E 
 
Class JL4SX)- 
 
^ 
 
 ^ 
 

 SPEECH 
 
 HON. L. M. MORRILL, 
 
 OF MAINE, 
 
 ON THE 
 
 CONFISCATION OF PEOPERTY. 
 
 DELIVEEED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, MARCH 5, 1862. 
 
 The Senate having resumed the consideration of the bill to confiscate tbe 
 property and free the slaves of rebels, Mr. MORRILL said : 
 
 Mr. President : The great measure before us — and none 
 greater has ever been before the Senate — has been character- 
 ised in this debate in earnest, eloquent, indignant, and I think 
 I am authorized to say, satirical speech, as extraordinary, un- 
 constitutional, oppressive, and inexpedient. When I freely 
 confess to its opponents that it does not belong to the class of 
 ordinary legislation, I concede no more than must be confessed 
 of much that has been done on behalf of the nation, here 
 and elsewhere, by the national Legislature and by the Fede- 
 ral Executive since our troubles began. 
 
 Sir, it were better that that man had not been born who 
 shrinks from taking the responsibility when a distracted 
 and bleeding country requires in its public servants, " the 
 dauntless spirit of resloution." As to the rest: the Consti- 
 tution, I conceive, is the strength and shield of the nation 
 in its hour of peril, and must not be construed so as fatally 
 to hamper honest endeavor in its behalf. Clemency on the 
 lips of an American Senator to the malignant enemy of the 
 Republic is cruelty to its friends; and that is expedient 
 which is demanded for the present safety and future security 
 of free institutions. I premise this much as the stand-point 
 of the debate, and in this spirit I approach its general topics. 
 
 The bill under consideration contemplates the exercise of 
 the extreme legislative power of the nation for purposes of 
 self-preservation and for the chastisement and overthrow of 
 its domestic enemies. The primary object of the bill, as I 
 read it, in i's general scope and bearing — I do not speak of 
 its details— is the suppression of rebellion. It apparently 
 

 proceeds upon the assumption that the insurrection is incited 
 by a faction in the shxve States, holders of the vast proportion 
 of the property and slaves in those States ; that this property 
 and these slaves constitute the incentive and form the mate- 
 rial base of the rebellion ; and that, therefore, it becomes the 
 light aud duL^ of thp nation, from tli. height of its extreme 
 authority to award the penalty of concle«ination of estate 
 and lorleiture of control over persons to those wl,o thus con- 
 spire against the Government and make war on its auikority 
 But, sir, at the threshold of this measure, as, indeed, at th& 
 outset of every effort on the pffrt of the friends of the Gov- 
 ernment to defend it against the machinations of conspirators 
 and to put down this most impious rebellion, we are met with 
 a flat denial of adequate constitutional authority. 
 
 The nation is involved in the perils of civil war, demanding 
 the instant and decisive exercise of its utmost powers and 
 combined energies, and yet it is painfully obvious that there 
 exists the most embarrassing contrariety of opinions as to the 
 constitutional powers of Congress, and the policy demanded 
 by the public emergency. Under these circumstances, it is a 
 matter of the first importance to ascertain the extent of the 
 authority,_where it is lodged, and upon whom the responsi- 
 bility for its exercise is to rest. The powers and duties we 
 shall assign to the Government will depend, I think, upon 
 what shall be determined to be the actual condition of the 
 nation — whether that of peace or war. 
 
 Plainly enough, the general and ordinary powers of the Gov- 
 ernment, under the Constitution, are applicable to the nation 
 in a state of peace ; and yet as clearly the Constitution con- 
 templates the exercise of powers and the performance of duties 
 peculiar to a state of war. Is the nation in that condition 
 which devolves upon the Government the exercise of power 
 common to a state of general hostilities? "Constitutionally 
 speaking," to use the phrase in vogue here, is the nation in a 
 state of war- and if so, what are its powers, under the Con- 
 stitution, and to what extent do the public perils render the 
 exercise of those powers necessary and expedient? The power 
 of the Government over its domestic enemies, the necessity 
 and expediency of its exercise, are the topics to which I in- 
 vite attention. First, is the nation, for purposes offensive and 
 defensive, for all questions of its authority, to be regarded in 
 a state of loar ? 
 
 It should be obseryed that the Goyernment has made no 
 formal declaration of war, and (hat the conflict is between 
 the established Government and members of the sam* Gov- 
 ernment. But it will not be questioned that a state d war 
 may exist between the Government and a portion of th* pen- 
 pie, and that no formal declaration , is necessary to legalize 
 
 West. EeB.Hlrt. BOO. 
 
hostilities. That a general state of hostilities exists, need not 
 now be argued, and will not be questioned. That the nation 
 has passed through the period of hesitation between peace 
 and war, conciliation and authority, compromise and coercion 
 s equally clear. As to the policy of war as the only solu- 
 • tiou of the national troubles, the necessity of a contest of 
 arms to repel insults, redress injuries, and to establish abso- 
 lutely and toreyer the supremacy of the national Government 
 over Its domestic enemies, all truly loyal men everywhere 
 are now happiy agreed. And, sirf this"^ condition of ^the na- 
 tion is not, and from the beginning of the conflict throuo-h 
 all its successive stages of threat and menace to open aSd 
 armed assault upon its authority, has not been optional and 
 ^ounraryonourpart; but throughout, the stern alternative 
 has been constantly presented to the Government of abiect 
 submission to the impious designs of a malignant faction or 
 the manly and patriotic vindication of its integrity 
 r.«S ' ^W"" 1^ impartial performance of its duties to all 
 parties, and to all parts of the Union, the authority of the 
 Government was set at defiance throughout a large portion of 
 
 ar.S. '^ \ '^' f'"'"^'^"' ^' ^ Government derided; its forts, 
 aisenas, custom-houses, navy-yards, ships of war, aid public 
 property— the substantive tokens of its national supremacy— 
 nffr.1 ""' P^^^^of ^a^N and employed to disturb that tran- 
 SpI nf-^.^'^'TT f f S'^ ^"^ ^"'"^' 5 the public press silenced ; 
 npS n? ^ United States guilty of no offense, and sus- 
 
 drfvonfn '?^' •'T^^M.'-^'^ '^'^ U^^^"' imprisoned or 
 wioC T*""" ^'^"^l^' d^«l^«i"g^ at length, a bold and 
 tTnrlinJ P^'^'^^V^-^'-^'^^^^^ ^"^"-^ communities, and ex- 
 St^fpr^hi''-^ combining in its plans and purposes several 
 on Iwi.r''? ^ military organization which put'^these States 
 thefi^Sl^^^"^?^^'''*^ peace,, and which brought into 
 numwfh''^ ^^^^^ ^^^k a°d file were 
 
 Zn...! ^^^"/''^'^/*^T'^"^«' ammated by the auda- 
 
 aid ravpn?r? ""{? 'Pf ^^. ^'^7°"" ^^P^° ^^^ ^^tional capital, 
 and lavening for the plunder of northern cities 
 
 frPm;%Tfy""'"^'*?' ^\ ^''^ ^^^ ^ ^^"^^'^1 Of men in the ex- 
 SDr^ad ^h'l^' rr ^^T ^^^^^l^ties, artfully fomenting discontent, 
 ?Zl% t '"^.^^^^"/o other communities, until they came to 
 L thet S?«?p''''' f '^\T^ ^}^'''' Emboldened by success 
 ron. fo-f- f ;/• ^ maddened by recent popular demonstra- 
 w«r nn^fl!'''- ^^J- "?'^^ '^^^^^^' ^^^^ ^t length made open 
 dZwn^ J^^risdiction of the United Statesfand opened a 
 deadly cannonade upon a fort held by a handful of men, sim- 
 ply as custodians of the Federal authority. 
 
 .n.,/j °''^i'''' ^"""^^^ °''^ misunderstand this unprovoked, 
 
 '^^rderous, and cowardly assault. Long-standing conspiracy 
 against the Government having passed tlrough tie successive 
 
stages of sedition and insurrection, now broke into open rebel- 
 lion, declaring at the cannon's mouth its purpose to overthrow 
 republican institutions, and to erect on the ruins of the Repub- 
 lic an oligarchy, hostile to Liberty and inimical to the civilza- 
 tion of a Christian age. 
 
 The Government, at length comprehending its danger and 
 the designs for its subversion, proclaimed its purposes of de- 
 fense. At the national summons, more than half a million 
 of patriot men, hundreds of thousands more than the estimated 
 need, heroically volunteered, and now, at the end of a few 
 short months, stand in serried ranks, country-loving, God- 
 fearing, bold, defiant men, a numerous and resistless host, im- 
 patiently demanding to be shown the enemy of our peace. 
 
 The nation, sir, it may be assumed, is in a state of war — 
 involuntary war on its part, insurrectionary, causeless, re- 
 bellious war on the part of its domestic enemies. And it 
 matters not that it is not purely public war — conflict between 
 two or more nations; civil conflict is as positively and unqual- 
 ifiedly war, and ]ias its laws as well defined as conflict between 
 two nations. It surely, Mr. President, is not a state oi partial 
 hostilities, combining a few persons, invading a few places, 
 and extending to and involving minor interests. Literally, 
 the country is a camp and the nation an army. The war 
 reaches to the confines of the Republic; levies its contribu- 
 tions on loyal men by millions of dollars each day ; has daily 
 sacrifices in the camp and on the field of scores of heroic men : 
 and accepts its recruits from every city, town, and hamlet in 
 the land. 
 
 Sir, let us not mistake. It is war in its most gigantic pro- 
 portions — insurrectionary war upon the land, and piratical 
 war upon the sea — not for redress of grievances, not to recover 
 rights lost or impaired, not to escape from a heavy load of 
 burdens no longer tolerable, but for objects and with motives 
 and conduct which put the conspirafors beyond the rights of 
 civilized warfare, and which invest the nation with the high 
 prerogatives of war, and forces upon the Government the ex- 
 ercise of its extreme power for self-defense. To balance longer 
 on the condition of the nation or question its power will prove 
 fatal. We should stand no longer on the hope of conciHation ; 
 we are fully committed to war as our remedy j a deadly con- 
 flict is upon the nation; begun, high advanced, wields a sword 
 already red with its best blood, consumes its weahh, wastes its 
 substance, the which if you do not bring to a speedy close, by 
 bold, determined, successful battle, will degenerate into a re- 
 morseless national hroil, adding to the horrors of general war 
 the miseries of intestine disorder, gaunt famine, general demo- 
 ralization and desolation, and which, if the nation do not tri- 
 umph, by an unconditional assertion and vindication of its 
 
'jhsolute supremacy^ will end in the extinction of all hope of 
 popular government. 
 
 Our condition, sir, being that of civil war, I think it must 
 be manifest that the nation possesses all the rights and powers 
 necessary for self-preservation and for dealing with its enemies 
 that are common to a nation in that situation. Clearly the 
 Constitution contemplates the contingency when the Govern- 
 ment may be required to draw the sword, both as against ex- 
 ternal and internal enemies, and wisely provides for such an 
 event by the institution of an army and navy, and a system 
 of militia ; and in such contingency imposes no limitation on 
 its power, but plainly designed that it should be left wholly 
 unrestricted, to exercise all the powers and rights of a nation 
 forced to take up arms for its defense. 
 
 While, under the Constitution, a State of peace is the nor- 
 mal condition of the nation, and while that instrument care- 
 fully defines and limits the powers of the Government and 
 guards the rights of the States, leaving them free to pursue 
 their internal aiiairs in their own way, a state of hostilities, of 
 insurrectionary war, is contemplated; and in such an event 
 the power of the Government over all its enemies, whether 
 internal or external, is unlimited and unrestrained, and is con- 
 trolled only by the law of nations. The nation may then deal 
 with its enemies in any way its exigencies may require, not 
 repugnant to the principles of public law. 
 
 Sir, the amplitude of the power of the nation was forecast 
 in the significant phrase of the preamble to the Constitution, 
 itself a compendium of the objects and duties of Government: 
 ^'To form a more perfect union," "establish justice," "insure 
 domestic tranquility," "provide for the common defense," 
 " promote the general welfare," " secure the blessings of lib- 
 erty.'^ In its civil functions the Constitution provides for 
 Government with limited power and duties, general in their 
 character, and chiefly applicable to external affairs. Its war 
 power is of the most absolute character ; the right of making 
 war, the expediency and necessity of an appeal to arms, are 
 expressly given to the Federal Government, and the States 
 are as expressly forbidden to exercise them. And, sir, the 
 war power is not an incidental, but a substantive power, ex- 
 pressly conferred, and is that extreme power known to nations 
 as the ultima ratio^ at the declaration of which civil privi- 
 leges are in abeyance and municipal laws silent. Strange 
 delusion of the times, that it ever should have been doubted 
 that the nation possessed the powers necessary for selt-preser- 
 vation % 
 
 The specific grants of power in the Constitution cover the 
 whole subject of public hostilities, and every variety of na- 
 tional conflict; " maj define and punish piracy on the high 
 
seas ;" ^"declare war ;" " make rules for captures on land and 
 
 water ; raise and support armies ;" " call forth the militia/' 
 to suppress insurrection or repel invasion." 
 1 am aware, sir, that there are those who do not a^ree to 
 this assumed power of the Federal Government, those who 
 sti-angelj insist that internal disorder, a state of general inter- 
 nal hostihties, IS m "no constitutional sense war-" that the 
 nation is fatally hampered by its organic law, and in such 
 case can perform none of those acts of aelf-defence which are 
 the essential characteristics of Government ; that the Consti- 
 tutioii at best provides for a sort of quasi Government in its 
 relations to the States, and was purposely left without the 
 power of entorcmg obedience to its authority. In the lanffua<^e 
 the late President, ".the Federal Executive has no authority to 
 to decide what shall be the relations between the Federal Gov- 
 ernment and the States ;" that " Congress possesses no author- 
 ity, by force of arms, to compel a State to remain in the Union •" 
 that "while Congress possesses many powers of preserving the 
 Union by concihahon, the sword was not placed in their hands 
 to preserve it by forced 
 
 Sir, the dark page of our history will be that which records 
 these- opinions, not as the delirium of mad ambition, not as 
 the dreams of the human mind, but as the semi-authoritative 
 utterances of the chief "public functionary" of the nation in 
 the hour of its trial and peril, l^o public officer had ever be- 
 fore so sinned, so blundered. There had been gi-eat crimes 
 and _great_ criminals, from the days of the false prophets to 
 Davis— crimes against country, society, humanity ; traitors"in 
 ovr own times; rebels beside "fallen angels," and little an- 
 terior to the " angel of the bottomless pit ;" but no such base 
 compound of weakness and wickedness as is disclosed inUliis 
 traitorous speech ; himself in some large sense the State its 
 representative and chief, conceding to the enemies of its peace 
 what makes his authority a sham, and degrades the majesty 
 and grandeur of the commonwealth to the dead level'of a 
 commercial partnership. 
 
 Set, sir, as a sentinel to guard the approaches to the citadel 
 cognizant of the fact of a long-standing conspiracy for its as- 
 sault, familiar with the infernal counsels that for four years 
 had been plotting its overthrow in his very presence, he still 
 hesitates, as if halting between abstract love of the mischief 
 contemplated and self-will, absurdly denying the riqht of the 
 conspirators to take his official life,' and questioning his own 
 " constitutional authority" to defend it, and at length compro- 
 mising the whole matter by tlie sublime sophism that " Con- 
 gress has many powers of i3reserving the Union by concilia- 
 tion, none by force." The height of this argument will con- 
 stitute the bad eminence of the public functionary, as through 
 
all time it will carry tlie conviction, whenever repeated, of a 
 resort to a pitiful subterfuge to avoid responsibility, when the 
 peace and safety of his country demanded a brave and manly 
 word from its executive chief. He has doubtless learned, ere 
 this, that " to be weak is miserable, doing or suffering." 
 
 There seems, sir, some fatal delusion misleading the minds 
 of those who thus reason and act. The history of the origin of 
 the Constitution, as well as the progress of the nation under 
 it, shows that its founders designed to provide for a govern- 
 ment with the essential attributes of government for " domes- 
 tic tranquillity," as well as for foreign relations. Until the 
 sentiment of government, under the Constitution, sovereign 
 and absolute within its sphere, shall take possession of the 
 minds of the American people, there can be no Union per- 
 fected, no tranquillity secured, no civil liberty attained. As 
 well expect the results of a superintending Providence from 
 an atheistic pantheism, the harmony of the planets without 
 the central power to control them in their orbits : 
 
 " The glorious planet, Sol, 
 In noble eminence enthroned, and shepherd 
 Amid the rest." 
 
 But, sir, let the nation rejoice that, with the close of the 
 administration of the partisan President, the beguiled official, 
 liis political sophism lost its power, and that the whole breed 
 of politicians who could insanely repeat disloyal sentiments 
 while the country trembled on the brink of dissolution, is well 
 nigh extinct in a large portion of the nation. •' '.- 
 
 And, sir, here I regret to feel obliged to notice, in passing, 
 that these sentiments and opinions are not yet considered 
 wholly out of place in the Senate. 
 ? "We were told the other day by the honorable Senator from 
 Virginia, " that, constitutionally speaking, this is not a war 
 in which we are engaged." 
 
 Pray, sir, what is a war, and what are its characteristics, 
 and how shall it ever be known when a nation is at war? 
 *'War," says Mr. Jefferson, " is a conflict in which the parties 
 endeavor to do each other all the harm they can." Tried by 
 this standard, are the conspirators making war on the United 
 States? 
 
 What, sir, could men or devils do that they have not done, 
 are now doing, or attempting, to subvert this free Govern- 
 ment, and lay it in ruins ! To carry this fiendish purpose into 
 effect at the point of the bayonet, they have taken up arms, 
 organized a military despotism in a large portion of our ter- 
 ritory, robbed loyal men of their property, and thrown them 
 ^into prisons, captured or burned your commerce on the seas, 
 marched armies for the subjugation of States, and now be- 
 
8 
 
 leagner your national capital. Does not the honorable Sen- 
 ator see in all this the "grim visage and stern look of war?" 
 True, we are not, have not been making war ; but we are 
 waging war already begun and forced upon the Government„ 
 In its designs, plans, and appointments, it is inveterate, and 
 vengeful, and exhibits war as seldom sung or painted : 
 
 "The death shot hissing from afar, 
 The shock, the shout, the groan of war." 
 
 "A dark, a desperate game 
 
 Where lives and limbs and hearts and souls of men 
 Are staked for knaves." 
 
 Not war ! Then what shall we write upon the tombstones 
 of Ellsworth, Winthrop, Lyon, Baker, Lander, and scores of 
 brave hearts that have perished in battle ! Sir, how do such 
 statements mock our grief for the patriot dead ! 
 
 It is an "effort," says the honorable Senator, "on the part 
 of the Federal Government to suppress insurrection and put 
 down rebellion ;" and what, pray, is an " effort" with the 
 sword between two great armies drawn from all parts of the 
 contending sections, but war ? Is insurrection, breaking into 
 armed rebellion and involving half a continent, anything less 
 than a state of hostilities? The shock of "the effort" has 
 sundered the honorable Senator's State, and its violence made 
 her soil crimson with the blood of her children, and yet we 
 are told that, " constitutionally speaking, this is not war in 
 which we are engaged." The effort, on their part, is for the 
 utter subversion of the Government — an effort of invasion for 
 a moiety of the national domain and for the establishment, 
 within our limits, of an independent government upon princi- 
 ples inimical to American liberty — an effort characterized by 
 rapine, robbery on land, and piracy on sea, and displaying 
 the most deadly hostility to social forms and national in- 
 terests. 
 
 There seems, sir, some fatal delusion by which minds, keen 
 in other respects, are blinded to the deep-seated malignity of 
 this great insurrection. The forecast of Jackson, Adams, 
 Benton, had enabled them to see the gathering storm, and to 
 warn their cou7itrymen of its approach. Its distant mutter- 
 ings were heard in 1833 in South Carolina. It had clouded 
 the extreme southern horizon in 1850, threatening sudden 
 disaster. In 1860 it had covered the entire southern sky, and 
 the pregnant tempest was soon to burst upon the nation 
 " with laden rain and iron hail," awakening the people to a 
 sense of their danger, and to a full realization of what had 
 been predicted. Still there are those who doubt as to our 
 real condition — much more as to our duties, and whether, if 
 we are actually involved in a hostile contest at arms, it is not 
 possible so to conduct it as not to injure the enemy. The 
 
9 
 
 great EugHsh hiBtorian has well said that a languid conduct 
 of war is cruelty to all parties. 
 
 Assuming now the state of the nation to be that of gen- 
 eral internal hostility ; and that, being so involved, it pos- 
 sesses the power of self-defense, it is still important to inquire 
 in what department of the Government this authority is 
 lodged. Happily this is no longer an open question. The 
 supreme power of making and conducting war is expressly 
 placed in Congress by the Constitution. " The whole powers 
 of war," says the Supreme Court of the United States, in 
 Brown vs. The United States, (1 Cranch,) " are vested in Con- 
 gress." Surely all will agree there is no such power in the 
 judiciary, and the Executive is .s^'m^Zy "Commander-in-Chief 
 of the Army and Navy ;" all other powers and duties, not 
 necessarily implied in the command of the military and naval 
 forces, are expressly given to Congress. Congress declares 
 . war ; grants letters of marque and reprisal ; makes rules for 
 captures on land and water ; raises and supports armies ; pro- 
 vides and maintains a navy ; makes rules for the government 
 of land and naval forces ; provides for organizing, arming, 
 and disciplining the militia, and for governing them in actual 
 service ; and is thus invested, in the language of the court, 
 " with the whole power's of war^ 
 
 In the contingency of actual hostilities the nation assumes 
 a new and extraordinary character, involving new relations 
 and conferring new rights, imposing extraordinary obligations 
 on the citizens, and g^bjecting them to extraordinary penal- 
 ties. 
 
 There is then, sir, no limit on the power of Congress ; but 
 it is invested with the absolute powers of war — the civil func- 
 tions of the Government are, for the time being, in abeyance 
 when in conflict, and all State and national authority subor- 
 dinated to the extreme authority of Congress, as the supreme 
 power in the peril of external or internal hostilities. The 
 ordinary provisions of the Constitution, peculiar to a state of 
 peace, and all laws and municipal regulations must yield to 
 the force of martial law, as resolved by Congress. 
 
 ISTow, sir, upon principles of public law, what are some of 
 the rights of nations in a state of hostilities ? 
 
 In war, says Grotius : 
 
 "We have a right to deprive the enemy of his possessions — of anything 
 which may augment his strength, and enable him to make war. Whenever 
 we have an opportunity, we seize our enemy's property and convert it to our 
 own use, and thus diminish his power and augtnent our own, and obtain at 
 least a partial indemnification for what constitutes the subject of the war, or 
 for expenses, or losses incurred in its prosecution — in a word, we do ourselves 
 justice." 
 
 In the language of Professor Martin : 
 
10 
 
 "The conqueror has aright to seise on the property of the enemy, whether 
 moveable or immoveable. This may be done: 1. In order to obtain what may 
 be demanded to be due. 2. To force the enemy to an equitable peace. 3. To 
 defray the expenses of the war. 4. To deter him, or by reducing his strength, 
 to hinder him, from repeating in future the injuries which have been the cause 
 of the wai". And with this object in view, a Power at war has a right to 
 destroy the possessions and property of the enemy for the express purpose of 
 doing him mischief." 
 
 Says the Supreme Court : 
 
 " War gives the full light to take the persons and confiscate the property 
 of the enemy wherever found." "It may be considered as the opinion of all 
 who have written onthe^'ws belli, that war gives the right to confiscate." 
 
 In the case of The Rapid, which was the case of the for- 
 feiture of the property of a citizen, the court said : 
 
 "This is the first case since the organization of the Government in which 
 
 this court has been called upon to assert the rights of war against the property 
 
 of the citizen. It is with extreme hesitation, and under a deep sense of solem- 
 
 '" nity of the duty we are now called upon to discharge, that we proceed to ad- 
 
 ■•^' judge the forfeiture of private rights upon principles of public law highly penal 
 
 in their nature, and unfortunately too little understood." 
 
 "But a new state of things has occurred, a new character has been assumed by 
 this nation, which involves it in new relations and confers on it new rights, 
 which imposes a new class of obligations on our citizens and subjects them to 
 ■^'iiew penalties." — 8 Cranch, p. 64. 
 
 We have now assumed that new character: 
 
 "The nature and consequences of a state of vsar must direct us to the conclu- 
 sions which we are to form in this case. In a state of war nation is known to 
 nation only by their armed exterior, each threatening the other with conquest 
 or annihilation." 
 
 The court held that the power of Congress under that pro- 
 vision of the Constitution which authorizes it " to make rules 
 concerning captures on land and water," to he an unrestricted 
 power. 
 
 Thus, sir, we have seen that Congress is invested with the 
 whole power of war, and that confiscation of the enemy's 
 property is one of its powers. 
 
 Confiscation, sir, is the fate of the property of the belliger- 
 ent — the penalty of war — and there can be no fair pretense 
 that these principles do not apply in the case of a domestic 
 enemy. They are the ordinary dictates of justice to those 
 who not only wantonly involve the country in the miseries of 
 civil war, but who rob the loyal citizen of his property as a 
 penalty for his loyalty. 
 
 Condemnation of the estate of the domestic enemy of the no.- 
 tion is the current judgment of the civilized world. Nay, 
 more ; it is the judgment of the nation against any man who 
 revolts. Every circumstance of this rebellion — its purpose, 
 plan, conduct — demand that the nation should enter up this 
 judgment against the conspirators, if its authority is to be re- 
 spected in the future. The protection and indemnity of the 
 loyal citizen robbed of his property require that this judgment 
 
11 
 
 should be enforced. The popular sentiment of the nation is 
 for it ; that of the civilized nations of the earth will approve it. 
 
 And, sir, necessarily conjiected with the question of the 
 confiscation of the property of the rebel, is that affecting his 
 right to control his slave. That principle or policy which dis- 
 possesses the rebel of his property, would seem to deprive him 
 of his slave. If it be allowable to take his property to " com- 
 ■j, pel a peace," ''^ to deter A^'m, or by reducing his strength to 
 ii5 hinder him, from repeating in the future the injuries which 
 have been the cause of the war," why not liis slave which is 
 not less his support and incentive to rebellion, and which is, 
 indeed, in this case, the casus helli ? 
 
 Sir, the well defined notions of mankind in relation to per- 
 sons and property, in peace or war, seem wholly to fail to 
 guide us when the shadow of the sable African falls upon us. 
 He is the riddle we cannot tell ; the nondescript we con- 
 stantly fail to comprehend ; the visible outline of man with 
 the invisible quality of property, mysteriously united, that 
 confounds us ; the grim idol of an idolatry that shocks while 
 it enchants' and infatuates. 
 
 Plainly, that judgment which condemns the person and 
 property of the rebel, nessarily absolves -the allegiance of his 
 slave. 
 
 The right to deal with the rebel, and the necessity of his 
 overthrow, is urgent, and yet we constantly stumble on the 
 methods of action. 
 
 There is a class of persons, here and everywhere, who, while 
 they entertain no doubt of our power, and the expediency of 
 its exercise, to confiscate the property of rebels, still dep 
 recate all interferance with their slaves. They constantly 
 raise imaginary distinctions, putting slave property on grounds 
 high above other rights of property, which should exempt it 
 from the casualties common to all municipal rights. It is sup- 
 posed to possess a constitutional immunity wholly unknown to 
 and above all other rights of property. The honorable Senator 
 from Virginia seems to participate in these notions, to regard 
 the "institution" as possessing a sanctity akin to that which 
 ■ attaches to the Constitution — its existence essentially the bond 
 of union between the States, and which was carefully pro- 
 tected by the framers of the Constitution. "That a war for 
 the liberation of slaves would be a war for the overthrow of 
 the Constitution ;" " an inhuman and unholy crusade against 
 American constitutional liberty." "That the troubles that 
 now stare us in the face are chargeable, not upon slavery, 
 but upon an unwarrantable agitation of the subject." 
 
 Now, sir, the plain import of all this impassioned phrase ,ie, 
 that the existence of the institution is indissolubly bound up 
 with the Constitution, and so an element of the essential life 
 
12 
 
 of the nation. That the institution and the Constitution must 
 stand or fall, survive or perish, together. That slavery is not 
 the guilty cause of our troubles, and that to destroy it would 
 be to destroy the Constitution of the country. 
 
 Sir, in this view of the subject, the memorable words "lib- 
 erty and Union, one and inseparable, now and forever," were 
 an unmeaning figure of speech, when uttered by the great 
 expounder of the Constitution in view of national perils ; and 
 they are delusive now when pronounced from the lips of the 
 illustrious patriot Senator from Tennessee, himself involved in 
 all the miseries of civil war. The rendering should have been, 
 and should now be, " slavery and Union, one and inseparable, 
 now and forever." 
 
 Sir, I do not care, at this time, to attempt the refutation of 
 this oft-asserte|l and as oft-refuted political heresy ; nor do I stop 
 to take issue with the honorable Senator whether slavery is 
 the real or the predisposing cause of the rebellion. Sufficient 
 that it is the ostensible cause, and the one assigned by the 
 conspirators themselves. JSTeither do I accept issue upon the 
 immaterial question whether " war for the liberation of the 
 slaves would be a war for the overthrow of the Union " — im- 
 material because no such question arises on the record, and is 
 wholly foreign to the facts involved in the national contro- 
 versy. 
 
 There can be no fair pretense for saying that the Govern- 
 ment has made war, or prosecuted war, for " the liberation of 
 slaves," or that it has made war at all ; it has, at most, waged 
 war already begun upon it. The manner of conducting war 
 thus begun upon it is the Government's high prerogative, and 
 is not to be questioned by those who assail it and stand in the 
 relation of its domestic enemies. Let those who take the 
 sword abide its stern arbitrament. But, sir, if slavery makes 
 war on the nation for any purpose, I maintain the right of 
 the Government, under the Constitution, to defend itself, and 
 in doing so " to liberate the slaves " of rebels ; and that when- 
 ever and howsoever the question arises between the " exis- 
 tence of the institution " and the Constitution — slavery and 
 the Union — the former must go to the wall, must peHsh, if 
 necessary to preserve the latter ; and that this may be done 
 in the name and in the hehalf of " American constitutional 
 liberty." 
 
 The Government has inaugurated no war on slavery ; but, 
 sir, it has raised the great battle-axe of war on rebellion, and 
 on whatever is inseparably connected with rebellion — its 
 guilty cause and support. Let no man plead to avert the 
 penalties awarded to those who wantonly take the sword 
 against the life of the nation. The right of slavery to "ex- 
 emption from interference within its locality" is lost in its au- 
 
13 
 
 dacioiis revolt and armed assault on the Government ; its cry 
 "to be let alone" amid the cannonading of Sumter, is a shal- 
 low pretense to conceal a wicked purpose. 
 
 Sir, that " the institution" is inseparable from " American 
 constitutional liberty" and the Union formed by the founders 
 of the Government, I deny with all the emphasis of my being ! 
 This is the great delusion of the times — " the direful spring" 
 of all our political woes. No greater fallacy was ever asserted 
 than this attempt thus to link " the institution" and the Con- 
 stitution indissolubly together, to engraft the former upon the 
 latter, to make slavery the corner-stone of the nation, to be 
 guarded and protected by the Government. 
 
 In a. national sense " the institution" has no legal basis 
 whatever. Its aspirations for national recognition and protec- 
 tion are as foreign to the purposes and principles of the Gov- 
 ernment of our fathei's, under the Constitution, as would be a 
 pretension for recognition of the system of apprenticeship, or 
 any other purely local usage, good or bad. It rests, like all 
 other local rights, on the municipal law or usage, and will, ot 
 course, be left to the control of the local authority so long as 
 it does the nation no harm, and threatens none. I freely con- 
 cede its right to be exempt fi'ora interference by the nation — 
 to deal with it is clearly beyond the ordinary powers of Con- 
 gress ; but when it revolts, brings on war, public disorder, 
 menaces the life of the nation, it then subjects itself to the 
 rules of war, and to the penalties of war, at the hands of the 
 Federal Government. 
 
 Sir, the questions that divide us are not so much questions 
 of power as what the safety of the nation demands. And 
 here we shall all agree, that whatever faction or class, interest 
 or institution, raises itself against the Government, must pay 
 the penalty for its temerity by being itself overthrown. And 
 wherefore this rebellion? Let the history of American poli- 
 tics in the last quarter of a century answer. The constantly 
 increasing sentiment favorable to slavery in the South, the de- 
 mand for acquisition of territory, for change of national policy, 
 for "expansion," for "equality," for "protection," settled hos- 
 tility to free institutions, intolerance of opinions once current 
 and common to the whole country, and at length open assault 
 upon the early measures of the Government, and final demand 
 for intervention in favor of the " institution." These show why 
 war is levied on a Government against which no man at any 
 time has rightfully uttered a complaint. 
 
 We must deal with events as we find them presented to 
 us. The nation's necessity is to put down whatever disturbs 
 its repose, is hostile to its peace, menaces its existence. The 
 slaveholders have taken up arms against the Government. 
 Their property and their slaves are their stay and support, 
 
14 
 
 their meo/ns of carrying on the war. They have forced upon 
 the Government the dread alternative of war or submission 
 to dismemberment and subversion. To avert a disaster so 
 terrible as tlie overthrow of free government, the calamities 
 of civil war, even, are welcomed by the nation. More than 
 half a million of free men, with no other purpose than 
 defense of that Government, have accepted arms, and are 
 now encountering the perils and hardships of Wiir. They 
 have stood guard for long^ long months beliind a line 
 dividing loyal and disloyal States, to protect the Federal 
 authority, and preserve the national capital, their numbers 
 diminishing daily by disease, the covert attacks and stealthy 
 shot of the enemy, while south of that line have been 
 exhibited the revolting scenes of vengeful war. And now, 
 sir, when we are forced to contemplate an advance into the 
 enemy's country, our great solicitude seems to be how we can 
 best do 60 with least possible injury to the foe; and whether, 
 indeed, it is " constitutional" to advance at all, if thereby the 
 institution of slavery is to be endangered. 
 
 Those who have placed themselves in the condition, and 
 who maintain the purposes of enemies to this Government, 
 have no rights of property or person which shonhl restrain 
 the nation in the advance of its armies ! The laws of battle 
 they have invoked, the precious interests they have imperiled 
 the great necessity they have forced upon us, justify and urge 
 the advance for their overthrow, the seizure and condemna- 
 tion of their property ; and here, it is said, you must pause ; 
 you may not annul the right to control the slave, the cause 
 and strength of the war. 
 
 Sir, higher responsibilities were never imposed on any na- 
 tion than are now devolved upon the American people. Not 
 before was so much staked upon a single issue — the experi- 
 ment of free institutions, the capacity of man to govern him- 
 self. A malignant aristocracy, privileged and tolerated, 
 although alien to the principles of the Government, at length 
 seeks to supplant democracy. Jefferson Davis is founding an 
 empire within our limits, and desires "to be let alone." 
 Stephens is laying broad and deep the foundarions of a 
 government of which slavery is to be the chief corner-stone, 
 and " wants to be let alone." 
 
 Mr. Speaker Bocock proclaims a constitution founded on a 
 " different philosophy" from that of our fathers, and " wants 
 to be let alone." Secession is breaking up a great nation, and 
 desires " to be let alone." Slaveholders are founding a des- 
 potism in the heart of the Kepublic, and demand " to be let 
 alone." The enemies of free government everywhere are hold- 
 ing high carnival, and if we do not join in, we are expected 
 not by our violence or indiscretions to disturb the festivities 
 
15 
 
 of the occasion. "We are admonished by all the malcontents in 
 Christendom that we are endangering otir Cliristian character 
 by our obstinate refusal to be ruined ; that " the whole 
 doctrine of coercion" of such as neglect their duty to 
 Government, is barbarous and inhuman, and that "cwi- 
 ciliatio7i" is truly the great function of Government ; that 
 national resistance to armed conspirators, and measures of 
 self-preservation against organized rebellion, are cruel usur- 
 2)ations ! 
 
 Sir, what we are witnessing and encountering is the old 
 struggle of a class for power and privilege which has so 
 often convulsed the world, repeating itself in our history. 
 A claee identified with a local and exceptional institution, 
 grown powerful through political representation, demands to 
 govern. It has its origin in the idea and mixed motives of a 
 southern commercial center, and of the social and political 
 supremacy of a class through the servitude of a race. 
 
 To this end they have conspired, have persistently incul- 
 cated the malignant heresy of secession, and at length forced 
 the fatal issue upon the nation through the action of itfe" 
 States, in total disregard of the will of the people. Sir, to 
 those who have incited sedition and planned rebellion, let 
 the penalties of their great crimes be awarded ! 
 
 To the people, deceived and misled, upon return to 
 allegiance, give the assurance of amnesty, protection, and 
 the privileges of free institutions, free schools, homesteads^ 
 even-handed justice, and equality of political rights ; privi- 
 leges that ennoble and elevate the masses into the dignity of 
 a sovereign people, and give to popular government a secure 
 support. 
 
 Sir, it would be a libel on human nature to suppose that 
 the great body of the people of the South enter with alacrity 
 into the purposes of the conspirators to overthrow this popu- 
 lar government, and to found a government on slavery. I 
 would therefore discriminate in their favor, and seek to 
 establish in those States a commonalty^ with the privileges 
 and immunities which make the people truly sovereign, in 
 the place of an odious aristocracy, who, having betrayed, are 
 no further entitled to the protection of the Government. 
 
 Sir, in this great national drama there are many interests 
 and persons represented, domestic and foreign. Enacted 
 here, in the freest and most prosperous nation of the earth, 
 and on a scale of unequalled grandeur, it will not fail to stir 
 the pulse of the people and convulse the governments of all 
 Europe. 
 
 The cast of the tragedy will naturally move the people of 
 the Old World with lively emotions of sympathy for a Gov- 
 ernment that from the beginning, by its lofty declaration in 
 
\ ♦. 
 
 t 
 
 16 
 
 favor of human rights, had inspired them with hope, while it 
 will arouse the passions and excite the prejudices of clj>sses 
 and factions always inimical to our great example and experi- 
 ment. 
 
 In this great trial the people of old England, from whom we 
 are descended, will, I am sure, prove now, as always hereto- 
 fore, our friends ; the Government, whose tyranny drove our 
 fathers hither, as always heretofore, so now our enemy, and 
 that upon principles so natural as that it should surprise no- 
 body. The English people and the Anglo-Americans are in 
 favor oifree government everywhere ; not so with the " gov- 
 erning classes," so called. 
 
 If, in the providence of Heaven, external elements are to 
 " intervene " in this domestic strife, it may serve to prolong 
 and intensify the struggle ; it will not render doubtful the 
 issue. 
 
 The patriot endeavor and religious duty of the nation, is to 
 maintain the American experiment of popular government 
 as a power on this continent, in harmony with the purpose? 
 of the mtriots who planned and set that Government in mo- 
 tion, m. spite of foes, foreign and domestic. To maintain this 
 purpose and conduct this issue to a prosperous termination, 
 the people are fully committed, and will not turn aside or 
 falter, though their foes multiply and gather until the enemies 
 of popular rights are everywhere combined against them. 
 
 Sir, this purpose of the American people is in harmony with 
 the civilization of the age — the holiest aspirations of the age? 
 — with that truth and justice whose reign is eternal. 
 
 L. Towers <fe Co., Printers.