/- 
 
ilitlirlliliitiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii' 
 
 013 744 483 5 ^ 
 
 peRnulipe» 
 
E B68 
 .F41 
 Copy 1 
 
 SPEECH -9/ / 
 
 HON. ¥. P. FESSENDEN, OF MAINE, 
 
 THE RESOLUTION REUTING TO THE ADMISSION OF SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES 
 FROM THE CONFEDERATE STATES; 
 
 DELIVERED 
 
 IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, FEBRUARY 23, 1866. 
 
 WASHINGTON: 
 PRINTED AT THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE OFFICE. 
 
 1866. 
 
 <'> Vv-^O 
 

REPRESENTATION FROM CONFEDERATE STATES.. 
 
 The Senate having under consideration the resolu- 
 tion relating to the admission of Senators and Rep- 
 resentatives from the confederate States — 
 
 Mr. FESSENDENsaid: 
 
 Mr. President: I have already, in what I 
 stated on Wednesday and this morning in the 
 preliminary discussion, snfiiciently indicated to 
 the Senate my opinion of the importance of the 
 resolntion before the body; but as it has just 
 been laid upon our tables in printed form I 
 ask that it be read before I j^roceed. 
 
 The Secretary read the resolution, as fol- 
 lows : 
 
 liesolvedbj/ the Uouseof Reprenentativcs, (the Senate 
 concurrinpr.) That in order to close agitation upon a 
 question which seems likely to disturb the action of 
 the Government, as well as to quiet the uncertainty 
 which is asitating themindsofthopcopleofthe eleven 
 States which have been declared to be in insurrection, 
 no Senator or Representative shall bo admitted into 
 either branch of Congress from any of said States un- 
 til Congress shall have declared such State entitled 
 to such representation. 
 
 Mr. FESSENDEN. It was averred by the 
 Senator from Ohio that we had previously acted 
 upon resolutions similar in their character. I 
 am not aware that we have. The resolution, 
 it will be perceived, is nothing more nor less 
 than a legislative assertion by both Houses of 
 Congress that they will not proceed to act upon 
 the credentials of members from any of the 
 States which lately constituted the so-called 
 confederate States until they have previously 
 passed a law applicable to the condition of the 
 <States themselves. This, if 3-ou will allow me 
 to say so, is in exact accordance with what Con- 
 gress has indicated as its intention heretofore. 
 It was indicated in the last Congress, and it Avas 
 indicated in a resolution which came directly 
 from the Committee on the Judiciary, of which 
 the honorable Senator from Maryland [Mr. 
 JoHXSOx] wasamember, and, asl aminformed, 
 with his concurrence, not as applicable to all 
 the States, but as applicable to one of the 
 States. It is before me in a few words, and I will 
 read it. At the close of the report that was 
 made to the Senate on the 18th of February to 
 accompany joint resolution S. No. 117, on the 
 subject of the credentials of members claiming 
 
 seats from Louisiana, the last paragraph, which 
 I will read, is : 
 
 "The persons in possession of the local authorities 
 of Louisiana having rebelled against the authority 
 of the United States, and her inhabitants having been 
 declared to he in a state of insurrection in pursuance 
 of a law passed by the two Houses of Congress, your 
 coramifteo deem it improper for this body to admitto 
 seats Senators from Louisiana, till by some joint ac- 
 tion of both Houses there shall be some recognition 
 of an existing State government, acting in harmony 
 i with the Governmentof the United States andrecog- 
 uizing its authority." 
 
 Mr. JOHNSON. Is that the report of the 
 18th of February, 1865? 
 
 Mr. FESSENDEN. Yes, sir. Now, there 
 is the principle laid down in so many words, 
 and agreed to, as I understand, specifically by 
 the honorable Senator from Maryland, whose 
 authority we all acknowledge, that inasmuch 
 as the State of Louisiana had been declared to 
 be in a state of rebellion, and intercourse with 
 it had been suspended by a law of Congress, 
 therefore Congress could not properly admit 
 members from that State, except in pursuance 
 of a law of Congress providing for her peculiar 
 condition — I do not pretend to repeat the ex- 
 act language. When that resolution was intro- 
 duced into Congress, did it occasion any dis- 
 cussion upon that principle or the propriety of 
 its application ? Was there any objection made 
 to it here ? Was there any objection made any- 
 where? Did not everybody recognize the pro- 
 priety of that exact expression of opinion as 
 applied to the proposition to admit Senators 
 and Representatives from such a State ? I was 
 not here at the time, but I am informed that 
 there was no discussion upon that particular 
 subject, and no fault was found with the partic- 
 ular course that was thus indicated, so far, at 
 least, as this principle was concerned. 
 
 How does it happen, then, that when a similar 
 resolution is proposed, one applicable to other 
 States that have been precisely in the like con- 
 dition, there seems to be so much sensitiveness 
 in the minds of gentlemen ? How can it be 
 accounted for that what was thought to be so 
 proper as applicable to the State of Louisiana 
 should be so improper as applicable to these 
 other States? It is for gentlemen to answer. 
 
Let us look a little further, and see what has 
 occurred since that time, because I feel some- 
 what sensitive on this subject. Charges have 
 l>een made with rcfereuce to the committee of 
 which 1 have the honor to be a member that 
 have somewhat affected my view of my own 
 condition, and I feel compelled not only to 
 vindicate that committee, but to vindicate the 
 action of Congress with reference to it. Before 
 proceeding further, although exceedingly averse 
 to appealing to newspapers, yet, as 1 learn i'rom 
 all quarters that what I send to the Chair is a 
 correct statement of what was said on a recent 
 occasion. I will ask the Secretary to read an 
 extract which I have marked from a report in 
 the Morning Chronicle of a speech made by 
 the President of the United States to his fellow- 
 citizens. 
 
 Tiic Secretary read as follows : 
 
 "But, my countrymen, after having passed through 
 the rebellion, and given -such evidence as I have- 
 though men croak a great deal about it now [laugh- 
 ter]— when I look back through the battle-fields and 
 see many of these brave men, in whose company I 
 wa«, in parts of the rebellion where it was most dif- 
 ficult and doubtful to be found, before the smoke of 
 battle has scarcely passed away, before the blood shed 
 hiis .scarcely congealed, what do we find ? The rebel- 
 lion is put down by the strong arm of the Government 
 in the field; but is that the only way in which we can 
 have rebellion? They struggled for the breaking up 
 of your Government ; but before they are scarcely out 
 of the battle-field, and before our brave men have 
 scarcely returned to their homes, to renew the ties of 
 afi'ection and love, we find ourselves almost in the 
 midst of another rebellion. [Applause.] Thewarto 
 suppress one rebellion was to prevent the separation 
 of the .States, to prevent them from flying off, and 
 thereby changing the character of the Government 
 and weakening its power. Now what is the struggle? 
 There is an attempt to concentrate the power of the 
 Government in the hands of the few, and thereby 
 bring about a consolidation which is equally danger- 
 ous and objectionable with separation. [Enthusiastic 
 applause] We find that powers are assumed and at- 
 tempted to be exercised of a most extraordinary char- 
 acter. What are they? 
 
 "We find that Governments can be revolutionized, 
 can be changed, without going into the battle-field. 
 Sometimes revolutions, the most disastrous to the 
 people, are effected without the shedding of blood. 
 The substance of government may bo taken away, 
 while the form and shadow is still adhered to. Now, 
 what arc the attempts? What is being proposed? 
 AVe find that, in fact, by an irresponsible, central 
 directory, nearly all the powers of Government are 
 assumed, without even consulting the legislative or 
 e.Kecutive departments of Government. Yes! and by 
 resolution reported by a committee, upon whom all 
 the legislative power of the Government has been 
 eonforri-d, that great principle in the Constitution, 
 which authorizes and empowers each branch of the 
 legislative department, the Senate and House of 
 Eepresentatives, to be the judges of the election and 
 qualification of its own members, has been virtually 
 taken away from those departments of Government 
 and conferred upon a committee, who must report 
 before they can act un<lerlho Constitution and allow 
 members duly elci-ted to take theirscats. Bythisrulc 
 thry assume that there must bo laws passed, that there 
 mu-it be recognition in respect to a State in the Union, 
 with all its practical relations rcstijred, before the rc- 
 succtive Houses of Congress, luulcr the Constitution, 
 shall judge of the election and qualification of its own 
 uiembiTS. What position is that? You have been 
 struggling for four years to put down the rebellion. 
 You denied in the beginning of the struggle that any 
 State had the right to go out; you said that they had 
 neither right nor power. The i.ssuo has been made, 
 and it has been settled that a State has neither the 
 right nor the pow<T to go out of the Union; and when 
 you have settled that by the executive and military 
 power of the (ioveriimenl and by the public judg- 
 ment, you turn round and assume tluit they are out, 
 and shall not come in. [Laughter and cheers.] 
 
 " I am free to say to you, as your Executive, that 
 I am not prepared to take any such position. I said 
 in the Senate, in the very inception of the rebellion, 
 that States had no right to go out, and that they had 
 no power to go out. That question has been settled, 
 and 1 cannot turn round now and give the lie direct 
 to all I profess to have done in the last five years. 
 [Laughter and applause.] I can do no such thing. I 
 say that when they comply with the Constitution, 
 when they have given sufficient evidence of their 
 loyalty, and that they can be trusted, when they yield 
 obedience to the law, I say extend to them the right 
 hand of fellowship, and let peace and Union be re- 
 stored. [Loud cheers.]" 
 
 Mr. FESSENDEN. It will be noticed, Tilr. 
 President, that in the extract which has been 
 read there are very serious charges made. One 
 is that there is an effort being made to con- 
 centrate all power in a few, and that that power 
 is lodged in the hands of a sort of central com- 
 mittee, and the words which immediately fol- 
 low furnish a sufficient indication of what the 
 President meant. I think the President of the 
 United States could hardly have considered 
 with care the nature of the resolution under 
 which we have been acting as a committee of 
 this body ; he could hardly have looked at its 
 history, and hardly have understood its mean- 
 ing. Let me read that resolution and state its 
 history, for it is very singular that he should 
 charge that all the authority of deciding upon 
 the credentials of members of the House of 
 Representatives and of the Senate has been 
 taken from the House and the Senate and 
 referred to this committee. The resolution, 
 as it came from the House of Representatives 
 originally, was iu these words : 
 
 "Thatajoint committee of fifteen members shall 
 be appointed, nine of whom shall be members of the 
 House and six members of the Senate, who shall in- 
 quire into the condition of the States which formed 
 the so-called confederate States of America, and re- 
 port whether they, or any of them, are entitled to be 
 represented in either House of Congress, with leave 
 to report at any time, by bill or otherwise." 
 
 And then followed the words which I will 
 now read : 
 
 "And until such report shall have been made, and 
 finally acted on by Congress, no member shall be re- 
 ceived into either House from any of the said so-called 
 confederate States; and all papers relating to the rep- 
 resentation of said States shall be referred to the said 
 committee without debate." 
 
 That was the original resolution. When it 
 came to be considered in the Senate it was not 
 deemed very desirable at that time to interfere 
 with those questions which might bo said to 
 belong exclusively to each House, and the last 
 part of the resolution was stricken out, so that 
 the resolution as it finally passed stood in this 
 way : 
 
 "That a joint committee of fifteen members shall 
 be appointed, nine of whom shall bo members of the 
 House and six members of the Senate, who shiill in- 
 quire into the condition of the States which formed 
 tuo so-called confederate States of America, and re- 
 port whether they, or any of them, are entitled to bQ( 
 represented in either House of Congress, with leave 
 to report by bill or otherwise." 
 
 What was that? Simjily the apjiointment 
 of a joint committee, in this unexamiih'd condi- 
 tion oi' tlie country, with a war of four years (in 
 which eleven States liad been engaged against 
 the United States) just clo.sed, after all the ex- 
 jxmditure of blood and treasure tliat had been 
 made in the countrv, at the first meeting of 
 
Congress which occurred after actual hostili- 
 ties in the field had ceased — for what purpose? 
 To inquire into the condition of those States and 
 report wliotlier they were entitled to represen- 
 tation. That simple provision for acquiring 
 information in order to enable the House and 
 the Senate to judge understandingly upon this 
 important question affecting themselves has 
 been represented by gentlemen and by news- 
 papers as assuming authority which did not 
 belong to Congress. I have nothing to say in 
 this connection with reference to the Presi- 
 dent. I am speaking now of the complaints 
 that were made of that resolution, a simple res- 
 olution to inquire into the condition of those 
 States and report whether Representatives and 
 Senators could be admitted from them. •Sir, 
 in this were we doing anything moi-e than our 
 duty? Was it not advisable? It was not a 
 single question relating, as we understood it, 
 to the credentials of members. It was believed 
 that at the ve^y foundation of the whole ques- 
 tion of the admission of members lay this great 
 point, whether the condition of those States 
 was such as to render the admission of those 
 members safe. I have had this extract from 
 the President's speech read simply to show what 
 everybody must admit with regard to it. The 
 last paragraph of the extract that I sent to the 
 Chair and had read, is this : 
 
 " I am free to say to you, as your Executive, that I 
 am not prepared to take any such position. I said 
 in the Senate in the very inception of the rebellion 
 that States had no right to go out and that they had 
 no power to go out. That question has been settled, 
 and I cannot turn around now and give theliedirect 
 to all I profess to have done in the last five years. I 
 can do no such thing. I say that when they comply 
 with the Constitution, when they have given suffi- 
 cient evidence of their loyalty and that they can be 
 trusted, when they yield obedience to the law, I say 
 extend to them the right hand of fellowship, and let 
 peace and union be restored." 
 
 So say I, and so say all. When they do that 
 let these consequences follow. There is no 
 difference on that point. The President him- 
 self, instead of saying anything different from 
 us, says when they have complied with these 
 conditions then they ought to be admitted. He 
 himself in his speech makes that a preliminary 
 to examining the question a£ credentials to see 
 whether men come here jSoperly accredited. 
 Lest gentlemen on the other side should have 
 failed to notice this sentence, let me read it 
 again. It is peculiarly expressive: 
 
 "I say that when they comply with the Constitu- 
 tion, when they have given sufficient evidence of 
 their loyalty and that they can be trusted, when 
 they yield obedience to the law, I say extend to them 
 the right hand of fellowship, and let peace and union 
 be restored." 
 
 That, it seems, is a matter into which some- 
 body has a right to inquire, i should like to 
 know if the Congress of the United States 
 have not a right to ask these very questions 
 and be satisfied upon them before they admit 
 men as Senators and Representatives in the 
 several bodies which constitute Congress. If 
 Congress have a right to inquire, (and I agree 
 with the President entirely on, the subject,) 
 what have we done more than to inquire? 
 When Congress appointed this committee with 
 power to examine into the condition (for that 
 
 is all there was of it) of these so-called con- 
 federate States and report whether they were 
 in a fit condition to be represented by Sena- 
 tors and Representatives, what did we do more 
 than simply to endeavor to carry out precisely 
 f»hat the President has laid down in his speech 
 as preliminary to the admission of Senators 
 and Representatives? I state this in order 
 that th(! country may understand what all this 
 noise has been about in reference to the ap- 
 pointment of this committee. 
 
 But the President undertakes to say that 
 legislative power has been granted to this com- 
 mittee : that the power of legislation which Con- 
 gress possesses — he calls it "the power of legis- 
 lation" — over the question of the admission of 
 Senators and Representatives has been passed 
 out of the hands of Congress and given to a 
 central power. 
 
 Mr. RAMSEY. "Central" directory." 
 
 Mr. FESSENDEN. _ A central directory, 
 which chooses to exercise this power. Sir, is 
 this committee of fifteen anything more than 
 the servant of Congress? Is any committee, 
 either joint or several, which is appointed, any- 
 thing more than the mere servant of Congress? 
 Can any member of it, or the whole of it, set 
 up its will for a single day or a single hour or 
 a single moment against the will of the body 
 which constituted it? We were appointed for 
 a special purpose, to make inquiries, and report 
 to Congress the result of our inquiries ; and for 
 what reason? What was the great reason? Sim- 
 ply that neither branch, acting without suf- 
 ficient information, might take a course from 
 which the other lu-anch would differ, and thus 
 bring about a collision between the two bodies 
 which constitute the Congress. Under those 
 circumstances, is it quite fair to designate the 
 committee of fifteen as a central directory, as 
 a power assuming to judge and to decide ques- 
 tions which belong to the bodies which the com- 
 mittee represents? Is it quite fair to desig- 
 nate it as a central power sitting here with a 
 view to set up the government of a few against 
 the government of the many ? I can understand 
 the allusion in no other way ; and if any gentle- 
 man can place a different construction upon it, 
 I should like to have him do so. I am unwill- 
 ing myself, individually, to rest under such an 
 imputation. I have the honor to be one of that 
 committee. I never understood myself as any- 
 thing but the servant of Congress, or of the 
 body which sent me there, to endeavor to ob- 
 tain information and to come to a conclusion 
 upon which the body might act understand- 
 ingly; and that we have not come to a conclu- 
 sion yet, is only a proof that the question is a 
 much larger one than gentlemen might have sup- 
 posed, and involves more consideration and 
 more examination than might possibly have 
 been apparent to those who looked only upon 
 the surface, and judged only from what they 
 could gather from common report. 
 
 If the Executive — and I mean to speak of 
 the President with respect, because I entertain 
 for him respect — has an idea thai the several 
 points which he has suggested are prelimina- 
 ries to the admission of Senators and Repre- 
 
6 
 
 sentatives from these States, the question arises, 
 who is to exercise that power of judgment? 
 Does it belong to us, if a Senator presents 
 himself hero, to ascertain in the first place if 
 those conditions have been complied with on 
 the part of these States, or does it belong to 
 him? 'I'he honorable Senator from AVisconsin 
 [Mr. D001.ITTI.K] undertakes to find fault with 
 something that I think he will find 1 did not 
 say. Probably he anticipated that I should 
 sav it. 
 
 Mr. DOOLITTLE. I thought you did say it. 
 
 Mr. FESSKXDEN. It may be ; but if so, 
 I am very much mistaken. If I made a remark 
 of that kind I have not misconstrued the Presi- 
 dent ; and that brings me to a short considera- 
 tion of the veto message. I will say in regard 
 to that message, that 1 had no very particular 
 attachment to the bill which was thus vetoed. 
 In some particulars it did not meet my ap- 
 proval. I think some of the reasons which the 
 President gives for not approving it are such 
 as would commend themselves to public con- 
 sideration. It is a bill upon the provisions of 
 which there might well be a very considerable 
 difference of opinion. I yielded, however, the 
 objections 1 hud, and one of them was very 
 much like that stated by ray honorable friend 
 from West Virginia [Mr. Wii-t>ey] to the sixth 
 section of the bill, because I thought on con- 
 sideration that the power did exist, and it was 
 especially necessary to exercise it, and the bill 
 therefore received my vote. If the President 
 had confined himself in the objections which 
 he stated to a criticism of the bill itself, it is 
 very possible that I might have beeii quite 
 willing to waive my own feelings and opinions 
 in regard to the bill as it passed, and to sustain 
 his veto. But on looking at the veto message, 
 and the reasons given in it, it struck me, that 
 after passing from the consideration of the pro- 
 visions of the bill which was sent to him, he 
 gave other reasons which rendered it impossi- 
 ble, in my judgment, for any member of this 
 Senate with a due respect tohimself and to the 
 rights of the Senate and of Congress, to vote 
 otherwise than to sustain the bill they had sent 
 to him ; because a vote in the negative on the 
 question of its passage might seem to indorse 
 all his opinions whatever they may be, as ex- 
 pressed in the veto message. I considered it 
 so. At any rate, I did not mean to put myself 
 in the position of indorsing, or being supposed 
 for a single instant to give my assent to, the clos- 
 ing parts of the veto message. What do I un- 
 derstand by the closing parts of that message? 
 Simply that, in the judgment of the President, 
 Congress, as at present organized, has no right 
 to pass any bill affecting the interests of the late 
 confederate States while they are not repre- 
 sented in Congress. Docs the Senator from 
 Wisconsin say that that opinion is not definitely 
 expresseil ? 
 
 Mr. DOOLITTLE. Read the message. I 
 do not understand that to be the effect of what 
 is said by the President. 
 
 Mr. l-i":SSENDE\. i understand that to 
 i;e the effect of it. I cannot undei'stand it 
 Otherwise. I wish I was mistaken. I do not 
 
 say that he asserts we have no legal right to 
 do it, but that we have no moral right. If the 
 Senate will excuse me, I will read that portion 
 of the message: 
 
 "I cannot but aiUl another very grave objection to 
 this bill. Tlie Constitution imperatively deelaros, in 
 connection with taxation, that each State shall have 
 at least one ItcprcseiUa-tive, and tixcs the rule for the 
 number to which, in liiture times, each State shall be 
 entitled. It also ju'o vidcs that the Senate otthe United 
 States shall be composed of two Senators from each 
 State; and adds, with peculiar force, "that no State, 
 without its consent, shall bedeprivedof its equal suf- 
 frage in the Senate.' Theoriginal actwasncccssarily 
 passed in the absence of the States chiefly to be af- 
 fected, because their people were then contumaciously 
 engaged in the rebellion. Now the case is changed, 
 and some, at least, of those States are attending Con- 
 gress by loyal representatives, soliciting the ,allow- 
 ance of the constitutional right of representation. At 
 the tifce, however, of the consideration and the pass- 
 ing of this bill, there was no Senator or Ileprcsenta- 
 tive in Congress from the eleven States which are to 
 be mainly aflected by its provisions. The very fact 
 that reports were and are made against the good dis- 
 position of the people of that portion of the country 
 is an additional reason why they need, and should 
 have, representatives of their own in Congress to 
 explain their condition, reply to accusations, and 
 assist, by their local knowledge, in the perfecting ot 
 measures immediately affecting themselves. AVhile 
 the liberty of deliberation would then be free, and 
 Congress would have full power to decide according 
 to its judgment, there could be no objection urged 
 that the States most interested had not been permit- 
 ted to be heard. The principle is firmly fixed in the 
 minds of the American people, that there should be 
 no taxation without representation. Great burdens 
 have now to be borne by all the country, and we may 
 best demand, that they shall be borne without mur- 
 mur when they are voted by a majority of the repre- 
 sentatives of all the people." 
 
 I do not contend that he says in so many 
 words that we have no legal right to pass a 
 bill ; but the objection that he makes goes to 
 the foundation, that no bill affecting the rights 
 or the interests of the so-called confederate 
 States shall be passed by Congress until Rep- 
 resentatives and Senators from those States are 
 permitted to take part in our deliberations. It 
 follows necessarily, if that be a correct position, 
 that in relation to those States which have been 
 recently in rebellion, which have fought for four 
 years against the Government and endeavored 
 to overturn it, we can pass no law affecting 
 them, or restraining them, or providing any- 
 thing, no matter what, with reference to a 
 change of the CoWstitution or anything else, 
 until wc admit their Representatives and their 
 Senators upon the floor of Congress. I under- 
 stand that to be the necessary inference. The 
 President argues it; he states it argumenta- 
 tively, to be sure, but then that is the inevi- 
 table result, that our moral right to legislate 
 upon anything which affects their interests is 
 gone; and particularly, that we have no power 
 to pass any law or any rule or make any con- 
 dition with regard to them, but that we are 
 bound to take them just as they are, upon their 
 say so ; and when they are here, acting with 
 us, wc may proceed to legislate. I decline to 
 give mv assent to any such proposition. 
 
 Mr. DOOLITTLE. I certainly do not wish 
 to Interrnptthe honorable Senator in thecourse 
 of his argument, but 
 
 Mr. FESSl'LXDEX. It is no interrujition at 
 all. 1 am perfectly willing to hear anything the 
 Senator desires to say. 
 
Mr. DOOLITTLE. I only rise now to state 
 ^hat I understand the force of that portion of 
 the message to bo a discussion of the propriety, 
 not the power, of legislation. It is a question 
 of propriety whether it would not be bettor, if 
 loyal representatives are here, and the States 
 are fit to be represented, that we should have 
 them here and consult with them when legislat- 
 ing for their States. 
 
 Mr. FESSENDEN. But he makes that a 
 ground for his veto ; and if he can veto one bill 
 upon that ground, he will and must, for the sake 
 of consistency, veto every other bill we pass 
 on that subject. "Why is this in the message? 
 What necessity was there for it in this message ? 
 The gentleman talks about the propriety of the 
 thing. When the propriety of the thing is made 
 a specific ground for refusing to sign a bill, tliat 
 sense of propriety applies to every other bill 
 that may atfect the interests of those States ; 
 does it not? 
 
 Mr. DOOLITTLE. I do not understand that 
 to be stated as aground of the veto at all. You 
 ask why it is there. He states it as an impro- 
 priety, in his iudscment. 
 
 Mr. FESS'ENDEX. '•! cannot but add 
 another very grave objection to this bill." Is 
 not that a ground of objection to the bill? 
 That is the way the paragraph commences. 
 If the President had given us a little friendly 
 advice in relation to that matter, disconnected 
 entirely with a statement of it as an objection 
 to the measure under consideration, nobody 
 would have received it with better nature and 
 better grace than myself. I might not have 
 acceded to his reasons, but I would have re- 
 ceived them with all respect, and perhaps on 
 some matters we should agree very much better 
 than we would a])pear to do when he stands in 
 the position of President vetoing the bill, and 
 I in the position of a Senator commenting upon 
 it. But my objection to it was just there ; he 
 makes the fact that Senators and Representa- 
 tives have not been admitted from those States 
 an objection to this bill ; and while it stands 
 so it is an objection to any bill, no matter 
 what, that we may choose to pass, or anything 
 that vv'e may choose to do which by any possi- 
 bility may affect the interests of those States. 
 The gentleman cannot get rid of it or creep out 
 of it. 
 
 Striking me with the force that this position 
 of the veto message did, whatever I might think 
 of the President's other objections to the bill, 
 and however I might treat them, that is one 
 ground which rendered it impossible for me to 
 yield my assent, by agreeing to waive my own 
 opinions in reference to the measure itself, and 
 to support his, with aview to get something ; be- 
 cause you see that goes to the very foundation. 
 No bill, the Senate will perceive, touching a 
 Freedmen's Bureau, no bill touching any other 
 interest connected with the colored people, no 
 bill touching anything that may affect the south- 
 ern States, can in any way pass upon ground like 
 that. 
 
 Let us go a little further, sir. I received the 
 impression that the President really undertook 
 to limit what I understood to be the powers of 
 
 Congress in relation to this matter, and to show 
 tliat I will read a little more of the message. 
 After speaking on the subject of introducing 
 legislation before admitting Senators and Rep- 
 resentatives from these States into Congress, 
 he says : 
 
 "I would not interfere with the unquestionable 
 right of ConRress to judge, each llou.^o for itself, 'of 
 the elections, returns, and Qualifications of its own 
 member.'--.' But that authority cannot be construed 
 as including the right to shut out, in time of peace, 
 any •'^t.itc fVdm the representation to which it is on- 
 titlo<l liy the Constitution." 
 
 In his speech yesterday, he said : 
 "I say that when they comply with the Constitu- 
 tion, when thoy have given sufficient evidence of their 
 loyalty and that they can be trusted, when they yield 
 obcdicnie to the law, I say extend to them tile right 
 hand of fellowship, and let peace and union be re- 
 stored." 
 
 He is talking there about representation. Is 
 it not a plain, distinct, indisputable inference 
 from what I have read from the veto message, 
 that we cannot judge upon any question except 
 the simple question of the elections, returns, 
 and qualifications of our own members ? Let 
 us hear what he goes on to say in that mes- 
 sage: 
 
 "At present all the people of eleven States arc 
 excluded — those who were most faithful during the 
 war not less than others. The State of Tennessee, 
 for instance, whose authorities engaged in rebellion, 
 was restored to all her constitutional relations to the 
 Union by the patriotism and energy of her injured 
 and betrayed people." 
 
 Does he mean us to judge upon the position 
 of the State of Tennessee? 
 
 " Before the war was brought to a termination they 
 had placed themselves in relations with the General 
 Government, had established a State government of 
 their own, and, as they were not included in the eman- 
 cipation proclamation, they, by their own act, had 
 amended their constitution so as to abolish slavery 
 within the limits of their State. I know no reason 
 why the State of Tennessee, for example, should not 
 fully enjoy 'all her constitutional relations to the 
 United States.'" 
 
 I shall not read any more from the message, 
 though it contains other language which goes to 
 confirm the same idea. If I have mistaken the 
 view of the President, I shall be very glad to 
 be corrected by him or by anybody that is au- 
 thorized to speak for him ; and one would think 
 there are jilenty of those gentlemen about ; but 
 what he says is, substantially, in my judgment, . 
 this: "I have come to the conclusion that 
 these States are in the Union to be represented 
 in the councils of the nation, and particularly 
 the State of Tennessee. I admit that certain 
 things must be done ; they must, show their 
 loyalty, but I am the person to decide upon 
 whether those things have been done : whether 
 that loj'alty has been shown ; whether that con- 
 dition has been complied with, and all other 
 conditionsthat I may judge necessary, and when 
 I have decided that question with refereuce to 
 these States, Congress m.ay take up the ques- 
 tion of the elections, qualifications, and returns 
 of the memljcrs who present themselves to them, 
 inquire into that, and have nothing to do but 
 to settle the question whether they come within 
 the provisions of the Constitution or not." 
 
 If the President does not mean that, then the 
 question is for Congress to decide. If he does 
 mean that, the issue of which I spoke is directly 
 
8 
 
 presented to Congress. For myself, I could not 
 rest, as a Senator of the United States, content 
 with my position ; I could not believe that I was 
 faithful to the great interests committed to my 
 care, connected with others as I am, by the 
 State which sent me hero, if I yielded for a 
 moment to the idea, come from what source it 
 may, that anybody but Congress had the right 
 with reference to Senators and Representatives 
 to settle preliminarily the question whether the 
 States that sent them here were entitled to have 
 Senators and Representatives or not. 
 
 Sir, we should be yielding everything, we 
 should have no power left, we should be less 
 than children, we should hardly be entitled to 
 call ourselves slaves, if a question upon which 
 the very existence of these bodies, the Senate 
 and House of Representatives may depend, the 
 question of whether a State, or a body of men, 
 or an organization anywhere is entitled to rep- 
 resentation here, is not for lis to settle, and us 
 alone, so far as those proposed members are 
 concerned, without any dictation from anybody, 
 ay, without any advice from anybody. The 
 President is by the Constitution authorized and 
 required to give information to Congress from 
 time to time on the state of public affairs ; but 
 upon a question aifecting the representation in 
 the Senate or in the House of Representatives, 
 he is not competent even to advise us, from his 
 position and from the necessity that exists that 
 all these different branches of the Government 
 should be entirely independent of each other. 
 I am free to say I should consider myself as sit- 
 ting in a body bound hand and foot, having no 
 power, no rights, no independence, no char- 
 acter, if I thought I was compelled to ask the 
 opinion of any one with regard to the right of 
 a Senator to sit upon this floor and the right of 
 the State which sent him here to be represented 
 upon this floor. It is a question for us, and 
 only for us. 
 
 Looking, therefore, upon these two argu- 
 ments in this part of the veto message as I did, 
 one distinctly indicating that no legislation af- 
 fecting the States which have recently been in 
 rebellion would meet with the approval of the 
 President while those States were not repre- 
 sented here, the other that all the considera- 
 tion that we as members of the Senate had a 
 right to give to this subject was to look at the 
 papers presented and say whether men coming 
 here had the proper credentials from some- 
 body, leaving the question to be settled at the 
 other end of the avenue whether or not the 
 Statf'S themselves had aright to be represented 
 on this floor — while I considered those two 
 things as not only shadowed forth, but distinctly 
 stated in the veto message, I could not hesitate 
 for a single instant to say that where such rea- 
 sons were given for the veto of a bill, I could 
 not, without sacriflcing all my self-respect, and 
 what is of more consequence, sacrificing, as far 
 as I am concerned, all the rights and honors of 
 tlie body of which I am a member, vote to sus- 
 tain tliat message. Under those circumstances, 
 and, 1 will confess, influenced by that partic- 
 ular message, influenced Ijy those views and 
 igtateraents of the President, the committee of 
 
 fifteen, which is so denounced, saw fit to pro- 
 pose distinctly the resolution which is now upon 
 your table; and it is this: 
 
 That in order to close agitation — 
 
 To have no more dispute about it among our- 
 selves as to our own action — 
 
 upon a question which seems likely to disturb the 
 action of the Government, as well as to quiet the un- 
 certainty which is agitating the minds of the people 
 of tlie eleven States which have been declared to be 
 in insurrection, no Senator or Representative shall be 
 admitted into either branch of Congress iroir^ any of 
 said States until Congress shall have declared such 
 State entitled to such representation. 
 
 That, sir, is resuming the original proposi- 
 tion, substantially. H.aving been instructed to 
 inquire into the condition of these States, and 
 to report whether they, or any of them, were 
 entitled to representation, and not being pre- 
 pared to report on that question, we propose to 
 the House and the Senate this resolution, pro- 
 viding that — 
 
 No Senator or Representative shall be admitted 
 into either branch of Congress fromany of said States 
 until Congress shall have declared such State enti- 
 tled to such representation. 
 
 Originally, I did not tliiuk that resolution 
 was necessary ; but now I do. Why ? In order 
 that Congress may "assert distinctly its own 
 rights and its own powers ; in order that there 
 may be no mistake anywhere, in the mind of 
 the Executive or in the minds of the people 
 of this country ; that Congress, under the cir- 
 cumstances of this case, with this attempted 
 limitation of its jjowers with regard to its own 
 organization, is prepared to say to the Execu- 
 tive and to the country, respectfully but firmly, 
 that over this subject they have, and they mean 
 to exercise, the most full and plenary jurisdic- 
 tion ; they will be limited with regard to it by no 
 considerations arising from the views of others 
 than themselves, except so far as those consid- 
 • orations may affect the minds of individuals; 
 we will judge for ourselves, not only upon cre- 
 dentials and the character of men and the 
 position of men, but upon the position of the 
 States which sent those men here. In other 
 words, to use the language of the President 
 again, when the question is to be decided 
 whether they obey the Constitution, whether 
 they have a fitting constitution of their own, 
 whether they are loyal, whether they are pre- 
 pared to obey the laws as a preliminary, as 
 the President says it is, to their admission, we 
 will say whether those preliminary require- 
 ments have been complied with, and not he, 
 and nobody but ourselves. 
 
 It was my very strong impression and opin- 
 ion with reference to this matter which induced 
 me to ask the Senate to take up this question 
 now. I deem it as transcending in importance 
 the question of the amendment of the Consti- 
 tution which has been under discussion for 
 several days. I deem that in the present con- 
 dition of the country, situated as we are, ittran- 
 scoiids in importance every other question. 
 AVhcre are we, sir? Let us allow ourselves to 
 consider for a moment. If wc; are not to iiu]uire 
 into and be satisfied of the condition of these 
 States, if we are not to inquire and ascertain 
 whether thev are or are not in such a situation 
 
9 
 
 that they may safely come here and govern, (be- 
 cause when they come here they come as rulers, ) 
 but if somebody else is to settle that question 
 for us, all that Congress has to do is this : when 
 a State chooses to go out of the Union and make 
 war upon it, itis*to provide means for the occa- 
 sion ; when the State has been conquered and 
 is ready to come back again, it is to inquire of 
 somebody else whether the State is in a condi- 
 tion to come back, and is to take tlie men who 
 are sent here, and who may come here with 
 credentials from a military governor appointed 
 by the President, without a word except as 
 to tlieir qualifications. 
 
 Mr. President, this subject is one upon which 
 much might be said. I have been proud of the 
 fact — and perhaps I am, therefore, to be hum- 
 bled—that I am a member of the Senate of the 
 United States. I have deemed that the posi- 
 tion was a great one, one of which any man, no 
 matter how great his powers, might well be 
 proud, and with which his utmost ambition 
 might be well contented. Why? I supposed 
 that Senators were somewhat in the nature of 
 representatives of the people, although selected 
 by the Legislatures of the States ; that Sena- 
 tors, like Uepresentatives, were sent here for 
 the purpose of guarding the interests of the peo- 
 ple, and althougli other officers were chosen for 
 specific terms and exercised for the time greater 
 power, that after all the protection of this Gov- 
 ernment must be found in its Congress ; that 
 public opinion was represented»here, the pub- 
 lic wishes were represented here, the rights of 
 the whole people were guarded here, the money 
 of the people was taken care of here— I mean 
 in Congress, taking both Houses together — and 
 that, in fact, all the essential powers of the 
 Government, everything that was necessary in 
 order to protect our form of government re- 
 publican, and to save the liberties of the coun- 
 try, rested in the faithfulness of the Senators 
 and Representatives of the United States, and 
 in their power to judge of what was necessary 
 in order to constitute and regulate their own 
 bodies. But, sir, if this is not so, if they are 
 confined simply to a mere question of papers, 
 to a mere question of credentials, to simply 
 taking the opinions of others as to who are en- 
 titled to seats in this body, so far as States hav- 
 ing the right to send them here are concerned, 
 theii I consider that we are reduced to be mere 
 creatures of circumstance, nothings, nobodies ; 
 at any time we may be overwhelmed ; at any 
 time we may lose our power; at an}^ time we 
 may cease to be that check, which the Consti- 
 tution intends we should be, upon the Execu- 
 tive of the United States — upon other branches 
 of the Government ; at any time we may lose 
 all of which we have been so justly proud with 
 reference to our own condition as assigned us 
 by the Constitution of the United States. Sen- 
 ators will pardon me, I hope, for speaking at 
 such length upon that subject. 
 
 I believe that the President is a friend of his 
 country. I believe that he is a patriotic, de- 
 voted citizen ; that he would do nothing to in- 
 jure any of its institutions under any circum- 
 stance if he was aware, while doing it, of what 
 
 he was doing. I believe, liowever, in reference 
 to this matter that he has spoken unguardedly. 
 His feelings in relation to the admission of Ten- 
 nessee particularly, aiul these ot her States, have 
 carried him beyond what I l)elieve in calmer 
 moments and on due consideration he would 
 be willing to go; far lieyond what he himself 
 on a calm review would find it in his power 
 to stand by. I'his part of his message is not 
 well considered. That is all I choose to say of 
 it. But it is a message from the President of 
 the United States. It is a part of the record. 
 We must consider it as a part of the record, and 
 while it so stands as a reason given for vetoing 
 a Ijill of Congress, we must treat it precisely 
 in the same manner as if we believed that every 
 word of it was intended. I would not insin- 
 uate for a moment that the President would ad- 
 vance a sentiment that was calculated to wound 
 the Constitution in any degree. On the con- 
 trary, I believe he would not. No man has 
 shown a greater attachment to it than he has; 
 and I wish to speak of him respectfully and 
 kindly. But whether he means it or not, when 
 he advances opinions and lays down principles 
 which, in my judgment, strike at the very exist- 
 ence of this body as a power in the Govern- 
 ment, I cannot but enter my solemn dissent 
 from it, and call upon Congress to assert its 
 own rights and its own position with reference 
 to all these questions. 
 
 Mr. President, 1 have spoken at greater 
 length upon this point than I intended. I 
 had desired, as I did on a former occasion, to 
 say something u])on the main question which 
 renders our consideration of this matter neces- 
 sary. I exhausted myself before upon another 
 branch of the subject, and I have done pretty 
 much the same now with regard to this. But if 
 the Senate will forgive me I wish to state my 
 own views in as few words as possible upon the 
 great question of reconstruction. It comes in 
 here naturally, and perhaps I may as well state 
 my opinions upon that subject before I leave 
 the question under consideration. 
 
 For four years we were in a state of war, and 
 during those four years, according to my recol- 
 lection, almost fromthe beginning, we discussed 
 the question of reconstructing the States. A 
 great many gentlemen in this Chamber and in 
 the other House made elaborate speeches upon 
 the question of reconstruction. I made none. 
 I did not express an opinion upon it, for the 
 simple and single reason that we had nothing 
 at that time to reconstruct, and I thought it 
 better to attend to the proper business we had 
 in view, to quell the rebellion, to overcome the 
 rebellious States, and to put them in a condi- 
 tion to be reconstructed, before we undertook 
 to reconstruct them. The proper time has now 
 come. We are now entitled to consider the 
 question of reconstruction. The President 
 began to consider it beibre we did; 1 mean 
 since the overthrow of the rebellion. He took 
 his own course. I have had occasion once or 
 twice to speak of the course that he took as 
 not entirely meeting my own views, while I 
 did not undertake to find the slightest fault 
 with him for the course he chose to follow. 
 
10 
 
 But, sir, with reference to that matter allow 
 me to say that I think the better way would 
 have been for him to have kept all those States 
 uiuKt his own power as Commander-in-Chief of 
 the Army of the United States, and waited until 
 Congress eame together, to consult with Con- 
 gress as to what was the best mode of getting 
 them back again into the Union. He did not 
 choose to do that, and I had no disposition to 
 complain, for I believe he acted with good 
 intentions. He chose, by virtue of his power as 
 Commander-in-Chief of the Army, to appoint 
 provisional governors in some of these States, 
 and I do not know but in all of them, and to say 
 to the Stiites that he would aid them in the pro- 
 cess of reconstruction by api)olnting men who 
 should call conventions, and under which they 
 'might make constitutions, &c. They proceeded 
 to do it, and it is within my recollection, and I 
 think it must be in the recollection of a great 
 many others, that wliile that was being done, 
 and up to a very recent period, the President's 
 declaration was that it was only an experiment, 
 that if it turned out, from the conduct of these 
 States, that they were loyal and could put them- 
 selves in a fit position to be admitted into the 
 Union, then they could be admitted ; but if not, 
 nothing was lost, because they were in our hands, 
 referring to Congress and to the President. I 
 was content with that, so far as it went, and I 
 Ijelieved that when we came together as a Con- 
 gress the great question in reference to these 
 matters would be in our hands. We met. We 
 passed a resolution that the two Houses of Con- 
 ■grcss would consider it, and it seems that that 
 resolution gave very great offense in many quar- 
 ters. But, sir, we have been proceeding to con- 
 sider it, and, according to my view, as I have 
 expressed it here to-day, we had a perfect right, 
 and not only a perfect right but it was our duty 
 to do so. The question of reconstruction, then, 
 on our own plan, according to our own ideas, is 
 before us, and with reference to that I wish to 
 lay down a few very simple propositions. 
 
 With regard to what is transpiring before the 
 committee of fifteen it will not become me to 
 say much : nothing in fact as to what they 
 intend to do. That must be shown by their 
 actions. But I can state some views as they 
 occur to me with regard to our powers and 
 what is expedient. 
 
 Mr. President, I think it will not be disputed 
 by anyliody, not even by the Senator from 
 Maryland — and I call his attention to it — that 
 this country has been in a state of war, deci- 
 dedly in a state of war, war according to the 
 books, war in its worst acceptation, war in the 
 very strongest mc.ining of the term, witliout 
 any limitation or qualilication. If we have been 
 in a state of war, the question arises — and it is 
 a very simple one, and I think this whole thing 
 lies in a narrow compass — is there any dis- 
 jjute as to what are the consequences of war? 
 What are the consequences of successful war? 
 Where one nation conquers another, overcomes 
 it withoutqualifications, withoutterms, without 
 limits, and after a bitter contest succeeds in 
 crushing its enemy, occupying its enemy's ter- 
 ritory, destroying its armies, what are the con- 
 
 sequences? The Senator is pefectly familiar 
 with the writers on international law. Let 
 him read the chapter in the book under my 
 hand upon " Acquisitions by War." Is there 
 anything more certain than that the conquei'or 
 has a right, if he chooses, to change the form 
 of government, that he has a right to punish, 
 that he has a right to take entire control of 
 the nation and the people, that he has a right 
 to exact security for the future, and such secu- 
 rity for his own safety as he may demand ; that- 
 all these rights are his, with only the limitation 
 that he shall not abuse them and conduct them 
 in a manner contrary to humanity, in the ordi- 
 nary acceptation of the term ? 
 
 Mr. JOHNSON. What is the book? 
 
 Mr. FESSENDEN. Vattel, which is per- 
 fectly familiar to the Senator as it is to every- 
 body else who is master of the subject. I can 
 take up the book and read passages to show 
 precisely what I have stated, in the strongest 
 possible terms. I did not think it necessary to 
 hunt up a dozen authorities, because the law is 
 the same in all. There is no dispute about it. 
 That principle, then, is settled. Those are the 
 consequences of successful war. We are told 
 that we did not wage a war of conquest. Cer- 
 tainly we did not. Congress said precisely 
 what it meant at the time it stated that this war 
 was not waged for any purpose of subjugation. 
 It was not commenced with any such idea, but 
 if it follows that subjugation must come in order 
 to accomplish what we desire to accomplish 
 and what we must accomplish, it is not our fault. 
 If subjugation becomes necessary, although that 
 was not the idea with which the war was com- 
 menced, who can complain? Let me ask the 
 honorable Senator from Maryland a question. 
 He has cited in the course of some speech or 
 speeches he has made here, tha£ resolution 
 passed by Congress 
 
 Mr. JOHNSON. I never cited it. 
 
 Mr. FESSENDEN. Then it has been cited 
 by others. Suppose we made it, and suppose 
 it is binding upon us. Binding with whom? 
 Was that a compact with the confederate States? 
 It was a compact with our own people. We 
 told them and they told us that the war was not 
 waged for any such pmrpose. It was not a 
 promise made for the benefit of the confederate 
 States, it was not a promise made for the bene- 
 fit of others, but for our own benefit, and the 
 honorable Senator is perfectly familiar with the 
 legal principle that unless tlie consideration 
 comes from A, he cannot avail himself of a 
 j)romise made by B to C. That, then, is simply 
 the case here ; that is tlie law. Nobody will 
 dispute it. Those are the consequences of war 
 generally. 
 
 Now, is there any more dispute as to the 
 next proposition, that the consequences of civil 
 war are precisely tlie same ? Is there any writer 
 who does not lay it down distinctly that where 
 a civil war. in the proper sense of tiie term, 
 has existed, tlie consequences of that civil war, 
 so far as the rights of the parties are concerned, 
 are precisely the same that they are in other 
 cases ? If compelled to carry on the contest 
 upon the same principles — as we are by.iilie law 
 
11 
 
 of nations — and to treat it in all respects as a 
 war between two independent nations until the 
 war is closed, is there a dispute th;it jirecisely 
 the same consequences follow, precisely the 
 same rights are obtained as would be the case 
 in an international war? If not, let the Senator 
 show me where he finds a distinction drawn 
 between the consequences in the two cases. I 
 take it these two propositions are beyond dis- 
 pute ; there can be no difSculty about them. 
 
 Then the question arises, and it is only a* 
 natural one, does our form of government 
 change in any way tlie nature and inevitable 
 legal consequences of a civil war? Is a civil 
 war waged among us, living as we do under a 
 written Constitution, different in anyway so far 
 as the consequences are concerned, on account 
 of that written Constitution, from a civil war in 
 any other nation in the woi-ld? That is a ques- 
 tion upon which men may pause. It is very 
 manifest to me that there can be no difference 
 at all. And here I come to consider for a mo- 
 ment the argument of the honorable Senator 
 from Maryland, because that is what I wanted 
 to address myself to. He says that Congress 
 can do no more than quell an insurrection ; our 
 Constitution speaks only of insurrections; and 
 when an insurrection has existed in a State, 
 the moment that insurrection is over the" State 
 returns to its former position ; and he reads, 
 I believe, from that clause of the Constitution 
 which says that Congress may provide for call- 
 ing forth the militia to execute the laws of the 
 Union, suppress insurrections, and repel inva- 
 sion. Now, does the Senator undertake to say 
 in any way that that is all our Constitution 
 gives power to do? If I understand the argu- 
 ment of the honorable Senator, it is this : here 
 are State governments, and as there are State 
 governments, and as we are living under a 
 written Constitution, and Congress by the par- 
 ticular terms of that Constitution has power to 
 provide for calling out the militia to sujipress 
 insurrections and repel invasions, therefore 
 everything that takes place in the way of a fight 
 in this countr}', no matter what its extent, is to 
 be considered an insurrection within the mean- 
 ing of that clause. Do I understand the Sena- 
 toi' to take that ground? 
 
 Mr. JOHNSON. I said that Congress had 
 no authority to carry on war against a State. 
 
 Mr. FESSENDEN. My answer to that is 
 simply this : the Constitution has not specifically 
 provided for the case of civil war ; it never con- 
 templated civil war ; it would not contemplate 
 civil war ; but it provided the means to quell 
 it by giving power to Congress to raise and 
 support armies without stating for what ob- 
 jects those armies might be used ; and it gave 
 power to do everything in fact that is necessary 
 to be done in order to preserve and support the 
 Government. But it speaks of insurrection. 
 What is an insurrection? Isitcivil war? The 
 Senator will hardly contend that they are syn- 
 onymous terms. An insurrection, such as is 
 mentioned and referred to in the Constitution, 
 is not civil war; it is something far less. The 
 Senator will remember that Vattel — for I go no 
 further so far as this argument is concerned — 
 
 speaks of a tumult as one thing that may take 
 place, that is, when there is a tumultuous as- 
 semblage and tlic laws are violated ; and when 
 that tumult assumes form and becomes a resist- 
 ance to the law and to the governing authority, 
 it is an insurrection ; and when it assumes a 
 greater form, and the laws are successfully re- 
 sisted, and the sovereign power is defied by 
 armed force, then it becomes a civil war. Is 
 that condition of things what was meant, and 
 all that was meant, by the clause of the Consti- 
 tution giving power to call forth the militia to 
 suppress insurrection? 
 
 it' the Senator is right in his construction, 
 there is no such thing as civil war under this 
 Government, and can be no such thing; the 
 Constitution does not provide for it ; it speaks 
 simply of " insurrection f and there can be 
 none of the consequences of civil war, there can 
 be none of the rules applicable to civil war, be- 
 cause the Constitution has not provided for it. 
 Sir, this clause is of the narrowest possible lim- 
 itation, and refers only to ordinary tumults car- 
 ried to such an extent as to become insurrec- 
 tions that are perfectly familiar to us all, and the 
 very provision of the Constitution which the 
 Senator has quoted shows that was the under- 
 standing. The truth is, it has reference simply 
 to the militia. It is a power — 
 
 "To provide for calling forth tlie militia to execute 
 the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections, and 
 repel invasions." 
 
 Not that Congress shall have authority to 
 suppress insurrections, as the Senator would 
 have read it, and repel invasions ; but it may 
 use the militia force for the purpose of sup- 
 pressing insurrections and repelling invasions, 
 meaning simply that on a sudden emergency, 
 when there is an insurrection or invasion. Con- 
 gress may call upon the militia temporarily for 
 the purpose of effecting the object. That is all. 
 Now, then, sir, understanding that war has ex- 
 isted, and that its consequences are such as I 
 have stated, and that civil war is attended by 
 all the consequences of other wars, even among 
 us under the Constitution, I say that, in my 
 judgment, a State may be utterly extinguished 
 and swept out of existence by civil war. It is a 
 necessary consequence if the law of nations 
 exists among us and we are bourfd by its pro- 
 visions. A State may forfeit its status. The 
 Government may say that it has forfeited its 
 status, if it pleases to say so. It may impose 
 upon such a State punishment; it may protect 
 itself against the future ; and if, in order to pro- 
 tect itself against the future, the Government 
 finds it absolutely necessary to prevent it from 
 resuming its original position, it has^the perfect 
 power to do so. It is a necessary consequence 
 of the principle. 
 
 It has been said, men have been fond of say- 
 ing, "Once a State, always a State." That is 
 not true of States in general. It is not true as 
 a matter of fact. States may live and States 
 may die. I do not hold that these States are 
 dead, but I hold that States may die an8 have 
 died heretofore. But not being true of States 
 in general, it is not true of these States. Once 
 a State, it does not follow that they are always 
 
12 
 
 necessarily States, in the sense that we use the 
 term. They may continue to be States, they 
 may continue to be orjrani/.ations, but it is a very 
 diSerent question whether, as such organiza- 
 tions, they are States of the Union and in the 
 Union. Thatdependsui)Onothcrconsiderations. 
 I ask the Senator if something is not necessary 
 besides geographical extent and political or- 
 ganization as a State in order to be a State of 
 the Union? Must there not be a constitution 
 of the State? Must there not be a government 
 80 constituted that it has relations, and fitting 
 relations, to the Government of the United 
 States ? Must it not be in a position to perform its 
 duties? Has it not obligations to be performed 
 toward the United States, as well as the right 
 to insist on the performance of duties to be 
 received from the Government of the United 
 States? Can there be a State of this Union 
 without a constitution which makes and shows 
 its form of government and places it in relations 
 with the Government of the United States? Can 
 it be a State of this Union without any provision 
 through which and by which it can perform the 
 obligations which it is under to the United 
 States, to the Government of the whole ? Cer- 
 tainly not. Therefore it is not true that although 
 a State may exist in some particulars, it exists 
 in all relations to the Government of the United 
 States, and is a State in the Union, because 
 it has an organization. The result does not 
 necessarily follow. 
 
 In order to constitute a State of the Union 
 there should be a republican government ; that 
 government must be acknowledged by Con- 
 gress, and that government must have the requi- 
 site provisions to connect it with the Union. 
 When that government is destroyed, when the 
 ligature is broken, when there are no provisions 
 whatever that connect it with the United States, 
 it ceases to be a State of the Union from ne- 
 cessity. I do not say that its people pass out 
 from under the jurisdiction of the Government ; 
 it belongs to the Union and its people are un- 
 der the authority of the Union ; but as a State 
 having rights in the Union — rights, for instance, 
 in this Congress — when it has ceased to connect 
 itself with the Government by its own act or in 
 any way, it is at an end for the time being, be- 
 cause something more is necessary than a bare 
 organized existence. That is the position that 
 I assume, and I have not been able to see but 
 that it is correct. 
 
 Now, will the Senator deny, will any one 
 deny, tliat there has been a period and a long 
 period during which there was no connection 
 between these confederate States and the Gov- 
 ernment of the United States ? Have not years 
 elapsed during which no such connection cx- 
 islicd ? Was not the form of government which 
 bound them to the Union entirely destroyed ? 
 Was not the connection obliterated? Were not 
 all their people in rebellion? Was there any- 
 thing by wliicli any of those States could con- 
 nect itself witli tlio Government with which it 
 had been formerly connected, and if not, what is 
 necessary in order to Ijring it back? is it not 
 necessary that it should Ijc recognized by this 
 Government ? Is it not necessary that it should 
 
 have a constitution which does connect it with 
 this Government? Is it not necessary that it 
 should place itself in a position to discharge its 
 duties toward this Government? And when it 
 has done that, must it not apply to the Govern- 
 ment for admission, for reinstatement in the 
 Union? 
 
 This question has been argued, and argued 
 by authority, as if we had nothing to say about 
 it ; as if these people were back again simply 
 Ijccause they had made State constitutions. 
 How do we know it? What proof have we? I 
 want an answer. 
 
 Mr. COWAX. That question arises when 
 the representatives of those people come here. 
 
 Mr. FESSENDEN. But they do not bring 
 their constitutions with them. 
 
 Mr. COWAN. We have a right to inquire, 
 if it becomes necessary to determine whether 
 they were properlv elected. 
 
 Mr. FESSENDEN. Undoubtedly ; but the 
 argument is that we have no right to inquire 
 into anything except that they have been elected. 
 
 Mr. COWAN. Oh, no; it raises the whole 
 question about the legitimacy of the body which 
 elected them. 
 
 Mr. FESSENDEN. What body? 
 
 Mr. COWAN. The Legislature that elects 
 Senators. 
 
 Mr. FESSENDEN. But have we not a right 
 to see the constitution ? Should not that consti- 
 tution be presented to us? It has been once 
 overthrown, obliterated, gone. 
 
 Mr. COWAN. You inquire iiito their con- 
 stitution when you inquire into the election, and 
 see whether the person claiming to be elected 
 was chosen by the proper body. 
 
 Mr. FESSENDEN. What, then, becomes of 
 the argument that they can be admitted on their 
 credentials? Are we not to inquire into the con- 
 dition of the States? 
 
 Mr. DOOLITTLE. Will the Senator allow 
 me to state that no one has ever pretended, that 
 I ever heard, that we were confined to inquiring 
 into the credentials merely. We have a right 
 to inquire whether there was a Legislature to 
 elect them, whether the people were in a con- 
 dition to choose a Legislature to elect them ; 
 but what we say is that the Senate is to jtidge 
 for itself whether members have been elected 
 to this body, and should not allow the House 
 to judge for it. That is the position. 
 
 Mr. FESSENDEN. And who has ever pre- 
 tended that the House would judge for the 
 Senate, or the Senate for the House? 
 
 Mr. COWAN. If the honorable Senator 
 pleases, I understand this resolution is that 
 before we shall get at that question we must 
 have a law passed by Congress. 
 
 Mr. FESSENDEN. A law jmssed with ref- 
 erence to the single question whether the States 
 are in a condition to elect. 
 
 Mr. DOOLITTLE. Wo inquire into that 
 for ourselves. 
 
 Mr. FESSENDEN. I do not intend, Mr. 
 President, to be called off from the ground that 
 I was assuming. It was simply this, that when 
 they come here, after having been disconnected 
 with the Union, they must satisfy us that they 
 
13 
 
 have done all that is necessary in order to re- 
 store them to llu! Union ; tliut they have a re- 
 publican form of j^overnnient ; that tliey have 
 those provisions which are necessary to enable 
 them to perform their duties. Must not that 
 be required ? 
 
 Mr. D IXON. Satisfy whom ? 
 
 Mr. FESSENDEN. Satisfy Congross._ That 
 is the very question which I liave hccn discuss- 
 ing; but I am speaking now of the question of the 
 right to return, of whetheraState is outand Iiow 
 it is to get in. If gentlemen concede that these 
 States have been so disconnected with the Gen- 
 eral Government that they had no riglit to repre- 
 sentation here, that they were not States of the 
 Union and in the Union for this purpose, that 
 in order to acquire that right they must come to 
 Congress and apply to Congress and furnish the 
 necessary proofs that they are in a condition to 
 claim the rights of States in the Union, it is 
 sufficient for my purpose. If they admit that, 
 it is all I desire. But an entirely different doc- 
 trine has been laid down here ; and it has been 
 said that when gentlemen come here claiming 
 to represent these States we must hurry to ad- 
 mit them because they present credentials from 
 States ! What have gentlemen said here ? "I 
 present the credentials of A or B or C ; they are 
 in due form." We may inquire as to the form. 
 May we not inquire where is the State consti- 
 tution? Has it been presented to us? Have 
 we seen it? Has there been any application 
 from any of these States to be readmitted, if 
 you please to call it so, under its constitution 
 or to have its new constitution recognized and 
 its acts under it? Not one. We do not know 
 to this day officially in proper shape that any 
 one of these States has formed a constitution. 
 
 M. COWAN. You will not allow us to raise 
 the question. If you take up the question of 
 the admission of some of the gentlemen sent 
 here, we will show you a constitution and a duly 
 constituted Legislature qualified to elect, and 
 that they were elected. 
 
 Mr. FESSENDEN. And what does that 
 prove ? That when the question is asked whether 
 there is a constitution formed, the Senator from 
 Pennsylvania pulls one out of his pocket, and 
 says, "Here is a constitution." That is not 
 the way to deal with Congress upon these ques- 
 tions. What I say is, that if their relations to 
 the Union have been dissolved in the way they 
 have been, what they have to do is to come 
 here by their organizations, their Legislature, or 
 convention, and present their constitution to 
 Congress for examination, and ask that their 
 representatives be admitted under it, which no 
 one of them has yet done. That we have a 
 right to demand. Suppose their credentials are 
 in due form, have we not a right to go further 
 and inquire what the condition of those States 
 is and has been since their former governments 
 were overthrown ? I suppose Senators now will 
 admit that. 
 
 I had no Idea when I rose that I should speak 
 so long on this matter, but as I have got into 
 it I may as well finish what I have to say. I 
 wish to notice some things that have been said 
 more than once by the honorable Senator from 
 
 Pennsylvania, [Mr. Cow.\n.] He has talked 
 
 to us about the q\iestion of ta.xatlon and repre- 
 sentation, and app(;aled to us to admit these 
 people, to admit tlicsci States, to admit their 
 llepresentativcs and Senators, because, as he 
 says, it is gross injustice that tiiey should be 
 taxed and not re])resented. How is that? Had 
 we no right to tax them during the reb(;Hion if 
 we could ccdk'Ct tlie tax? ^V'ere we bound, 
 Ijccause they chose to go into a contest against 
 this Government, to let them oft' and not levy 
 ta.xes upon them? The Senator will liardly 
 contend for that. Wlille they were in reliellion 
 does the Senator say that wc had no right to 
 tax them? 1 am very glad to bring him to 
 that point. He holds, then, tluit we had no 
 right to consider them as subject to the Consti- 
 tution. 
 
 Mr. COWAN. The honorable Senator will 
 allow me to state my position fairly. I will 
 give it to him. I hold that it is the duty of every 
 Government to protect its subjects ; and that 
 while it is unable to protect them, and while it 
 is not strong enough to suppress a rebellion 
 originating among them, and when it does not 
 protect them, when it leaves them under the 
 dominion of usurped authority, while this con- 
 dition of things lasts, it has no right to tax 
 them. 
 
 Mr. FESSENDEN. In other words, Mr. 
 President, if the people of a particular portion 
 of the country choose to set themselves up 
 against the General Government, and to levy 
 an army against it and fight against It, we lose 
 all our rights of government over them. We 
 cannot control them, we cannot tax them, we 
 cannot call upon them for the performance of 
 any duty. We have a perfect right to kill them, 
 but iaot to treat them as subjects of the Gov- 
 ernment. That is the Senator's position. He 
 assumes that these people were people that we 
 did not protect, that when the power of a State 
 had passed into the hands of those inimical to 
 the Government, and when the whole people 
 en masse had risen against the Government, we 
 had ceased to protect them, and therefore we 
 had no power of government over them, no 
 matter how strong they are ; that until we put 
 down the rebellion all our power was to destroy. 
 A very fraternal and benevolent idea ! I was 
 struck, very much so from time to time, by the 
 arguments of the honorable Senator. I waa 
 puzzled somewhat when he talked about the 
 course of other nations over their conquered 
 people and told us that they at once took them 
 ,into partnership. I think he referred to the 
 example of Rome, aiul said that Rome never 
 made the people she conquered slaves. I have 
 some idea that they did tax them, that they 
 sent proconsuls to govern them. 
 
 Mr. COWAN. What I said of Rome was 
 that she always adopted one of two ways after 
 conquering a people. She either gave them 
 their original rights back again and very often 
 treated them as Roman citizens, or she Extermi- 
 nated them or scattered and drove them away. 
 
 Jlr. FESSENDEN. I did not hear that she 
 ever admitted their delegates into the Senate. 
 I never heard it claimed that they had a right 
 
14 
 
 of representation in the Roman Senate. She 
 did have a sort of governor that she called a 
 proconsul wlio ruled the conquered provinces. 
 
 However, this conversation with the Senator 
 is, perhaps, out of jilace, and 1 shall proceed 
 with niv argument, if it may be called an argu- 
 ment. The Senator has now contended (and 
 it is a necessary consequence of the position he 
 assumed the other day) that we necessarily lost 
 all our right of go%-crnment over these people^ 
 as the United States of America, by the simple 
 fact that they were enabled to rebel and to 
 raise an army to fight us. He has saved me 
 the trouble, tiierefore, of asking my (itlier ques- 
 tion. I was about to ask him if we had tliat 
 power while they were in rebellion, whether 
 the power of taxation did not continue for a 
 little while after the rebellion was quelled, or 
 whether we must necessarily wait until the 
 Government was restored in all its perfection 
 and in all its parts over these conquered peo- 
 ple, these subjugated people, until they came 
 back into the Government as rulers with us. 
 
 Now. sir, let us look at*this question. Gen- 
 tlemen have been talking here from time to 
 time and in the other House about the great 
 abuse that these States were not admitted to 
 representation while the Government was going 
 on to tax them. Sir, the arms that w-ere raised 
 against us were never laid down until last April. 
 From that time to December Congress was not 
 in session. They were under the control of 
 the military power. We came together on the 
 first Monday of December. There had been 
 an exhausting war, four years of deadly strug- 
 gle; hundreds of thousands slain, hundreds of 
 millions spent ; a war more savage, in my judg- 
 ment, on the part of the enemy we had to en- 
 counter than has been known in modern times ; 
 in which the mast savage hate was exhibited 
 against everything that was not of the confed- 
 erates, which wasdislinguished, remarkalde, for 
 its character, so distinct from all those wars that 
 have marked modern ])eriods. We came to- 
 gether in December, and certain men presented 
 themselves claiming to be admitted as Senators 
 and as Representatives upon these floors. We 
 had not been together thirty days before gen- 
 tlemen contended here that they were entitled 
 to admission upon an equality with ourselves 
 and as parts of the governing power. It is not 
 now ninety days since this Congress met: and 
 before the expiration of ninety days, ■ fter this 
 war of four years of the character lliat existed 
 and with denunciations of the most Ijlttcrkind 
 from all that people, we are told that v.-e are 
 perpetrating the most gross injustice because 
 they arc not already here in these seats as Sen- 
 ators and l^iopresentalives in Congress, and that 
 our legislation is substantially good for nothing 
 because they are not here. 
 
 It is a most remarjiable foot in this connec- 
 tion that not only have we not been together 
 ninety days when we are called upon to admit 
 these Senators and these Representatives, but 
 we are called on to decide that the condition 
 of that people is such as to render it safe, when 
 the President himself, who calls upon us to do 
 it, has not withdrawn his suspension of the writ 
 
 of ?iahea.i corpus throughout that territory, but 
 keeps his Army in that territory, and when all 
 the generals and himself at tlie head of all the 
 generals tell us that it is unsafe to withdraw it, 
 that they cannot be left to themselves, and that 
 the Army mu.st remain and they be kept under 
 military law. 
 
 Mr. President, this strikes me as somewhat 
 singular; and I say this because I want the coun- 
 try to understand it. Is no time to be allowed? 
 Here, it is said, are eight millions of people ; 
 here is a territory embracing three quarters of 
 a million of square miles ; here have been eleven 
 States in rel)ellion ; here has been a war of four 
 years. Congress meets ; the question is to be 
 submitted to that Congress ; and gentlemen 
 talk here and denounce it, and the President 
 himself denounces it, and the newspapers de- 
 nounce it, and the Democracy denounce it : 
 all raise their cry against us because within 
 ninety days, when the President himself, as Com- 
 mander-in-Chief of the Army, does not choose 
 to withdraw the Army from that territory, we 
 hr.ve not put its Representatives and Senators 
 in these seats to govern for themselves and to 
 govern us. I allude to this fact simply for the 
 purpose of showing how utterly false are the 
 accusations made against Congress, come from 
 M-hat quarter they may, how utterly unreason- 
 able it Is to suppose that a question of this kind 
 is to bo settled in such a hurry ; how utterly 
 unreasonable it is when the Senator from Penu- 
 sylvaniii undertakes to tell us that there is but 
 one course to pursue, and that Is to admit these 
 people inRtanicr, to assume that they are in a 
 condition to be admitted, to assume that all the 
 questions have been settled by other authorities 
 in point of fact. 
 
 Mr. COWAN. I beg that the gentleman will 
 alloM' me to correct him. I do not want it to 
 go to the country in his speech that I said they 
 should be admitted instanter. I never said any 
 such thing. I have contended that their cre- 
 dentials should be received and their cases ex- 
 amined by each House for itself, and that that 
 ought to be done immediately : and think now 
 that the sooner it is done the better. 
 
 Mr. FESSENDEN. The Senator's language 
 has been the language of denunciation of Con- 
 gress, at least of complaint. 
 
 Mr. COWAN. Oh, no ! 
 
 Mr. FESSENDEN. Very well. Does the 
 Senator admit that Congress has the right to 
 examine into the condition of these States as 
 p;irt of the question of admission? 
 
 Mr. COWAN. No, sir. 
 
 Mr. FESSENDEN. I thought so. Who 
 then is to settle the condition of these States? 
 
 Mr. COWAN. Each House for itself. 
 
 Mr. FESSENDEN. Do not the Houses 
 constitute Congress? Does the Si'uator admit 
 that the Senate has a right to examine Into and 
 satisfy itself of the condition of these States? 
 
 Mr. COWAN. Unquestionably. I have 
 lield it always. 
 
 Mr. DOO LI TTLE. (t(fMr. Fessenhex. ) Tliat 
 is all the point oI'dlfTerence between you and us. 
 
 Mr. FESSENDEN. I think the Senator will 
 find that we differ on a great many other points. 
 
15 
 
 Mr. DOOLITTLB. I am speaking of this 
 question now. 
 
 Mr. FESSENDEN. Then the Senate has 
 a right to examine into the condition of the 
 States. Is' not that^ a preliminary inquiry? 
 The Senator may answer or not, just as lie 
 chooses. I say that if the condition of the 
 States is to be inquired into by the Senate, 
 it is a preliminary inquiry. .(I'he Senate has 
 decided that that inquiry shall be made by a 
 joint committee, a committee of the Senate 
 and of the House of Representatives. It is 
 not a question referring to the credentials of 
 members, or whether a man has or has not 
 proper credentials. The condition of the 
 States is a question which may well be in- 
 
 Suired into and better inquired into by both 
 [ouses. 
 
 Then we come to this point, that the only 
 ground of complaint is, that instead of the 
 Senate raising its own particular committee to 
 make an examination it has raised a joint 
 committee, in connection with the House of 
 Representatives, to examine into the condition 
 of the confederate States. How small a matter 
 is that upon which to raise the great question 
 of taxation without representation ! Are we 
 to omit to tax these people while this inquiry 
 is going on? Have we no right to govern the 
 people of these States and make them con- 
 tribute their share of the public burdens while 
 this inqnir}' is being pursued ? Are we bound 
 to let them go scot-free, and say we have no 
 authority over them, because we have not yet 
 settled the question whether the Senators and 
 Representatives they have chosen to send here 
 shall be admitted to seats or not ? In all such 
 cases there must necessarily be a time when 
 people are taxed without being represented. 
 It is their own fault ; they have brought it upon 
 themselves. We cannot relax the reins of gov- 
 ernment because they have tried to shake off 
 our authority. And j'et it is a favorite cry of 
 the honorable Senator from Pennsylvania, and 
 it has been repeated here over and over again, 
 "What gross injustice you are committing by 
 taxing these people while you are inquiring into 
 their condition and seeing whether they are en- 
 titled to representation on the floor of Congress ; 
 because that is all that has been done.'" 
 
 Suppose it were a year after a war of four 
 years ; suppose it were even a longer time ; 
 would they have any reason to complain of 
 injustice? Would they have a right to turn 
 around upon us and say, "What right have you 
 to govern us a day, an hour, while we are not 
 represented on the floor of Congress?' ' The an- 
 swer is, " You have been in rebellion ; you have 
 made war against the United States ; you are 
 now crushed and overcome ; and we have now 
 to ascertain whether you are fit to come back 
 and have placed yourself in a position to re- 
 turn;" and that, says the Senator from Penn- 
 sylvania, is a gross outrage on the rights of the 
 people, laecause it is taxation without repre- 
 sentation. 
 
 Now, sir, I have been speaking simply of the 
 power of Congress ; but it is a very different 
 question when you come to consider what it is 
 
 best to do. I assert the power in its fullest 
 extent; I assert that by the civil war they lost 
 all the rights whicli I have enumerated, and we 
 acquired those v/iiich 1 haw: specihed. 1 assert 
 that they placed themselves in a position in 
 which they were not connected with this Union 
 as States. 1 assert that they have many things 
 to do in order to regain that position. I assert 
 that in the moan lime we have a right to govern 
 them, govern them as Christian men and as 
 statesmen, but to govern them because they 
 placed themselves in a position to render it ab- 
 solutely necessary that we should do so ; and I 
 assert, moreover, that they cannot come back 
 here to occupy these seats or seats in the other 
 House until we — no matter whether it is done 
 by joint or several authority, so that it is con- 
 ferred by Congress — be satisfied ourselves and 
 decide thnt they are entitled to occiqiy these 
 seats again ; and that we have a right to take 
 all the time necessary in order to give ourselves 
 entire satisfaction on that subject, and they have 
 no right to complain that in the meanwhile they 
 are taxed without being represented, because 
 they brought it upon their own heads. I say, 
 moreover, that the interests and safety of this 
 country require that we should be entirely con- 
 vinced of what is due to ourselves and our con- 
 stituents, and to the safety of all, before we 
 proceed to the examination of the question of 
 credentials and qualifications. 
 
 But having said that, it is another question 
 about what we should do ; I have been talking 
 about the I'ight. Now, I hold that the good of 
 this country requires that these States should 
 be admitted ; that we should have from them 
 Senators here in these seats ; that we should 
 have Representatives in the seats in the other 
 House just as soon as it can be done consist- 
 ently with the safety of the people of this coun- 
 try, and of the States now in existence, and of 
 their own ; not that I hold that we should be 
 doing them any great injustice if we kept them 
 out; but it is my doctrine that the exercise of 
 power is always dangerous. It is for our own 
 good as well as theirs, and our own good in 
 preference to theirs, that T would hasten that 
 day and admit them in the shortest possible 
 time ; and why ? Simply because if we con- 
 tinue to exercise this power; if we continue to 
 hold them in subjection, we perhaps create, 
 and certainly intensify, the feeling of bitter- 
 ness that already exists ; and not only that, but 
 we intensify our own feeling. We are teach- 
 ing ourselves to exercise a power which the 
 Constitution did not contemplate ; which the 
 good of this country ought not to permit and 
 cannot permit. I should be sorry, I should deem 
 it a blow, I should consider the country in dan- 
 ger, if for any considerable length of time the 
 present state of things should exist. No wise 
 or good statesman would wish it to exist for a 
 single moment longer than it was absolutely 
 necessary, because the inevitable result is that 
 we shall become demoralized ourselves. 
 
 I hold, then, sii>^ that it is best for all that as 
 soon as possible, as soon as it can be done with 
 any reasonable show of safety to ourselves and 
 to the Government of this country, these States 
 
16 
 
 should be established in their original positions, 
 that Senators should sit hero in this branch and 
 Representatives in the other, and that we should 
 proceed as best we may to govern the whole 
 country, a Government with the assent of all, 
 all being represented. But what 1 wish to enter 
 my dissent to is the doctrine that we cannot 
 and ought not to deliberate on the subject, in 
 our own way, in our own time, and that while 
 we are doing it we should be denounced and the 
 committee of which I am a member be -de- 
 nounced as an irresponsible tribunal, a central 
 l^ower; some power created to take legislation 
 out of its proper channels, and that the majority 
 of tlie Coiig'.ess should be held up to the counti'y 
 as it has been by gentlemen on the other side 
 of the ilouse, to say the least of it, and I think 
 also impliedly by my honorable friend from 
 Wisconsin himself, as perpetrating injustice 
 day by day every day that passed without seeing 
 men back in these vacant seats, or the simple 
 question of their credentials under consid- 
 eration; that this was an outrage upon States, 
 States lately at war, States which up to this 
 day have never sent us their constitutions or 
 made any request whatever in proper form to 
 be admitted or readmitted to their original 
 condition. 
 
 When such complaints are made of the Con- 
 gress, they are utterly without foundation. 
 Time enough has not elapsed yet to give rea- 
 sonable ground for dissatisfaction anywhere. 
 Time enough has not elapsed yet to say, as 
 was said by a gentleman on the other side of 
 the House the other day, that we were keeping 
 these States out of their places for party pur- 
 poses, with no evidence whatever to substan- 
 tiate the charge, except that we had not yet 
 closed our investigation of their condition. Do 
 Senators know what we have been doing? Do 
 Senators know what evidence we have been 
 taking ? Do Senators know what evidence we 
 have received? Do, Senators know anything 
 except that th.e President has expressed the 
 opinion that these States- ar.ein lit condition to 
 be received -here, and their. Senators and Rep- 
 resentatives admitted to seats upon this floor 
 and the floor of .the other House? 
 
 Before doing so, before placing ourselves in 
 a position where we may be nnable to exercise 
 all the powers necessary under the existing state 
 of things, in my judgment we must provide for 
 the safety of this people. If we think that consti- 
 tutional amendments are necessary arising from 
 the condition in which we have been, it is our 
 duty to i^ropose them. If we think that additional 
 
 LIBRfiRY OF CONGRESS 
 
 
 
 013 744 483 5 
 
 laws are necessary, it is our duty to pass those 
 laws. If we think that it is proper to impose 
 conditions — not conditions that would degrade 
 or disgrace any State, for when they come back 
 they must come on terms of ecpmlity — but if 
 we think it is necessary to impose some con- 
 ditions even upon these States on their return, 
 it is our duty to do that before we admit their 
 members to seats on this floor or the floor of 
 the other House. 
 
 That was the President's opinion. He under- 
 took to tell them that he would have nothing to 
 do with theirgovernments unless they made cer- 
 tain s])ecific provisions in their new constitu- 
 tions. .The President undertook to say, I will not 
 leave you to your own action, I will not recognize 
 your governments until you abolish slavery, 
 until you provide against the payment of the 
 rebel debt, and some other things of like de- 
 scription. If he had the right to do it, have 
 not we ? If he could impose conditions with 
 reference to what he would do, have we not the 
 I^ower to impose conditions with reference to 
 what we are called upon to do ? But, sir, while 
 I say this, I would not consent that a condition 
 should be imposed on one of these States that 
 would in any way degrade it, or of which there 
 could be just ground of complaint that it was not 
 left on an equality with all the other States, 
 because that would be a matter of complaint 
 forever and always. 
 
 Mr. President, I have thus stated the notions 
 that I entertain on the subject of reconstruc- 
 tion, as it is called. As I said before, it was 
 my intention to say something on that subject 
 long ago, but I found no fitting opportunity 
 hitherto. Perhaps I had better not have under- 
 taken to express these views to-day In connec- 
 tion with the resolution which I rose to discuss ; 
 but with the question, whether or not the Sen- 
 ate has power over this subject, and whether 
 or not the House of Representatives has power 
 over this subject, the question of the condition 
 of these States and the relations which they 
 now hold to the Union Is intimately connected. 
 My judgment is, that we hold the power over 
 that whole subject in our own hands, that it is 
 our duty to hold it in our own hands, and to 
 regard It as a matter of tJie most intense inter- 
 est to the whole people, involving the good of 
 the whole people, calling for our most careful 
 consideration, and to be adjudged without pas- 
 sion, without temper, without any of that feel- 
 ing which may be supposed to have arisen out 
 of the unexampled state of things through 
 which we have passed. 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 013 744 483 5 
 
 W>^.*,*.mm».»t»<*j*-