P^z/ 
 
 
UNIVERSAL AMNE 
 
 CONGRESS 
 
 7423 
 
 REMARKS 
 
 HON. ISAAC C. PARKER. 
 
 OF jMISSOXJRI, 
 
 IN REPLY TO MR. BLAIR, OF MISSOURI ; 
 
 DELIVERED 
 
 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 
 
 DECEMBER 21, 1871 
 
 WASHINGTON: 
 F. & J. RIVES & GEO. A. BAILEY, 
 
 REPORTERS AND PRINTERS OF TUB DEBATES OF CONGRESS. 
 1871. 
 
r 
 
 &&S 
 

 UNIVERSAL AMNESTY 
 
 Mr. Blair, of Missouri, in the course of hia 
 remarks in the House of Representatives, on the 
 "1st December, upon the question of amnesty, 
 :imong other tilings said: 
 
 "But. Air. Spciiker, I am told these men com- 
 mitted a great criiue; that they arc unworthy of 
 confidence, and beneath the notice of the American 
 l>eo|)le; sni'i that such unmistakably '* the doctrine 
 lichl by tbe Republiean party of this Union. What 
 crime, ,"\Ir. Speaker, have they been guilty of? Is 
 the crime committed by them in 1S61 in rebelling 
 against this Government any greater than that our 
 forefathers commi ted in raising the standard of 
 revolution agiiinst the mother country. England? 
 Is treason by American citizens against the Ameri- 
 can Government a greater crime than treason by 
 Briti.sh citizens against the British Government? 
 The people of the southern States to-day are guilty 
 of n<» greater crime, legally considered, than that 
 of which our forefathers were guilty when they 
 rebelled against the Government of England." 
 
 In reply thereto 
 
 Mr. PARKER, of Missouri, said: 
 
 Mr. Spkaker : I had not expected to say any- 
 thing upon this occasion ; but I am not satisfied 
 that the sentiments which liave fallen from my 
 colleague [.Mr. Blaiu] shall go to the House and 
 the country as a reflection of the views of any 
 clas.s of people in the State I have the honor in 
 part to represent. I do not believe, Mr. Speaker, 
 that in the great State of Missouri — a State 
 that was torn to tatters by the rebellion, a 
 State which has required the efforts ot an ener- 
 getic and determined people to place it again 
 on the road to peace aiid prosperity — I do not 
 believe there is in that State to-d.ay more than 
 one man who would be wiliingto avow uponthe 
 floor oflhe American Congress sentiments sucli 
 as have fallen from my colleague to-day, and 
 I believe that one man is the distinguished 
 gentleman who has just addressed you. You 
 ^cannot go to either the Democratic or Repub- 
 lican party of that Stale today and find any 
 man who is willing to stand before the country 
 and the world and justify the enormity, the 
 crime, the degradation and wickedness con- 
 nected with the system of American slavery 
 as it existed before the war. Yet we find the 
 
 gentleman here to-day going back even to Holy 
 Writ for the purpose of justifying the system 
 of slavery which existed here. 
 
 The gentleman ought to know that we are 
 living in a lirighter and better day, when the 
 rights of man are looked upoti as sacred, when 
 it is the highest aim aiul noblest purpo.se of 
 the good and true to assist and elevate the 
 downtrodden and oppressed, rather than to 
 justify or apoloarize for the system which de- 
 based and degraded them. A new era ha.s 
 dawned upon our country — an era in which 
 "peace on earth and good will toman" is the 
 polar star of the Christian statesman, and of 
 the great mass of men and women who look 
 upon all mankind, no matter (;f what Christian 
 faith or nationality or color, as men and broth- 
 ers. We arc indeed living under a new order 
 of things. Men now seek to be governed by 
 right and justice, rather than by oppression 
 and wrong. It is a period when it may be said 
 with some show of truth " that mercy and truth 
 are met together, righteousness and peace have 
 kissed each other." 
 
 The gentleman, while exploring the records 
 of the despotism of past ages, apjiearsto have 
 forgotten that it was proclaimed by the Sa- 
 viour of the world, when He taught tiie mul- 
 titude and through them all mankind, '• thai 
 all things wiiatsoever ye would that men 
 shotJid do to you, do yo even so to them, foi 
 this is the law and the prophets." 
 
 The gentleman is living in a past age. The 
 times have outrun him. He is unable to keep 
 pace with the progress made in favor of the rights 
 of man during the last ten eventful, terrible, 
 bloody years of our national history. Jn that 
 time slavery has been abolished ; its crimes, 
 its wickediips.-, the degradation and misfry 
 entailed by it are now lully known at)d haied 
 by men. Andall gootl men say '• Oh ! what a 
 monster was this which fastened itself niion 
 our system of government; what a Pro- 
 methean vulture was this which preyed uf^on 
 !l the verv vitals of our institutions and well 
 
nigh wrought their overthrow!" We are trying 
 in this age to forget the evils and wrongs of 
 the past. If men would but recognize the 
 fact that slavery is dead and buried in the 
 same grave of infamy with treason it would be 
 better for the nation, better for its citizens, 
 better for the cause of humanity, and better 
 for the rights of man everywhere. If men 
 would but endeavor to go forward instead of 
 backward, if they would but keep pace with 
 the mighty strides toward liberty and security 
 for all, which the nation has made in the last 
 decade, then we could say that America is the 
 propagandist of democracy and that we have 
 instituted the OTily successful republic of 
 ancient or modern times — a republic which 
 has been rendered sacred by the loyal blood shed 
 in its defense ; a republic of which the founda- 
 tions have been cemented by no unrighteously 
 spilled blood ; a republic founded on reason, on 
 the unalterable principles of humanity, neither 
 twisted nor forced fiom their natural channels to 
 harmonize with vice, wrong, and oppression. 
 Then we would know that American repub- 
 licanism, with commerce and the arts of peace 
 as its weapons, means the advancement of the 
 human race. 
 
 But as long as gentlemen undertake to 
 move the finger of destiny backward instead 
 of forward on the dial-plate of time, as long 
 as they endeavor to justify or gild over the 
 wrongs of the past instead of denouncing them 
 as crimes against God and humanity, just so 
 long will the true hearted and patriotic fear for 
 the safety of the great Repiiblic. 
 
 Why, I thought that the party with which 
 the gentleman has lately commenced to act 
 were asking us on this side of the House that 
 we should forget all the wrongs inflicted upon 
 the Government and its citizens in the past. 
 We have tried to forget them. We are for- 
 getting them, excepting the lingering re- 
 mains of crime, which are the legitimate out- 
 growth of that institution of slavery. There 
 is no other man in this House, whether he 
 sits on that side or this, who would think for 
 a moment of justifying human slavery as it 
 was in America, justifying an institution which 
 was anomalous as connected with a Gov- 
 ernment which proclaimed itself to be a 
 Government instituted for the protection of 
 the rights of all men — a Government founded 
 upon that immortal principle which declared 
 all men were free and equal. Why, both 
 political parties in this country, as 1 under- 
 stand it, are willing to acknowledge, they 
 are daily acknowledging, that slavery was 
 a crime, that it was a great wickedness, that 
 it did so warp and degenerate and draw aside 
 from the path of duty the minds of the south- 
 ern people as to place them in direct. hostil- 
 ity to our Government. They all concede 
 that, and the gentleman is the first member 
 of this House who has been willing to put 
 
 himself upon the record as justifying that 
 institution of slavery ; or, to put it as mildly 
 as possible, of apologizing for it. 
 
 But, Mr. Speaker, it is not this sentiment 
 which is most obnoxious to the people of my 
 State, though it grated so harshly on the ears of 
 the members of this House when it was uttered 
 by the gentleman. He asks the question, was 
 it any greater crime for Americans to rebel in 
 this country against the American Government 
 than for our forefathers to rebel against the 
 Government of Great Britain? I want it dis- 
 tinctly understood, that although we had one 
 third of our population in the State of Mis- 
 souri in armed hostility to the Government of 
 the United States during the rebellion, I do 
 not believe to-day in that State there is any 
 man who will put himself on the record as 
 taking a position of this kind. I cannot ex- 
 plain my friend's position in any other way 
 than by attributing it to the enthusiasm of a 
 new convert. I do not understand there is 
 any gentleman on the other side of the House 
 who would maintain that rebellion against the 
 Government of the United States was no crime. 
 The gentleman does not seem to be willing to 
 put himself in that position by declaring that 
 it was no greater crime than that of our fore- 
 fathers against the Government of Great Brit- 
 ain ; but he asks the question, thereby evidently 
 intending to convey the idea that one was no 
 greater crime than the other. 
 
 Now, Mr. Speaker, let us see how that was. 
 We all know that in 1861, when rebellion burst 
 on this land, when the people of the South 
 were dragooned into it — because I am willing 
 to concede, and 1 have believed all the time, 
 that the masses of the southern people were 
 led into this unholy and wicked strife for the 
 overthrow of the Government by their lead- 
 ers — immediately before Sumter was fired upon 
 on the 14th of April, 1861, every department of 
 this Government v/as in the possession of the 
 southern people or of the party which had been 
 the champion of their cause. All the prominent 
 offices of the Government were held by men 
 from that section of the country. They had 
 every department in their possession. They 
 had enjoyed the patronage of the Government 
 from the time of its formation to the time they 
 rebelled to a greater extent than the people of 
 any other section of the country. Then, did 
 they have any right on that ground to under- 
 take to tear down the Government and build up 
 in its stead a great slave empire where slavery 
 would be the rule and freedom the exception? 
 Well, what other rights of theirs were in- 
 vaded? The gentleman said their slave prop- 
 erty was in danger. If there was any agitation 
 wiiich grewup in this country and which soughi 
 to endanger their slave jiroperty, pray tell me 
 who began it? This question was understood 
 in the political history of the country to have 
 been settled entirely by what was called the 
 
Missouri compromise. Who sought to violate 
 that compromise, and to drag slavery before 
 the nation once more? Who opened up that 
 controversy and sought to viohitc that compro- 
 mise in order that other Territories might he 
 brought into the Union as States, which, in the 
 language of anotlier, "should be compelled to 
 submit, to the l)at(^fnl embracps of slavery?" It 
 was the party which had its scat and center in 
 the southern part of tlie United States. TIk; 
 slavery question was practically settled by tiiat 
 compromise line. It was taken from Congress, 
 and it was taken, as an agitating cause of 
 trouble, from betbrc the country. Yd it was 
 reopened; legislation was commenced upon 
 it again and by this very party. 
 
 Well, it might be said lliat in consequence 
 of a party t'uat was unfriendly to slavery elect- 
 ing a President of the United States that in- 
 stitution was rendered insecure. I want to 
 ask the question whether or not that President 
 did not in every declaration that fell from his 
 lips pledge himself to protect slavery under the 
 laws of the country? I want to ask the ques- 
 tion whether or not that President, after he was 
 installed in office, did not in one instance 
 return to slavery men who were seeking free- 
 dom? I want to ask the question whether or 
 not the position was not taken by that Pres- 
 ident in his inaugural message that this insti- 
 tution was to be as safe as it could be made 
 under the laws of this country ? I want to ask 
 the question whether or not the American Con- 
 gress did not pledge itself to protect slavery 
 in the States where it existed? Then, what 
 reason was there upon that ground for this re- 
 bellion? There was no reason anywhere for 
 it. There was no reason that can be given 
 that was a true one, except that which has been 
 given so many times before to the country — 
 the desire upon the part of a few men in the 
 southern States who sought to build up a slave 
 empire ; men who hated freedom and who loved 
 bondage ; men who desired a government where 
 aristocracy and caste should rule ; men who, 
 when they found they could not control the 
 American Government to such an extent as 
 to subvert it from the design of its original 
 founders, sought to build up a government that 
 should have in it an element of aristocracy, 
 which should recognize the rights of the few, 
 and leave unrecognized and unprotected and 
 uncared for the rights of the many. That was 
 the reason of this rebellion. 
 
 The fact, that the southern people, or most 
 of them, were made to believe that slavery was 
 endangered, was only one of the means that, 
 was resorted to by those men who sought to 
 '• tire the southern heart'' and to precipitate 
 tlu; cutton States into rebellion. Then, what 
 becomes of the inquiry as to the relative crini- 
 inality dC this rebellion against i he Governmeni 
 of the Uniti'd States and that of our forefathers 
 against Great Britain? 
 
 Mr. BLAIR, of Missouri. I would like to 
 ask the gentleman a question. 
 
 Mr. PAliKKi{. of Missouri. I yield to the 
 gentleman for that purpose. 
 
 Mr. BLAIR, of Missouri. I remarked tliat 
 the oflTenst! of those who rebelled against the 
 Government of England w;is that they had 
 violated the laws of the land, and that the 
 people of the South had done nothing more, 
 and that both were guilty of treason, and that 
 those who rebelled against this Government, 
 so far as crime was concerned, could not be 
 any more guilty than our forefathers were. If 
 the gentleman can make a distinction or a 
 difference there 1 would like him to do it. 
 
 Mr. PARKER, of Missouri. I can see very 
 little distinction between the position assumed 
 by the gentleman in the first instance and 
 that assumed by him now. There is a differ- 
 ence, however, between the cases he has men- 
 tioned. Everybody recognizes, the world over, 
 that there is an inherent right existing in 
 mankind to overturn established order as a 
 dernier ressnrt for the protection of human 
 life and human liberty and human property. 
 But in this case we had a Government that 
 guarantied, theoretically and practically, pro- 
 tection to all these elements of human happi- 
 ness ; in the other case we had a Govern- 
 ment that sought to degrade and debase life 
 and liberty on this continent. In one case we 
 had a Government controlled by the very men 
 who lifted the wicked and impious hand of 
 treason against the flag of our country ; in 
 the other case we had a people whose inter- 
 ests were controlled three thousand miles 
 across the briny deep. In one case we had a 
 people secured and protected in every right 
 that they were entitled to under any system of 
 government ; in the other case we had men 
 who were entitled to rights that were not pro- 
 tected by the Government. The simple differ- 
 ence and the simple distinction between the 
 two cases is that our torefathers had a just 
 cause tolhrow off the yoke of English tyranny, 
 and those who rebelled against the Govern- 
 ment of the United States did it without a 
 shade of a shadow of a cause. Our forefathers 
 struck for God and liberty : those who rebelled 
 against our Governmeni struck for despotism 
 and slavery. 
 
 Mr. BIjAIR. of Missouri. In vour opinion. 
 Mr. PARKER, of Missouri.' Well, does 
 the gentleman think that they liad a cause? 
 
 Mr. BLAIR, of Missouri. lam not passing 
 judgment upon that. My argument is drawn 
 from the conscience of those who were engaged 
 in the rebellion. 1 did not involve myself in 
 it, for it is known tliat I have been anti-slavery 
 for years, but I was treating it from the stand- 
 point of those who were engaged in the rebel- 
 lion, who had held the institution fora century 
 or mon.', and I say tinit ihit pnople, so longas 
 they believed that slavery was riglit, could have 
 
6 
 
 no conscientious scruples, or believe they were 
 guilty of crime. 
 
 Mr. PARKER, of Missouri. That does not 
 answer my question. After I had assumed a 
 position here, my colleague said, "That is so, 
 in your opinion." Well, that is so, in my 
 opinion, and I hope to Heaven that it will 
 , always remain so. Now, I want the gentleman 
 to be equally fair with me, and to give the 
 House his opinion as to whether he thought 
 it right or wrong. 
 
 xMr. BLAIR, of Missouri. Slavery right? 
 Mr. PARKER, of Missouri. The rebellion. 
 Mr. BLAIR, of Missouri. The rebellion; 
 no, sir. I never believed it was right. 
 
 Mr. PARKER, of Missouri. That answers 
 my question. 
 
 Mr. BLAIR, of Missouri. But then I am 
 not the judge of their conduct. They are to 
 be held responsible for their own conscientious 
 views on that subject, and not mine. And so 
 it was with our mother country, England. 
 She regarded our forefathers in the same light 
 that you today regard the rebels in the South. 
 They looked on them as traitors, as rebelling 
 against one of the best Governments on earth. 
 They used the same arguments that you use 
 to-day. 
 
 Mr. PARKER, of Missouri. The gentle- 
 man answers my question at last, and says he 
 does not believe the rebellion was right. I am 
 very sorry to see my colleague put himself in 
 the position of becoming an apologist in this 
 House for that which he believes was wrong. 
 There is a distinctive difference between right 
 and wrong, and whenever a gentleman is sat- 
 isned that a matter is wrong he ought never 
 to justify it or to become its apologist. 
 
 Mr. BLAIR, of Missouri. Will the gentle- 
 man say in what sense I am the apologist of 
 the rebellion? 
 
 Mr. PARKER, of Missouri. I have been 
 very indulgent to my colleague. 
 
 Mr. BLAlR, of Missouri. I hope the gen- 
 tleman will not make statements unless he gives 
 me the opportunity of asking questions by way 
 of explanation, at least. 
 
 Mr. PARKER, of Missouri. I will answer 
 the gentleman by quoting on him the remark- 
 able speech that just fell from iiis lips, and if 
 that was not an apolog}^ and not an etfort upon 
 his part to justify this crime against the Gov- 
 ernment tiien I fail to understand the meaning 
 of the English language. Why, even our col- 
 leagues upon this door, the honorable gentle- 
 men who have been admitted here, who were 
 disfranchised under the laws of the country, 
 and who are now entitled to sit here with us, 
 and who are our peers here, are not found jus- 
 tifying ihis rebellion by any means. They are 
 not doing it. No man upon this floor does it, 
 except as it has l)eea done by the genth^man 
 here to-day. And the time has come, 1 think, 
 in this country, if we desire peace and harmony 
 
 and prosperity throughout the whole extent of 
 this broad domain, when gentlemen should not 
 only cease to justify the rebellion, but sliould 
 commence to denounce it as a crime, and not 
 only as a crime of ordinarj- extent, but one 
 that was extremely wicked, one that caused 
 the destruction of hundreds of thousands of 
 the bravest and best men in the land, one that 
 destroyed millions of property, one that still 
 leaves its scars upon the institutions of this 
 country, one that came nigh tearing from 
 beneath this noble governmental fabric of 
 ours the very foundations upon which it rests. 
 And I want to say here that as the gentle- 
 man has become suspicious of the Republican 
 party, the party he has been acting with in 
 the past, the party he claims that he fought on 
 the side of during the war, I want to say here 
 that so far as that party is concerned, although 
 we may occasionally hear the charge hurled at 
 it that it is illiberal and proscriptive and tyran- 
 nical and all that sort of thing, there is not 
 a party whose acts have been recorded upon 
 the pages of the world's history that has deeds 
 of charity and forgiveness and kindness writ- 
 ten upon its record in such burning letters of 
 light as has the Republican party of this na- 
 tion. It is a party of charity and a party of 
 forgiveness. Tell me, Mr. Speaker, a govern- 
 ment under the sun which, alter men had re- 
 belled without cause, without a decent pre- 
 text, without any justification in the world, 
 and after they had caused ruin and destruction 
 and devastation such as was witnessed upon 
 every hand at the close of this war in 1SG5 — 
 tell me of a government that would have dealt 
 so lightly witli the leaders of that rebelliou as 
 the Government of the United States, under 
 the controlof the Republican party, has done. 
 Almost every demand that has been made 
 by those men who were in the rebellion has 
 been complied with by this party. They came 
 up here after the war, asking that they should 
 be recognized. The Republican party said 
 there was one condition-precedent, which was 
 that we must have guarantees that they would 
 no more lift the hand of revolt against the 
 Government. The Republican party said to 
 them, " You must insure protection to life, lib- 
 erty, and property to every citizen in your 
 section of the country, from the highest to the 
 lowest." When those things were giiarantiod, 
 those States were admitted to representation 
 in this House and in the Senate. When that 
 was done it was believed that time would 
 heal the harshness that had been left by the 
 rebellion. 
 
 Butwhatdo we witness to-day? An attempt 
 is being made in some localities of the veiy 
 region of country that was ni revolt against 
 the Govennnent to do what? To protect life, 
 liberty, and property? No. sir; but to crush 
 out of existence men whose only crimes seem 
 to be that they are black, and are loyal to the 
 
'Government. This question can no longer be 
 lone of controversy. The matter has come up 
 'in the courts of the country, where facts have 
 t been developed that ouj;;ht to cause the chec-k 
 of every honest man fu blush for shame that 
 such infamous conduct should be practiced 
 under a Government pledged to the protection 
 of the life, liberty, and properly of the citizen. 
 
 The fact that there are men banded together 
 for the purpose of destroying the rights of 
 others in the southern States, because they do 
 not agree with them in political sentiments, 
 is no longer a mooted question. The wonder- 
 ful and astonishing thing is that an attempt 
 should be made to justify such conduct. Who- 
 ever heard of an attempt to justify murder 
 because the victim may be said to have com- 
 mitted some crime? Why should these name- 
 less crimes in the southern States be excused 
 in the manner in which it is done here? 
 
 We hear a great deal about the necessity of 
 general amnesty. Sir. this House at it last 
 session passed a bill, for which I together 
 with a great majority of the Republicans iu 
 this House voted, and which went over to the 
 other House, from whose provisions are ex- 
 cluded only about one thousand men in all the 
 United States. A stranger in this land, unac- 
 quainted with the rights which all citizens en- 
 joy under the laws of the United States and 
 of the several States, would understand from 
 the remarks of my colleague [Mr. Blair] that 
 men were terribly oppressed here ; that in 
 some sections of the country they were deprived 
 of their rights as citizens. There is not a State 
 in this Union, except perhaps there may be 
 one, where any man is disfranchised, where 
 every man has not the right to vote, unless he 
 is a criminal and disfranchised by the judg- 
 ment of a court. They all have equal rights 
 in that respect. The man who bared his bosom 
 in the cause of his country, together with the 
 man who raised his arm against that country, 
 both alike can go to the polls and vote. Is 
 there no charity, no kindness in that? 
 
 And let me tell the gentleman that that was 
 ^,ot granted by this Government because the 
 >yal people of these States did not believe 
 hat rebellion was a crime. No, sir ; it was 
 pimply granted as an act of charity, and in the 
 \ope that those who received that charity 
 Mild be able to appreciate that act of gen- 
 erosity and kindness, and would be willing in 
 the future to stand side by side with every 
 good citizen for the protection and security of 
 the Government of the whole country. That 
 is why that right was granted to them, notwith- 
 standing the great crime they had committed. 
 
 Now, who are those who are not included in 
 the provisions of the bill of amnesty passed 
 by the House at its last session ? Thoy are the 
 men who brought ruin upon the southern States 
 and desolated them ; the men who caused them 
 to be laid waste, who caused the residence of 
 
 the planter to be lighted up with the torch of 
 the incendiary, who caused the lurid light of 
 war to glimmer upon every mountain-top, on 
 every hill-side, in every valley in the southern 
 States. They are the men who, in 18til, stood 
 up in the Senate Chamber, and, as they pre- 
 pared to leave the Hall, said they would have 
 a Government to suit their selfish purposes, 
 and, holding up their white handkerchiefs, 
 boasted that their efforts to do so would not 
 cause blood enough to flow to stain tiiem. 
 Those are the men who to-day, through the 
 mouth of the gpntiemati here, are asking that 
 we should deal liberally with them. 
 
 Sir, the Republican party of this country 
 has no feeling of unkindness for the people of 
 the South. The Republican party knows no 
 section, neither North nor South, neither Ea.st 
 nor West. It is the only truly national party 
 that has ever existed in the history of this Gov- 
 ernment. Its advocates, and those who believe 
 in its principles, can be found among the ever- 
 glades of Florida as well as amid the snow- 
 capped regions of Alaska ; they are every- 
 where. The Republican party is national in 
 its character. It has no feeling of unkind- 
 ness toward the people of the South who were 
 drawn by their leaders into rebellion. Every 
 step they have taken to bind up the bleeding 
 wounds of this nation and to heal the differ- 
 ences of the past has been characterized by 
 kindness, and forbearance, and forgiveness. 
 
 I know we hear it said that the Congress of 
 the nation has been guilty of harsh legislation ; 
 but 1 ask, has Congress, in its efforts to heal 
 divisions and cement the people more closely 
 together, ever passed a law that was not 
 intended for the protection of the innocent 
 against the efforts of the guilty to deprive 
 them of their rights? Then why should men, 
 if they are guiltless, if they have not imbrued 
 their hands in the innocent blood of those men 
 who were lately emancipated, characterize our 
 conduct as a party by those harsh and oppro- 
 brious terms which they are constantly hurl- 
 ing against us? I can say to gentlemen upon 
 the other side that the Repul)lican party of this 
 country will go as far as themselves toward 
 enfranchisement or anything else, if you can 
 satisfy it that the country is perfectly secure 
 and that by such a measure the harmony and 
 prosperity of the nation are to be promoted. 
 But it does not look well for gentlemen to stand 
 up in the House of Representatives of the 
 United States and plead for a man who but a 
 few short months ago proclaimed to the south- 
 ern people, who were becoming quiet and peace- 
 able once more, that their cause — "the lost 
 cause," the cause of treason, the cause of 
 those who sought to tear down the Govern- 
 ment — was not dead, but only sleeping. 
 
 I do not believe the lime has quite come yet 
 that a man of that kind should be permitted 
 to stand side by;aide with and as the peer of 
 
 \ 
 
Charles Sumner iu the American Senate. I do 
 not believe, for one, that the time has quite come 
 for any such thin^' as that; but I will go as far 
 as any one toward giving enfranchisement and 
 all the rights men can enjoy under this Gov- 
 ernment to the masses of the people of the 
 southern States, to the men who are willing to 
 recognize the fact that we are living under a 
 new order of things ; that a new era has dawned 
 on the country, an era where liberty is the rule 
 and despotism and slavery the exceptions. 
 
 x\nd, Mr. Speaker, let me say to my friends 
 on the other side of the Chamber that it seems 
 to me, when they are advocating the rights 
 of the South, when they are advocating the 
 claims of the southern people, there are many 
 thifigs which they are neglecting here — not 
 intentionally, of course. There is a work of 
 reconstruction which can go on j , ^nd which 
 can bi-ing about peace and harmony to a greater 
 extent than has-yet been permitted, and that 
 is, for them to seek to develop the resources of 
 the fertile country they may have the honor to 
 represent. There issome disposition in some 
 localities of the country to keep out capital 
 and enterprise, because they may happen to 
 come from some other section. This is surely 
 wrong. This work of reconstruction will be 
 only fully consummated, will be only fully 
 carried out, entire peace, security, and happi- 
 ness will only reign, when commerce shall 
 carry its good work into those States, and when 
 capital and enterprise from all sections of the 
 country shall be invited among them. It seems 
 to me this is the most practical work to which 
 gentlemen from that section of the country 
 could devote themselves. 
 
 And let me say, Mr. Speaker, that the Re- 
 publican party does not believe that the rebel- 
 lion was not a crime. It has sought to brand 
 it as a crime. It has sought to place its infamy 
 where it can be read by him who runs. At 
 the same time it is willing to go as far as the 
 safety and security of the country and the 
 prosperity and happiness of the people will 
 warrant it, in granting amnesty to these lead- 
 ers. It is now only the leaders who are ex- 
 cepted, not the masses of the people who were 
 dragooned into this thing. We know that 
 hundreds and thousands of them were not 
 conscious of what they were doing. The Re- 
 publican party has recognized that. All their 
 misconduct has been obliterated, in a legal 
 point of view at least. It is only the leaders, 
 the men who persuaded them into it, and soon 
 there will only be a few, comparatively speak- 
 
 ing, of those who remain. I think we have 
 gone as far for the peace of the country in 
 that direction as we ought to go at this time. 
 
 No man asks these men, the Republican'' 
 party has not asked them, to get down on their 
 knees and ask forgiveness. The gentleman is 
 mistaken if he thinks the party with which he has 
 heretofore acted has ever asked at the hands 
 of these men any such thing; but it is asked. 
 it is demanded at their hands, that they shall 
 assist in guarantying the rights of all men, 
 no matter who they may be. Until they show 
 a willingness and disposition to do that, until 
 they show a willingness and disposition to 
 recognize the rights of colored men in those 
 States, as well as the rights of white men, I 
 think the Congress of the United States ought 
 to deny to these men equal rights in this Govern- 
 ment. I believe that to be the sentiment of 
 the people in my State. I do not believe the 
 people of the great State of Missouri to-d-s-y 
 would vote for any such measure as the gentle- 
 man has proposed. I do not believe that it is 
 any reflection of their sentiments when gentle- 
 men on this floor claim that the Republican 
 party, being the dominant party of the nation, 
 is cruel, unjust, illiberal, and proscriptive, when 
 it fails to recognize the fact that Jefferson Davis, 
 and Toombs, and Stephens, and all these men, 
 are entitled to the rights of all other citizens. 
 There oughtto be some distinction somewhere. 
 
 Gentlemen say we admire these men who 
 fought against the Government. We may ad- 
 mire their courage, but we hate their crime, 
 and that is about the view we take of this mat- 
 ter ; and, speaking as liberally as we can while 
 there is patriotism existing in the country, 
 while there is love of country in the breast of 
 man, I hope there will be a majority of the 
 people of the whole land who will hate any 
 attempt to subvert the Government of our com- 
 mon country. 
 
 It is as well gentlemen should recognize the 
 fact that there are other things to be taken into 
 consideration besides emancipation from this 
 cloud which hangs over Jefferson Davis. There 
 are a few humble peojDle in the southern States 
 whose rights are as sacred to the Republican 
 party as the rights of the most pow-erful in 
 the land, and I think we ought to be able to 
 guaranty protection for life, liberty, and prop- 
 erty to those people before we grant amnesty to 
 men who are still striving to fan the flames of 
 hatred, and to cause them to burn with more 
 intense heat against these people than ever 
 before. 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 1 nil III 
 
 013 744 742 3 
 
 pH8J