slate" for legislation. The Johnson Governments were political non- entities. Andrew Johnson breathed into them all the breath of life they ever had. Their constitutions weie never voted upon by the people for , whom they were made or approved b}- Congress. I [12] I Suppose on the day that Lee surrendered, Congress had been in s* fr- sion, could it not then liave made laws for the rebel States with a view to reconstruction? Could it have exercised the power the President undertoolc to exercise? Isaytbatitcould,and thatits powerin thatrespect wasas per- fect in February, 18(57, as it was when Lee surrendered, for it bad been in no wise circumscribed, modified, or relinquished. 1 come now to the necessity of this legislation. 1 argue in the first place tbat Johnson and bis Demo- cratic friends are estopped by their own acts from controverting its neces- sity. While they bave been pretending that the rebel States wore fully reorganized and tbat the reception of their Senators and Representatives b}^ Congress was the only thing wanting, the fact is, tbat these States have been governed all the time by the military decrees of Andrew Johnson. To appreciate what I am about to say, it is necessarj^ to bear in mind tbat the Johnson Governments were set up in the year 1865. On the 1st of December, 18G5, the President issued a proclamation revoking the suspen- sion of the writ of Habeas Corpus in all excei^t the rebel States. On the 2d of April, 186G, be proclaimed tbat the rebellion was at an end and peace restored. Enquiry" was made b}' General Tilson as to the effect of this latter proclamation, and to that enquiry the following answer was given : Adjutant General's Office, War Department, Washington, April 17, 1866. The President's proclamation does not -^remove martial law, or operate in any way upon the Freedmen's Bureau in the exercise of its legitimate jurisdiction. It is not expedient, however to resort to military tribunal in any case where justice can be attained through the medium of civil au- thority. E. D. Townsend, a. a. G. I know" of no other order or proclamation, unless it be the one issued a few days since, affecting the suspension of the writ of Habeas Corpus in the rebel States. On the 17th of January, 1866, General Thomas ordered a Tennessee Judge to discontinue a suit pending before him otherwise he would be arrested. On the 12tb of the same month General Grant issued an order protecting from prosecution or suits in the State or municipal Courts of the rebel States " all loyal citizens or persons charged with offences done against the rebel forces, directly or indirectly, during the rebellion ; all persons in possession of abandoned lands, or other property, under Fed- eral authority," and also " prohibiting colored persons from prosecutions in any of said States charged with offences for which white persons are not prosecuted or punished in the same manner and degree." Here are militaiy orders regulating the administration of justice and nullifying numberless laws of the Johnson Governments. John S. Monroe was duly elected Mayor of New Orleans and one Nixon, Alderman, but the Presi- dent by an order excluded them from the offices to which they were chosen. Raphael W. Semnies was elected with great unanimity Judge of Probate in the city of Mobile, but was not allowed by the President to hold the office. Here were elections held according to the laws of the Johnson Governments and then set aside by the Presidential mandate as though they were the play of boj^s. I do not complain of this. It was an effort by the President to save bis policy from the damning odium that these elections if allowed to stand, would attach to it; but I will remark as 1 pass along, tbat the election of tbat notorious freebooter of the seas, li. W. Semmes, b}^ the people of Mobile, is a significant commentary' upon- their loyalty and respect for the Federal Government. i' I [13] No longer ago than the Gth of July, 1866, General Grant issued the following order : Washington, July 6, 1866. [General Orders, IS"©. 44.] Department, district and post coninianders in the States lately in rebellion are hei-eby directed to arrest all persons who have been or may bereal'ter be charged with the commission of crimes and offences against officers, agents, citizens, and inhabitants of the United States, irrespective of color, in cases where the civil authorities have failed, neglected, or are unable to arrest and bring such parties to trial, and to detain them in military confinement until such time as a proper judicial tribunal ma}^ be ready and willing to try them. A strict and prompt enforcement of this order is required. By command of Lieutenant General Grant : E. T>. TowNSEND, Assistant Adjutant General. Taking these instances of the exei-cise of arbitrary power by the President, (and he as Commander-in-Chief of the Army is responsible for all military oi'ders) I make this point upon him and his party. According to their own judgment, military authority in the rebel States is a necessity and the State Governments then are what the Union party have claimed them to be, inadequate to the protection of life, liberty and property. Would President Johnson presume to annul the elections, laws and judi- cial decrees of the State of Oregon ? Manifestly not, because in the first ]ilace the authorities of the State are adequate to the protection of its citizens, and in the second place, because the rebellion in his judgment has given to the President the right to interfere in the domestic affairs of the rebel States — a right which he would not dare to exercise in the loyal State of Oregon. I maintain, therefore, that the Military Bill onl}^ regu- lates b}^ law a power that has been exercised at the discretion of one man. I will proceed now to adduce some.other evidence as to the neces- sity of this legislation, and I beg you to remember that the "witnesses I bring are not politicians or partizans, but true and tried soldiers on duty in the South, and who knowing the truth dare to speak it. Gen. Sickles testified in last December before a Committee of Congress as follows : I do not think the garrisons can remain in South Carolina or North Carolina if ice are to rely upon the civil courts to protect the troops and the property of the United States, nor if we are to turn over to the civil courts for trial soldiers and officers who may be charged with offenses ; I do not think they could expect justice at the hands of Southern Courts and juries; there is no remedy, unless the authority of military tribunals bo sustained. Again : — I think that the country demands the exercise of martial law to-day just as much as did a year ago; so far as the temper of the people is concerned it is more necessary. General Schofield says : — Cases of hostility and outrage of one kind or another by white men upon freedmen are comparatively common, and iu almost all such cases the State courts fail to do justice; the difficulty is in the disposition of the magistrates and jurors. General Baird says : — if a frecdman is murdered, or an offense of high grade committed by men who had been in the rebellion, it is impossible to get the criminal arrested even, and if he is arrested, he is sure to be re- [14] leased on very low bail ; the trouble is both with the Jurors and the mag- istrates. General Wood believed that homicides of Union men, soldiers and _J'reed men were on the increase; he never heard of but one instance in which a white man was punished for killing a negro, and then the punish- ment was only a year in the Penitentiary. General Thomas says: — I do not think the civil authorities are dis- posed to administer impartial justice, if left to their own will ; the remark applies to all the States in n\j department prett}" equally; in Georgia a good many offences have been committed against freedmeu; I have not taken any note of the number, but I know the}^ are frequent — entirely too frequent; I cannot say that I know of a single instance v\'^here they have punished any one for a serious offence againsi a freedman ; they have been punished sometimes, for slight offences, vfhere the punishment was merely a fine, or something slight in its nature ; but in a case where the penalty extends to imprisonment or summary punishment, I do not know of a single instance ; I do not believe there is much chance of convicting a resident or citizen of Georgia for murder, if the victin\ was a Union man or a negro ; if the murderer was a Union man or a negro, they would con- vict him very speedily, or if the man had moved into Georgia since the war and was known as a Northern man or a Union man. The observa- tions I make in reference to Georgia apply to the other States with equal force. Putting all this evidence together, and a thousand times more to the same effect might be produced, and it proves either that these witnesses were false and perjured or that under the Johnson Governments rebels could rob and assassinate Union men and go " unwhipjied of justice." Assuming that the testimony is true, which no reasonable man will question, then I say Congress was bound by every consideration of grati- tude, humanity and justice to protect from rapine and murder those who imperiled their all to protect the Government when a gigantic and bloody war threatened its destruction. Any government that would in the hour of victory abandon its friends under such circumstances, would deserve and no doubt receive the contempt of mankiiul, and in any future danger its cry for sympathy and aid would only remind the world of its former ingratitude and treacher}^. I have already said that it was the duty of Congress " to guarantee to each State in the Union a Republican form of Government." Congress is now attempting to execute that guaranty as to the rebel States, and if it be true as it undeniably is, that one part of the people there having the power, if left to themselves, would exclude another part equally entitled, fi*om any participation in the re-organization of the local governments, then I sa}^ that Congress may interfere b}" military power to protect the right of the minority. What I mean to affirm is, that Congress may employ the military power of the Government to guarantee to any State aRe])ublican form of Government, if in their judgment the circum- stances make the emplo3nnent of that power necessary, as I think they do in the rebel States. No feature of the Military Reconstruction Bill so horrifies the Democracy as the extension of suffrage to the black men of the South. Taking the Democratic ground that negro enfranchisement in the rebel States is an evil, and it does not therefore follow that it ought not to 'h' atlopted. Nations as well us individuals are sometimes compelled to eliooso between two evils. Slaveholders by tlieir rebellion compelled the nation to choose between the terrible sufferings and sacrifices of war, and the destruction of the Government. When our ruitional honor is ajfsailed by a foreign power, we are compelled to choose between its vindication at a great expense of blood and treasure, and submission to ./the insult. Our fathers were compelled to choose between the recognition of Slavery in the formation of the Constitution and a neighborhood of jarring and dis- cordant States. I do not pretend to say that negro suffrage anywhere is desirable. I know iu view of the pi-ejudice of the race to whidi I belong ' and in which I to some extent participate, that it will be attended with some disorders, but I say it is one of the necessities which the infernal spirit of rebellion and war against human freedom, has brought upon the country. I argue that the extension of the elective fi'anchise to black men ' in the South is necessary in the first place, to check or counterpoise that tendency to disunion wliich prevails among tlie white men of that section of the country. Armed resistance to Federal authorit3' in t|je South has been defeated, but suppose that the white jjeople there were left as free to act as they are to think upor) the subject, does anybody doubt that they would now take their States out of the Union? Is it love for the Govern- ment or a salutary fear of its power that keeps them where they are ? Alb history teaches that the true policy of Government in reference to a sec- tion of country that has revolted and been subdued is not to govern by extraneous force where it can be avoided, but to create and cherish if pos- sible among the people of the rebellious district, a part}' strong iu its num- bers and strong in its attachment to the parent Government. Invest the loyal black men of the South with the right of suffrage, and they with the loyal whites will make a political power there, upon which the Govern- ment can depend in anj- emergency. When all militarj- power is with- drawn from the South so that it becomes self-governing like the North, then there must be a large loyal element there, else when the nation be- comes involved in a foreign war, or some similar contiugenc}' arises, a new scheme of secession v.-ill fasten itself upon the vitals of the country. I say in the second place that the enfranchisement of the blacks in the South is necessaiy for their own protection. While they were Slaves pecuniary considerations were sufficient with the Slaveholders to ensure their safety. Now tliey are compelled to depend i:pon themselves. Think of the matter as we may, the black men of the vSouth are not only free, but they are cit- izens of the United States. According to the Dred Scott decision they were not citizens under the Constitution, because they belonged to an en- slaved race, but now their race is no longer enslaved, and the reason of the law as laid down in that case having failed, of course the lawfailswith it. I presume I do not venture on dispu.ted ground when I say, that the Gov- ernment owes equal protection to all citizens and is bound to see that all have an equal right to " lil'e, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Situ- ated as the black men of the South are in the midst of all the prejudice and hate growing out of their former servitude and attachment to the Uniou cause, they absolutely need the protection of the ballot or ba3'onet. Is it not wiser, easier and more economical to withdraw from them all special protection by the Government, and give to them the right to vote, with which they may protect themselves? Negro suffrage, then, in the Houth. if it be an evil as the Democrats claim it "to be, is not, I affirm, an evil so great or dangerous as the ascendency of the rebel spirit there, or the necessary employment of military power to defend and protect the , friends of the Government. What are the objections to this extension of [16] sufirria<;-c? Douo-las in his championship of Shxveiy once exclaimed '* This is a "white man's Government," and to a class of small politicians who never think for themselves, these are oracnlar words. I say in the first place as to this dogma, that it is mere assumption and no argument. If Douglas meant to say that Slaves were not to participate in the government of the country, no doubt he was correct, but if he in- tended to say that the protection and privileges of Grovernment should be extended to one and denied to another class of citizens, then the assertion is at war with all just ideas of a Iiepublican polity. <^ I trust that no white man is willing to admit that the control of our Government can ever pass from the hands of more than thirty millions of whites to which, besides the natural increase, immense additions are made every year by European immigrations, into the hands of two or three million blacks, who have alrcad}' started down the sorrowful road to ultimate extinction. .Assuming what Douglas said to be true, I should like to know where the Government of the native born black persons of this country is to be found? Are they to be citizens and have no protection? All experience shows that the tendency of power is to concentrate in the hands of a few, and thus form an aristocrac}^ and therefore the Republican theory v^'as invent- ed, so that the low and weak and poor might have political rights with which to protect themselves from the selfishness and ambition of those who were the favorites of birth or fortune ? Are we afraid to stand upon the platform of our institutions? Another objection is that black are inferior to white people. Without controverting this position, it is sufficient to say, that the Constitution and laws of the country recognize native born negToes as citizens. They share like others in all the burdens and duties of society. Life, liberty, home, family, friends and property are as dear and valuable to them as to others. Education and religion are as neces- sary, and vice and crime as hurtful to them as to others. White and black are alike susee])tible to injurj^ and suffering: to maim or murder a man, to strip him of his property, to destroy or debauch his family, are crimes that carr}" wretclicdness and woe to the hearts of black, as well as white vic- tims. Admit, then, that the blacks are inferior as the Democrats claiAi, they certainly are not "dumb cattle." They are '* persons," and are so called by the Constitution of the United States, and they are citizens hold- ing the i-elations and having the rights I have indicated, and tliey ought therefore to have the necessary power to protect themselves if they are ca])able of exercising that pov\-er I know upon this question of capacity there is great controversy. Pres- ident Johnson in his Sharkey letter, and many of the leading Democratic journals such as the Chicago Times, Boston Post and Albany Ai'gus favoi- qualified negro suffrage. The objection then, lies not to their natural in- ca])acity, but their want of education. I admit that the negroes are not as well informed as it is desirable they should be, but I say they have in- telligence enough to distinguish between their friends and their enemies, and this is the one thing needful for their own protection. Ignorant and stupid as the negroes of the South are claimed to be, they und^-stood the issues of the late war. They knew when and where and how to fight. They knew the difference between Union with freedom and Secession'with Slaveiy. When the sinking Confederacy cried out for negro soldiers to come to its help, it was like calling " spirits from the vasty deep," but the heart of every black man bounded at the sound of the Union bugles, and every black hand was ready to strike for the Union cause. To be added to what tlie blacks learned during the war, the fact is not to be overlooked! that tlaey are rapidly acquiring knowledge by means of the schools and. [17] chr.rchcs and otbcr facilities for education with which they ure furni.slicd — the political discussions that avg everywhere held in their presence — the publications of various kinds tiiat are put into their hands; all of which they appreciate and use Avith an unconimon zeal for their own improve- ment. To "ive them the right to vote is to inspire them with new ardor to enlighten and elevate themselves. When we consider that black men are employed and trusted in every sphere of labor, it is difficult to see why they may not exercise political power as wisely as others in the same sphere of life. Ever}- one knows that since the formation of the Govern- ment, people have generally been divided into two great political parties, known at different times by different appellations. White men at this time are divided into two political organizations, one of which is called the (hiion Republican or Radical ])arty, and the other the Democratic or Conservative party. Xegroes if the}' vote will undoubtedly be incorpo- rated into ouc or the other of these parties. Will our Democratic friends hold that if they vote the Democratic ticket that they thereby show their ignorance and unfitness to vote ? To assume that they are incomjietent to vote because they vote the Union ticket is to assume that a large part of the most enlightened and patriotic people of the country ought not to en- joy the elective franchise. During the war, black men worked and fought with the Union men, and they have s ince voted with them, as in the late elections in Georgetown. Washington and Tennessee. Education is of great value, but it is not the only thing to make a good man or a patriot. Who will say that the thousands of educated men who plunged this nation into all the horrors of a civil war, are safer depositaries of the voting power than the thousands of more ignorant men who fought for the integrity and honor of the nation ? Showmeaman whohasthosense and patriotism to fight as a volunteer for his country, and I will show you a man who has sense and patriotism enough to vote for his country. Is the ballot more dangerous than the bayonet in the hands of an ignorant man ? Is there no question of right or justice inivolved in this discussion? Are .the 800,000 black men who threw themselves into the red tide of battle to ^ave the Government, now to be treated as the enemies of that Govern- ment, while its foes, fresh from the fields of their warfare upon it, are accepted as its friends and honored with its favors? Is a tl-aitor to be trusted because his skin is white, and a patriot tried in the fiery ordeal of battle to be distrusted and disfranchised because his skin is black ? Is not the nation admonished upon this subject to '' Be just and fear not." I do not argue in favor of this feature of the Congressional polic}^ be- cause it stands upon debateable ground. The time for argument has passed. Black suffrage in the South, whatever may be said or thought about it, is a fixed and irreversible fact. Black men are voting there now and they • will continue to vote. Suffrage takes no backward steps. Popular rights widen and deepen by agitation, and under a Republican form of Govern- inont no considerable class of people can be disfranchised after they have once exercised the right to vote. Intelligent men of the South seem to take this view of the subject. They accept the situation. The}- do not ■^iropose to fight longer over the suffrage question. Every interest of society dictates a different course. I invite your attention as to this point 10 a letter written by Gen. Longstreet of the rebel service, dated June 3d, 18(57, in Avhich be says: •The highest of human laws is the law that is established by appeal to arms. The great principles that divided political parties prior to the war ■vore thoroughly discussed by our wisest statesmen. When argument was [18] / exhausted, resort was had to compromise. When compromi.se was un- availing, discussion M-as renewed and expedients were sought, but none could be found to suit the emergenc}-. Appeal was finally made to the sword to determine which of the claims was the true construction of con- stitutional laAV. The sword has decided in favor of the North, and what^ they claimed to be principles ceased to be ])rinciples, and are become law. The vicAvs that we hold cease to be principles, because they are opposed to law. It is therefore our duty to abandon ideas that are obsolete and conform to the requirements of law. The Military l)ill and amendments are peace offerings. We should accept them as such, and place ourselves upon them as the starting ]ioint from which to meet future political issues as they arise. Like other Southern men, I naturally sought alliance with tb.e Democratic part3^ merely. because it was opposed to the Eepublican party. J3ut as far as I can judge, there is nothing tangible about it, except the issues that were staked upon the war and there lost. Finding nothing to take hold of excej^t .prejudice, which cannot be worked into good for anjr one, it is proper and right that I should seek some standpoint from which good ma}' be done. If I appreciate the j-jrinciples of the Demo- cratic party, its prominent features oppose the enfranchisement of the colored man, and deny the right to legislate upon the subject of suffrage, except by the States, ijidividually. These two features have a tendency to exclude Southern men from that party j for the colored man is already enfranchised here ; and we cannot seek alliance with a party tiiat would restrict his rights." Longstreet seems to regard the issues of the rebellion and those made by the Democratic party as identical, for he says '' there is nothing tan- gible about that party except the issues that were staked upon the war and there lost." He says with great good sense that '^ the colored man is already enfranchised and the South cannot seek alliance with a party that would restrict his rights." Few persons will fail to appreciate the force of Longstreet's remark in saying that there is nothing to take hold of in the Democratic party " except prejudice which cannot be worked into good for any one." Call to mind the Democratic speeches that you have read and heard and wdiat besides an appeal to prejudice do they contain 'i Do the}^ address the gen- erous or patriotic impulses of the heart? Do they ever plead for the poor and weak and those who need care and sympath}^ ? Are they not on the contrary replete Avith denunciation and all uncharitableness ? Has the Democratic party any kind or encouraging words for those who are fly- ing to rise from the long dark night of Slavery into the day light of Free- dom, or does it howl for a chance to put its foot upon their necks and trample them into a lower degradation 't Much effort is made to excite alarm bj^ the cry about the equality and amalgamation of the races. I advocate nothing of that kind. All I say is, that political power should be so diffused among the people as to secure the peace of the country and t!ie j^rotection of the citizen. To give to colored people freedom, educa- tion, religion and property, is as objectionable in tending to equality as to give to them the right to vote. Every man is free to seek his own society in this country. He may go up to where the wise aud good and pure have their abiding places, or he may go down to the too populous hells of wickedness, vice and crime. There is no compulsion as to social taste and| position. Will it tend to amalgamation to give to negroes the power toj protect themselves ? Would it be better in this respect to have a state of) things in which marriage was not respected and where every colored' ■ / [10] )iniin, wife, mother, or daughter, is a lielploss victim to tiio lust of any |iionii busy fingers of history arc weaving chaplets of fame for Grant and Sher- man and Sheridan, they are only crowning the chieftains and heroes of our unconquered party. Consistent witli our record in war shall be our pur- ])0ses in peace. Our jjolic}^ is to ensu]'e domestic tranquility, to dispo! ignorance and diflTuse knowledge ; to maintain freedom, and to do justice to all men ; to enlighten and elevate humanit_y, and to make the Govern- ment of this great Eepublic as ftir as human passions and frailties will al- low, oi'ie in which "Mercy aud truth are met together, and righteousness and peace have kissed each other." LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 013 786 518 ft Pri))t