Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2010 with funding from The Library of Congress http://www.archive.org/details/speechofhonjohnsOOcarl E480 SPEECH • C28 Copy 1 H OF HOK JOHN S. CARLILE, OF VIRGINLV, ON THE BtLL TO CONFISCATE THE PROPERTY AND FREE THE SLAVES OF REBELS; federate i rebellion DELIVERED ™ '^f.' 'dge his otthat you to n the • will IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, MARCH 11, 1862. '' ^^ WASHINGTON: PRINTED AT THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE OFFICE. 1862. t^'''^^^ ■^^^^ f^e- Bi&* ancipatecJ . disregard 'o:lUs of tli( ey resid 'ere wi alwa' I abo' re wi '> the a he l\ f^aar SPEECH The Senate having undur consideration the bill to con- fiscate tlie property and free the slaves of rebels — Mr.CARLILE said: Idonotpropose, Mr. Pres- ident, to follow the example set us by my friend, the honorable Senator from Illinois, [Mr. Brown- ing,] who addressed the Senate yesterday, by saying what I may do in the future upon the hap- pening of a contingency which, in my judgment, never can arise. I am content to deal with the present. If I can meet wisely the questions of the hour, I shall be satisfied; and in my opinion it would be well if we would, in this the day of our trial, act upon the maxim, "Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof." The bill under con- sideration is entitled '* A bill to confiscate the property and free the slaves of rebels." The ob- jects of the bill, as stated in the title, are, in my opinion, beyond the power of accomplishment, if we regard our constitutional obligations. The Supreme Court would have to pronounce such a law unconstitutional in any case arising under it, if it could be brought before that tribunal for its decision. The founders of the Government intended to secure to every citizen, and have so provided in the Constitution, the right to test the constitutionality of any congressional enactment before the Supreme Court-, but here is a bill taking from more than one fourth of the entire popula- tion of this whole country all their property of j every kind and description, reducing them to beg- gary and want, without judicial trial or legal in- vestigation. The bill denies to the citizen the constitutional right of testing the constitutionality of the act before the tribunal created by the Con- stitution. It would seem as if the authors of the bill, conscious of the unconstitutionality of the proposed measure, purposely framed it so that its constitutionality could not be pronounced upon by the Supreme Court. The bill proposes to confiscate to the use of the Government all the property, real and personal, belonging to the citizens of the seceded States who are or may be in the service of the so-called confederate States, or who in any way give aid and comfort to the rebellion. When it is remem- bered that the authors of the rebellion were in possession of the various State governments, and used the powerand machinery of their respective State governments to compel the people to ac- quiesce in their unconstitutional acts, and to rec- ognize their usurped authority, it will be seen that all the property of each and every citizen in the seceded States would be forfeited under this bill. Such a sweeping proposition, so unjust and cruel s measure, one better calculated to continue the war forever and exhaust the whole country, never has been in the history of the world, and I predict never will be again, proposed to any legis- lative assembly representing a civiliiied commu- nity. By the bill all the property, except sl^iei*, is to be sold, and the proceeds put into the public Treasury. The slaves are to be emancipated in violation of the Constitution and in disregard of the acknowledged constitutional rights of their owners and of the States wherein they reside. The want of power in Congress to interfere with slavery in the States where it exists has always heretofore been admitted; the most ultra aboli-^ tionists admit that Congress cannot interfere with slavery in the States, and because this is so they denounce the Constitution as a covenant with death and a league with hell. The ablest speech made this session in Congress in favor of con- verting the struggle in which we are engaged into an anti-slavery war, was made by the Represent- ative in the House from Kansas, [Mr. Conway.] It is a speech that must challenge the admiration of those who differ with its author, for its bold- ness, frankness, and candor. The member from Kansas with directness meets the questions he discusses; there is no mistaking his position. Not a dollar or a man will he vote for the restoration of the Union. Millions for an anti-slavery war, not one cent to suppress insurrection and to restore the supremacy of the Constitution and the laws. Do I misrepresent him.' Let him speak for him- self: " For one, I shall not vote another dollar or man for the war until it assumes a dilferent standing, and tends directly to an anti-slavery result. Millions for freedom, butnot one cent for slavery !" To accomplish his purpose — the abolition of slavery — he would recognize the so-called con- federate States as an independent Power, and he ^ would conquer the seceded States and hold them as subject provinces. Hear him again: " To recognize the confedoriite States for tlieir benefit is no part of our duty; but to shape our policy to accord with events, and enable us to fulfill a liigh purpose, is what we are imperatively called upon to do. The fiction upon which we are now proceeding binds us to slavery ; and hence the national arms, instead of being directed against it, are held where they may at any moment be required to be turned to its defense. "The wish of the masses of our people is to conquer the seceded States to the authority of the Union, and hold them as subject provinces." The member from Kansas admits that his pur- poses cannot be accomplished constitutionally, and expressly refers to the bill now before the Senate, and shows it to be unconstitutional. Hear him again: " Slavery cannot be abolished in a State by act of (Jon- press. The thing is impossible. Congress is the legislative Ijranch of the Government, performing itsduties undercer- tain constitutional limitations. Slavery in the States is outside of those limitations. It can be abolished only by tlie States themselves, or by the Executive in time of war, on principles of public law, as ably expounded many years ago by John Quincy Adams. In the suppression of insur- rection, however, the Executive has not this power, unlesa the insurgents have ceased to be i)artie3 to our constitu- tional Union ; in which case they liave, in fact, ceased to be insurgents, and become belligerents. " The overthrow of slavery by confiscating the property of rebel slaveholders seems to me to be utterly impractica- ble, consistently with the plain requirements of the Con- stitution. A bill has recently been introduced into the Sen- ate to declare the property of all persons engaged in the rebellion forfeit, and directing the President to execute its provisions summarily without the interposition of civil pro- cess for trial or judgment. This bill is unconstitutional. The fifth aniendment to the Constitution provides that, ' No perf'-^n shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property witlioy : process of law.' And the sixth amendment is as follows: '"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy tlie right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State or district wlierein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascer- tained by Jaw, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation ; to be confronted with the witnesses against him ; to liave compulsory process for obtaining wit- n«Jsses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel -^felr liis defense.' " A bill has also been introduced into this body of similar import, and obnoxious to the same objection, and likewise to a still stronger one. This latter bill proposes to abolish a State, and degrade it to the position of a 'J'erritory . Such an act as this is utterly at war with the theory of our Fed- eral system. It could not be carried into eiftect without destroying the nation, as it has heretofore existed. Its suc- cess would establish a precedent which would make the Federal Government the source of all power, and convert the States into mere corporations." To accomplish his purposes, he would recog- nize the so-called confederate States as a separate nation, and wage war upon them because he be- lieves that the laws regulating public war would enable him to deprive the citizens of those States of ^2,000,000,000 worth of slave property. He says: "The conflict has now been progressing nine months, and has changed its cliaracter from an attempt to destroy an insurrection into a deliberate and settled war." I have read from the speech of the member from Kansas, because, in my opinion, it is a represent- ative speech, and because he lias had the boldness to avow what 1 believe are the real views of his party, but what liis party associates, less bold than himself, for prudential reasons do not avow. If a member from a slave State had uttered such sentiments as those I have read from the speech of the member from Kansas, the wliole air would have been filled with the cry of disloyally and liis expulsion demanded. The press that clamored so loudly for the expulsion of the late Senator from Iiuliana and the rejection of the Senator from Oregon, is engaged in applauding the sentiments of the member from Kansas. Those sentiments are, as I have shown you, that unless the con- federate States are recognized as an independent Power and war is waged upon them for the abo- lition of slavery, not another man or dollar of money will the member from Kansas vote. Let a member from a slave State of either House de- clare that he would — unless the so-called confed- erate States are recognized and war allowed, not to conquer the northern States and hold them as subject provinces, but only to secure constitu- tional guarantees for slavery in tiie Union — not vote another man or another dollar; how long, think you, would he or ought he to retain his seat in Congress? And yet what would be the differ- ence .' Whose utterances would be most disloyal, or, if you please, most treasonable.' For more than twenty-five years, Mr. Presi- dent, the representatives of the abolitionists and of tlie secessionists have pulled the same string at different ends, heretofore sitting together in the same Congress and acknowledging the same coun- try. They are still pulling the same string at dif- ferent ends of the siring and each in his own end of the country. Both want the so-called confederate governiTtcni recognized; both want the rebellion dignified by the name of war; both want their rights. The one wants you to acknowledge his right to take his slave into the Territories, not that he will ever take him there; the other wants you to acknowledge his right to liberate the slave in the slave States, not that he would do it, for he will not let the free negroes live in his State, and he knows that they will not be permitted to live in the slave States. The secessionist is fighting for his rights; the abolitionist would have you fight for his. Both contend that the Union is dissolved. Par nobile fratrum. People of America look at them ! Behold a pair of noble brothers — abolition and secession; twins they are; spawned at the same time in the saine inuddy stream. The third section of this bill makes it the duty of the President to colonize the negroes at the cost of the Government, of course the Government to get the iTioney by taxing the people. It is not enough to tax them for war purposes, but they must be taxed to pay overseers on Georgia and South Carolina plantations; taxed to the tune of ten dollars an acre, to buy implements of hus- bandry for all the land tilled by these overseers in Georgia and South Carolina; taxed to buy land in tropical climates; taxed to send negroes to trop- ical climates; in short, the people are to be taxed uponlyingdown andgetting up,standingor walk- ing, asleep or awake, all for the glorious privilege ofevincingto the world that enlarged philanthropy that can view with complacency the sufferings and the groans of the white race, but is horrified at the sight of four millions of negroes comfortable, con- tented, and happy, unconscious of suffering until informed by some philanthropic Greeley; who was willing to permit their masters to withdraw them and the States in wliicli they reside from the Gov- ernment to which the labor of the one and the pro- ductions of the other has contributed more than any other portion of our country to make it wlmt it was a little more than one year ago — the proud- est, richest, and most prosperous on the globe. Mr. President, I was about to call the attention of the Senate to the third section of the bill. This section makes it the duty of the President'^ pro- vide for the transportation, colonization, and set- tlement of such emancipated negroes as may be willing to emigrate to some tropical climate, to be selected for them by the Executive. The bill fails to make provision for the negroes who shall be un- willing to leave the land of their birth and the home of their nativity. That this latter class will com- prise at least ninety-nine hundreths of the slaves, IS a fact known to all acquainted with the race, and I presume is known to the advocates of this meas- ure in the Senate. I see from a speech reported in the Globe, made by a member of the House, concurring in opinion with the advocates of this measure, that tiie negro's attachment to his na- tive land is well understood by the member, [Mr. Davis, of Pennsylvania.] 1 will read the extract to which I refer: " Yet of the 53,000 free blacks in Pennsylvania, only 15,000 are not native horn. Why have this people, with so many reasons to impel Iheni, not. micirateci to the North ? Why (io ihey adliere with such persistence to tlieir native soil .' This love of home is strikingly illustrated hy the fol- lowing figures from the census of 1850 : Of the .'>4,333 free blacks in the State of Virginia, only 533 were born out of the State; of the 18,073 in Delaware, onlv 1,141; of the 74,723 in Marylanil, only 1,367; and of the 27,463 in North Carolina, but 645 were born out of the State ; or of a total free population in these four States of 174,000, only 3,686 are foreign born, or a trifle over two percent. This shows plainly tliat the black is not migratory, and that our people have little to apprehend from a race thus deep-rooted in the soil of the South. Is it not doing violence to right reason and the facts to assume that the negro would abandon the lunne that he has clung to under such adverse circum- stances, with the first step towards rendering his existence tolerable? i am satisfied tliat gentlemen have allowed their prejudice to cloud their judgment ; and when they come to review the facts, they will agree with me that, with eman- cipation, the exodus of the negro will be southward, and that soon, of all the free blacks resident in the cold North, one half or more would take up the line of march to the sunny land of Dixie. " ' Where the yam will grow, the cotUui blow, They'll raise the rice and corn ; And never they'll fear if never they hear The driver blow his horn.' " Assuming that the attachment of the negro to his " native .soil" is as Mr. Davis represents, and that all the free negroes in the non-slaveholding States are, as he intimates, to be colonized for settlement in the now slaveholdingStates, and that the advocates of this bill so understand their pro- posed schemes of emancijiation, colonization, and settlement, the conclusion that it is their purpose to Africanize American society in the southern States is irresistible. If this be their pur]iose, I assure them they are mistaken. Self-preservation would compel the States within which slavery now exists, if the slaves were emancipated, either to expel them from the State or reenshive them. If expelled, where would they go.' The non-slave- holding Slates, many of them, exclude them by ex- press constitutional provision ; others would do so, for we are told by the advocates of emancipation that the negro is not to be permitted, when liber- ated, to come into their States. What follows.' Extermination or reenslavement. Can it be pos- sible that the Christian sentiment of the North, which it is said demands the abolition of slavery, desires the extermination of the negro race.' Such, I trust, is not the sentiment of any considerable nuinlx'r of persons anywhere. The result would be that the States would do what they have the acknowledged constitutional right todo,reenslave them. The wellbeing, if not the existence, of the white race would demand their reenslavement, and it would be done. I ask, then, what good to either race would be accotnplished by the passage of this section of the bill ? The Senator from Illinois, [Mr. Trumbull,] the patron of this bill, as I understood him, admitted the want of power in Congress to forfeit real es- tate for a longer period than the life of the owner. If I am in error, I desire to be corrected. Mr. TRUMBULL. The Senator certainly mis- understood me. 1 said that I was inclined to think Congress could not forfeit the real estate of a con- victed traitor longer than for life; but the bill which is pending proposes not to forfeit tlie real estate of convicted traitors, but to forfeit 'he property of persons who cannot be convicted, who are be- yond the reach of judicial process. It is not a bill against persons who can be reached by judicial process. Mr. CARLILE. I thank the Senator, because I desire to understand his position. I now under- stand liim to say that, while it is not in the power of Congress, aided by the judicial department of the Government, upon trial and conviction for treason, to confiscate the real estate of the traitor beyond his life, Congress can yet of itself, with- out the intervention of the judicial department of the Government, inflict that punishment, not upon a convicted traitor, but upon one who in the eye of the law is presumed to be innocent until he is proven to be guilty. That is to say, you may"" without conviction impose a heavier penalty than can be imposed upon guilt being ascertained and judgment being pronounced. It is worse than I supposed. Such a proposition I shall not detain the Senate by discussing. The Senator referred us, in his argument, to several decisions of the Supreme Court. I have ex- amined those cases. Notoneof them bears upon his proposition. In Brown's case the court seem to say that Congress can by legislation provide for the confiscation of enemy property. This is not authority for the confiscation of the private jirop- erty of our own citizens, although they may be reb- els. The Constitution provides against the con- fiscation or forfeiture of the estate of the latter in as plain language as it forbids the enactment of bills of attainder. That this bill is a bill of attainder, as such bills have been defined by our own judges, is beyond the shadow of a doubt. The Supreme Court has said that " a bill of attainder may effect the life of an individual, or may confiscate his prop- erty, or both." Judge Tucker says a bill of pains and penalties is a biUof attainder. The true defini- tion of a bill of attainder, is any bill providing for the infliction of punishment by Congress for po- 6 litical offenses, without the intervention of the judicial department of the Government — without legal trial. Such bills the Constitution prohibits and forbids, and takcscare to secure to the citizen a jury trial, and to secure him from being deprived of his pro[ierty without due process of law. Con- gress can as well pass a bill making it the duty of the President to order the seizure by such officers, military or civil, as he may designate, of all per- sons in the seceded Stales, and direct the officers so seizing them to hang them without the inter- vention of judge or jiiry»as they can pass this 1)111 which makes it the tluty of the President to order sucli officers as he may designate, military or civil, to seize the property of the citizens of the seceded States, and confiscate it. But, say the advocates of confiscation, there ought to be such a power, and therefore we will enact such a law. How dilferent such sentiments from those given us by the Father of his Country. Washington says: " ir, in the opinion of the people, tlieilistribution ormod- inc:ttion of constitutional powers l)e wrong In any partic- ular, lot it be corrected hy an amendineiit in the way wliich the ConstitiUion designates. But let there be no change hy usiirpntion; lor though tliis in one instance may be the in- strument ol" good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must al- ways greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transit-lit benefit which the use can at any time yield." Mr. President, the advocates of this bill would have us believe that although in time of peace llie Constitution is the paramount law of llie land, in timeof war it ceases to be of binding obligation, and tlierefore feeling the want of constitutional power they seek to show, by citations from Groiius and others, that such a ineasure is authorized by the law of nations, forgetting that the laws of war fix the rules by which separate and independent na- tions are to be governed when engaged in war with each other. Senators who contend for the power to enact this bill ignore the great fact which lies at the foundation of all oi\r institutions, that this is aGovcrnmentof limited powers, clearly defined in a wrilter. Constitution forbidding the exercise of any power not authorized by it, and denymg to the legislative branch of the Government the au- thority to enact any law which is not authorized by a grant of power. It is unnecessary to detain the Senate by a ref- erence to authorities to show that this is a Gov- ernment nf limited powers, such as I have stated it to be. It is an admitted truth that no man, 1 take it, at this day will dispute. But, Mr. President, I deny that the laws of war authorize any such measure as this bill proposes; and I go further, and deny that even if sanctioned by the laws of war Congress could enact any sucii law, unless the power were given in the Constitution. I deny, as Senators seem to sup[)ose, that in limt' of rebel- lion the Constitution is a dead letter. I deny what the rebels assert, and what Senators seem to admit, that the act of rebellion has destroyed con- stitutional government, and left us at the mercy of the unrestrained will of Congress. Let us see what Vattel says of these confiscation proposi- tions. In speaking of the ancient rules of war, he says: " But at present war is less dreadful in its consequences to the subject ; matters are conducted with more humanity ; one sovereign makes war against another sovereign, and not against the unarmed citizens. 'J'he conqueror seizes on the possessions of the State, the pul)lic property, while privBle individuals are permitted to retain theirs. They suffer but indirectly by the war; and the conquest only sub- jects them to a new master. " IJiU if the entire State be conquered, if the nation be subdued, in what manner can the victor treat it, without transgressing the bounds of justice.' What are his riglitH over the conquered country.' Some liave dared to advance this nifuistrous principle, that the conqueror is ab.-tolutc mas- ter of /is conquest; that he may dispose of it as his prop- erty; tliat fie may treat it as he pleases, according to the common expression of /?ff/<(7ti: a State as a conguercil covrt- try ; and hence they derive one of tlie .sources of despotic goverinnent." — fattens Law of Nations, book 3, chap. 13, sees. 200,201. In pursuing the same subject, lie says: " But if the conqueror thinks proper to retain Ilie sover- eignty of the conquered State, and has a right to retain it, the same principle must also determine the manner in which he is to treat that State. If it is against the sovereign alone that he has just cause of complaint, reason plainly evinces that he acquires no other rights by liis con(|uest llian sucli as belonged to the sovereign whom he has dispossessed, and, on the submission of the people, he is bonndto sovcrnlhem accorilins; to the laws of the State. ^^ — falters Law of Na tions, book 3, chap. 13, sec. 201. Without detaining the Senate, I will read the concluding sentence of another j)aragraph on the same subject, wherein the writer says: " Surely it is enougli that an innocent people sufTer the calamities of war: must even peace itself become fatal to them V'—Ibid., book 3, chap. 13, sec. 390. And again he says: " For the same reason, he who declares war does not con- fiscate the immovable property" — this bill proposes to do that — "possessed in his country by his enemy's subjects. By permitting them to purchase iind possess such property, he lias in that respect admitted them into the number of his subjects." — IhiJ., book 3, chap. 5, see. 323. Justice Story, in treating of the clause in the Constitution giving to Congress power to punish treason, but forbidding the forfeiture of the estate for a longer period than life, says: "Two motives probably concurred in introducing it as an e.vpre.ss power. One was, not to leave it open to impli- cation whether it was to be exclusively punishable with death, according to the known rule of the common law, and with the barbarous accompaniments pointed out by it, but to confide the punishment to the discretion of Congress. The other was, to impose some limitation upon the nature and extent of the punishment, so that it should not work corruption of blood or forfeiture beyond the life of the oftender." — Story on the Constitulion , book 3, sec. 1297. Again, he says: " IJills of attainder, as they are technically called, are such special acts of the legislature as inflict capital punish- ments upon persons supposed to be guilty of high offenses, such as treason and felony, without any conviction in the ordinarj- course of judicial proceedings." — /6i(/.,bouk3,sec. 1314. I will not detain the Senate by reading the whole paragraph, but I will call the attention of the Senate to this: "The punishment has often been inflicted without call- ing upoii the party accused to answer, or without even the formality of proof; and sometimes, because the law, in its ordinary course of proceedings, would acquit the offender. . The injustice and iniquity of such acts, in general, con- stitute an irresistible argument against the existence of the power. Ill a free Government it would be intolerable ; and in the hands of a reigning faction it might be, and probably would be, abused to the ruin and deatii of the most virtu- ous citizens." — Itiicf., book 3, sec. 1344. Mr. President, this bill does not forfeit thepri- vate property of alien enemies, inhabitants of the enemy's country, but it proposes to take all the property belonging to our own citizens who have been compelled to submit to a power they could not resist, which claims to be both a de facto and a dejure government, and which docs possess the physical force to compel obedience to it from those within its limits. This Government — the Federal Government — which claims the allegiance of these citizens has been unable to relieve tiiem or to pro- tect them in their assertion of that allegiance. Are not allegiance and protection mutual obligations, and when you fail to afford the one will you pun- ish for the want of the othei-, when it was not in the power of the citizen to give it, and when, if proclaimed, it would have cost him his life? It should never be forgotten, but always borne in mind, that the struggle in which we are en- gaged is not on our part, constitutionally speak- ing, a war. We are not engaged in war. Con- gress makes war, declares war. Congress has made no such declaration; nor has Congress de- clared, as in the case of the war with Mexico, that war exists. When we speak of war generally we mean public war. If we do not, we use some ex- pression to define the kind of war of which we speak, as civil war, servile war, and the like. The war spoken of by the writers on the laws of war quoted in this debate is public war, that which takes place between nations or sovereigns, where one nation seeks to enforce its alleged righ ts again st another and separate nation; where, in the lan- guage of Scripture, "nation lifts up the sword against nation." The struggle in which we are now engaged is not, strictly speaking, even a civil war; but is, on our part, an effort to suppress insur- rection, as an extract from Vattel will show. The war of tiie Revolution was a civil war. Why? Because there was justice on the side of those who were in rebellion. They had right on their side; and whenever you speak of a civil war to a man who understands its definition, you admit that there is some justice for that war. I deny that there is any justice for this rebellion. It is an unholy and wicked effort on the part of ambitious men to enslave the people and make them sub- servient to their own wicked purposes. Senators will mark the distinction which Vattel makes, be- cause I shall call their attention to the definition of insurrection presently: '^Tlie name ofrcbels isgiven to all sulijects wlioinijustly take up arms ai^ainsttlie ruler of the society, whether their view be to deprive him of the supreme authority, or to resist his commands in some particular instance, and to impose coiulition.s on him." Sir, are not these people rebels? " A popular commotion in a concourse of people who as- >f'nibli; ill a luinuU.iious manner, and refuse to listen to tlie voice of their superiors, whether the design of the assem- bled multitude be leveled against the superiors themselves, or only against some private individuals. Violent commo- tions of this kind take place when the people think them- selves aggrieved, and there is no order of men who so fre- quently give rise to them as tlie tax-gatherers. If the rage of tile malcontents be particularly leveled at the magistrates, or others vested with the public authority, and they proceed tea formal disobedience or acts of open violence, this is called a sedition. When the evil spreads, when it infects the majority of the inhabitants of a city or provnice, and gains such strength that even tlie sovereign is no longer obeyed, it is usual more particularly to distingiiisli such a disorder by tlie n.ime of insurrection." — Valtel, book 3, chap. 18, sees. 288, '289. Now, what is the definition of civil war? " When a party is formed in a State who no longer obey the sovereign, anil are possessed of sufficient strength to op- pose him— or wlien, in a republic, the nation is divided into two opposite factions, and both sides take up arms — this is called a civil war. Some writers confine this term to a just insurrection of the subjects against their sovereign, to dis- tinguish that lawful resistance from rebellion, which is an open and unjust resistance. But what appellation will they give to a war which arises in a republic torn by two fac- tions, or in }i monarchy, between two competitors for the crown.' Cns'toni appropriates the term of 'civil war' to every war between the members of one and the same po- litical society. If it be between part of the citizens on one side, and the sovereign with those who continue in obedi- ence to him on the other, provided the malcontents have any reason " — mark — "for taking up arms, nothing further is required to entitle such disturliance to tiie name o[ civil war, and not that of re- hellion. — VutteVs Law of Nations, book 3, chap. 18, sec. 292. Sir, I deny that this is a civil war. I deny that there was anything to justify the men who inau- gurated it. I pronounce it a rebellion, and those who are engaged in it are rebels. 1 deny, therefore, that if Congress were not restrained by the Constitution the laws of war would authorize or justify the enactment of such a law as the bill proposes; but whether right or wrong in this proposition, I plant myself upon the Constitution, deny the power, and challenge con- tradiction. I assert what will not be denied, that, prior to the rebellion, the advocates of this bill themselves admitted the want of power in Con- gress to interfere with slavery, or to change the status of the slave in the slaveholding States. No Senator has shown, or can show, any grant of power in the Constitution to warrant the enact- ment of such a law, or from which the power to do so is deducible. The want of such a power is conclusive, and should end the discussion. 1 will read, however, from the eighty-fourth number of the Federalist, written by Mr. Hamil- ton, who certainly is believed at this d^y to have~ claimed as large powers as the most Fatitudinous constructioti could give to the Conatitution. He is endeavoring to show why a bill of rights was not necessary: " I go further, and afTirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the extent they are contended for, are not only un- necessary in the proposed constitution, but would even be dangerous. They would contain various exceptions to powers not granted ; and on this very account would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than were granted. For why declare that things shall not be done, which there ia no power to do? Why, for instance, should it be said that the liberty of the press sliall not be restrained, vvlien no power is given by wiiich restrictions may be imposed.'"' — Federalist, p. 53o. Again, I call the attention of Senators to the very first section of the first article of the Consti- tution itself: " All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives." Then, sir, it is only the legislative power gran ted in the instrument that the Senate and House of Representatives can exercise, and none other. I go further, and show that not only is there no such power given in the Constitution, but the ex- I 8 ercise of such a power is expressly forbidden; first by the clause declaring that " No bill of altaimirr or ex post facto law shall he passed." Again, by the clause declaring, '• Tlio Congress shall have power to ilrdare flic prinisli- ment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work cor- ruption of blood or forfeiture, except during the life of the person attainted." Again, by the fifth article of the amendments, " No person shall be held to answer for a capital or other- wise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indict- ment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces or in the militia when in aclual service In time of war or public danger; nor shall aiiypiTson be subject for the same ofTcnse to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in anycriminal ease to hea witness ;igainst himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law ; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation." Again, by the seventh article of the amendments: '•In suits at common law, where the vahu; in contro- versy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved ; and no fact tried by a jury shall be other- wise reexamined in any court of the United States than according to the rules of the eoinmoii law." Where but twenty dollars is involved, the right of trial by jury is secured, and admitted to be se- cured by the Constitution; and yet under this bill all that the citizen may hMV<; is swept from him without even the first process known to our courts being served upon him. It is incumbent upon Senators who, prior to the rebellion, admitted that Congress could not inter- fere with slavery in the States where it exists, but who are now the advocates of this bill, to show the clause in the Constitution conferring upon Congress the power claimed. Congress has the power to legislate for the suppression of insurrec- tion, but the insurrection nmstbe suppressed and the rebellion put down by constitutional means, and in a constitutional way, otherwise all that would be necessary to overthrow the Constitution and destroy the Government under it, would be to incite insurrection. If Congress were not to suppress insurrection by constitutional means and in a constitutional way, there would bo nothing for the loyal citizen to fight for. He readily obeys his country's c,ill,and enrolls himself in its mili- tary service. Why, and for what? That the Con- stitution may be overthrown, that his fellow-citi- zens in th(; rebellious States may be deprived of their constitutional rights secured to them by the common bond? No, sir; God forbid. He takes up arms for no such purpose; he enlists under the banner of his country to uphold itarid all the rights of which it is the emblem. He spills his blood that the constitutional Government under which he has lived may be preserved, and all his consti- tutional rights maintained. It was for this, and this alone, as I know full well, that the brave Lan- der sacrificed his life. Patriot soldier he was. Long will his memory live in the hearts of the loyal pco|ile of my State. He it was that led our troops to battle and to victory at Pliilippa and Rich Mountain. It is one of the proudest recollections of my life that I urged upon the President and his Cabinet his noinination as brigadier general. I reflect with satisfaction upon my agency in pro- curing his nomination. I will not now check the unbidden tear that fills my eyes while I recall be- fore me his manly form and reflect upon his heroic courage. No man ever guarded more carefully the honor of his country, or more scrupulously pro- tected the riglits of private property. Mr. President, Massachusetts 's son was made a Virginia brigadier. Your records will show that it was Frederick W. Lander, of Virginia, that the President nominated and the Senate confirmed. Virginia adopted him as her son, and she claims the privilege to mingle her tears with those of his own native State. This is as it should be between States united as are the States of this Union, under one Constitution, having one country and one destiny. Let us remember that to the united efforts, in warandin peace, of Massachusetts and Virginia and their sister States we are indebted for our glorious Constitution. I would acknowledge also our indebtedness to Massachusetts for loan- ing to us, through her Governor, in our darkest hour last spring, two thousand stand of arms. Such recollections are themes upon which I love to dwell. Would to God there had been in the past nothing inconsistent with the kind and friendly service to which I have referred. Let us bury forever all recollection of what has occurred to interrupt the kindly relations between the two old States or between the sections of our common country. Let us again be a united and a happy people, animated by that fraternal feeling so ne- cessary to our peace and prosperity as a nation. God grant that again we may be bound together by the silken cord of brotherly love, never to be broken; each State vieing with the other in the kindly discharge of every constitutional obligation and all frowning indignantly upon the first dawn- ing of any attempt to alienate the sections or to disturb the harmony of the whole. Mr. President, the Senator from Maine the other day argued that we were engaged in a war, and contended that Congress had the power to do what he said the law of nations authorized sov- ereign and independent nations engaged in public war to do. Assuming his positions, he argued to prove what the rebels have been striving to make I' the world believe, that the so-called confederate j States were a nation and an independent Power, 11 entitled to be recognized as a belligerent Power, i and therefoi-e, according to his assumption, as we j have the right to confiscate the projierty of a bel- I ligerent Power, we have the right to pass this bill i| and confiscate, not the property of the belliger- I ent, but all the property, lands, and goods of pri- t vate individuals inhabiting the domain over which j the government of this belligerent Power extends. '] If the Senator be right, we should cease to com- ij plain of England for so far recognizing the so- jj called confederate States as a belligerent as to j maintain a neutral position between us. I TheSenator from Maine follows the Represent- 'i ativc from Kansas, from whose speech I have li quoted, and contends that the conduct of the rebels I' invests this nation with the high prerogatives of war. In other words the unconstitutional acts of rebels confer upon Congress powers not dele- gated by the Constitution. I humbly submit to the Senator if he has not done what no foreign Govertiment has yet done, and what we would be ready to resent if any foreign Government were 9 to do — recognized by his speech the pretended confederate government. He has gratified the conspirators by dignifying their rebellious acts into acts of war. He would concede to them what they claim, that they are not engaged in rebellion, but in waging war against a foreign Government; for the Senator from Maine has arrived at the con- clusion, to use liis own language, that we are in a elate of involuntary war with a belligerent Power, and therefore he would confiscate tlie property, not of the belligerent, for the belligere-./t has none — the custom-houses, forts, dock-yards, mints, &.C., are ours — but he would confiscate the prop- erty and free tiie slaves of private individuals. I confess I do not understand the Senator's logic. We are not at war, Mr. President, with a belliger- ent Power, but with rebellious citizens. The Sen- ator from Maine asivs how shall it ever be known when we arc in a state of war? 1 reply. Con- gress will inform him. The Constitution confers upon Congress the power to declare war. I object to this bill because it violates an ex- press provision of the Constitution in this: the Constitution declares that no person shall be de- prived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, and that private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensa- tion. This bill, as the Senator from Illinois ex- plained a little while ago, without judicial accu- sation or trial, would sweep from the entire pop- ulation of the seceded States the property of every person residing therein. It dispenses with the judicial tribunals of the country, condemns with- out a hearing, and punishes without a trial. In short, it does what the Constitution expressly for- bids — executes itself. I inquire, was there ever before such a proposition submitted to any legis- lative assembly in any civilized country on the face of the earth? In the same letter, to which I before referred , Mr. Hamilton quotes Justice Blackstone: " To beroavo a man of life," says he, " or by violence to confiscate his estate, without accusation or trial, would be so gross and notorious an act of despotism as must at once convey the alarm of tyranny througlyout tlie whole nation ; but confinement of thi! person by secretly hurrying liini to jail, where liis sulVerings are unknown or forgotten, is a less public, a less striking, and tlierefore a more dangerous en- ^inc of arbitrary Government." And as a remedy for this fatal evil, he is every- where peculiarly emphatical in his encomiums on the habeas corpus act, which in one place he calls " the BULWARK of the British constitution." (Fed- eralist, p. 533.) This paragraph from Justice Blackstone cited, as I have shown, by Mr. Hamilton, in the num- ber of the Federalist to which I have referred, shows conclu.si vely that such a proposition as this would not be authorized by the Constitution, and would be exercised only by the veriest despotism. The fi'iends of this measure contend that it is necessary to the suppression of the rebellion. How can this be? It can only be enforced where rebellion has never existed, or where it has been suppressed. How can you execute this law in those States and districts where all your laws are successfully resisted? Before you confiscate the property of rebels you must first be able to pos- sess yourselves of it. You can only do this where u J 1 1 .nentwRl your armies have preceded you, and wl "snea rebels have been dispersed. This bill car^=^ taste enforced in the districts occupied by youJd, as t the or by loyal citizens who i-ecognize their id of taka- tion to the Constitution and laws, and wh^'jlj j'djq aid you in their enforcement. If the mere i>ntrv sage of an act would put down the rebellion, ai..^ you have to do is to pass an act confiscating all the powder in the seceded States, and the rebellion is ended at once. The absurdity of such an cifect to be produced by the mere passage of a bill to operate in States where you are unable to enforce any law must be apparent to all. This bill, if it become a law, like all of your laws, will remain upon your statute-book, a dead letter in the se- ceded States until you shall have crushed out the rebellion and suppressed the insurrection. When that is done, this bill cannot aid in suppressing what is not in existence. Mr. President, is it expedient to beggar six millions of your people? Will the avowal of such a purpose have the effect to stiengthen the loyal sentiment of the seceded States? Will it confirm and bring to your aid the hesitating and doubtful, or will it not rather, if that be possible, make more desperate those now arrayed against you, increase their power, and bring to them an active strength that has up to this time kept aloof from the struggle? What will be its effect upon the thousands that have been impressed into the rebel army who are now anxiously looking for an op- portunity to rush to your standard? There is scarcely a family of any size in all the loyal por- tion of my State that has not one or more mem- bers of it, or some one connected with it in the rebel service, or who have not in sorne way aided the rebellion. It has divided parents from their children, brotherfrom brother, and separated hus- band and wife. I will, with the permission of the Senate, read an extract from a letter 1 received yesterday from a highly respectable lady, a resi- dent of north western Virginia, a daughter of a late judge of the United States, and a grand-d/,^ughter of a former Governor of the State of Ohio, and a member of the Cabinets of Mr. Madison and Mr. Monroe. " I have never had a line from my husband since last August, and am not in communieation with him at all. It is only through Mrs. , who returned a fortnight ago, that I know his whereabouts. I do not and never have tliought secession a practical or desirable move. I have been her« with my children making every effiirt to send or to go to Dixie to induce him to return. You know that 1 was pos- sessed of sufficient means to at least live comfonably before our marriage, but as it consisted ofnotes,honds, and money, it has been almost all reconverted into other property, and can be all taken. I cannot believe it is the intoition and desire of the wise and humane rulers of this country to throw upon the world without means of subsistence unof- fending women and innocent children." Mr. President, is it expedient to deprive de- crepid age and helpless infancy of the means of support? If we do this thing, the cry of the widow and the wail of the orphan will go up to heaven, and the God of the widow and the Father of the fatherless will say in the storm-cloud: "Venge- ance is mine, and I will repay, saith the Lord." The incendiary press of this country seize upon the hour that exhibits to the gaze of the world the heart-rending spectacle of the only Government on ercise of s first by tl— " No bill here man enjoys as much liberty as is con- A'^ain with his iiaiiue, stru^glinf^ for existence, '•Till' c'"'*^ '^'^'•^ '" "^"^ difficulties by reviving sec- mciitofi feuds by which we have been torn and dis- ruptloii..-d in order to secure the acconiplislimcnt of P^'"*""'wislies of those who have for years denounced iftc Constitution of Wasliington and iiis compa- triots as i\ covenant with death and a league with hell. This, too, at a moment when the efforts of all should be directed to tiie single object of ex- tinguishing the flames lighted by the fires of rebel- lion. The temple of liberty is on fire, and instead of an honest effort on the part of all to save the noble structure, the anti-slavery element is en- gaged in an unholy effort to destroy the southern wing, not seeming to know or care that the de- struction of part involves the loss of the whole. The rebels have applied the torch, and the anti- slavery element say, let it go, unless the entire southern portion is shorn of its fair proportions, its dimensions narrowed and contracted, and its occupants made dependent upon our will and sub- servient to our views. These are they who at- tribute this wicked rebellion to the existence ot slavery, and who, by misrepresentations, would lead the people tliey ought to honestly instruct to war upon the Constitution. From such teachings we are warned by the Father of his Country in his Farewell Address — ■•Oneol' tlic expedients of party to acquire influence witliin [(artloiilar (listrict^s is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of otlicr districts." These are they who say if there had been no slavery there would have been no reljellion. As well might they attribute the rebellion to the Union, for if there had been no Union there would have been no rebellion against it. Has the coun- try torgolten that thirty years ago a similar at- tempt at rebellion was initiated, and would have grown to as great proportions, [)erhaf)s, as the present, if a Buchanan instead of a Jackson had bee:i the Clii(;f JVIagistrnte ? And do we not know liwi t\\f. tariff was then the pretext? Who, at that day, ih'sisted that commerce should be destroyed, or said if there had been no commerce there would have been no attempt at rebellion ? No, Mr. Pres- ident, Mr. Yancey and his associates spoke tlie truth when they wrote to the British minister " that it was from i!0 fear that the slaves would be lib- erated tliat secession took place. " The true cause, the real motive, is the same that influences the men v/ho now clamor that this shall be made an anti-slavery war. They would convert the lioly struggle in which we are engaged for a restoration of the Union into a wicked crusade againstslavcry, bringing down upon us the just vengeance of a righteous God and the denunciations of the whole civilized world. So long as our efforts are con- fined to a vindication of the Constitution and a restoration of the Union, we have the sympathies of the good throughout the earth, and, 1 sincerely believe, the approval of Heaven; for are we not engaged in a struggle to maintain religious as well as civil liberty.' The cause of the rebellion was a determination on the part of its authors to rule or ruin. The opposition to a restoration of the Union is to be attributed to the same cause. The restoration of the Union buries in the same grave 10 abolitionists and secessionists. In life their labors have tended to the same end; it is fitting that they should be consigned to the saine grave. May Heaven speed their demise. Mr. President, it is for us to preserve the best Governrnent on earth, and to keep inviolate our plighted faith. The passage of this bill would be a violation of the nation's faith as pledged through the Executive and Congress, and a fraud upon our people. What was the call of the President to which->your citizen soldiers so promptly re- sponded' Was it not to aid him in the enforce- ment of the laws, protect the nation's property, and to enable him to keep his oath of office, l)y which he swore to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution, and to see that the laws were faithfully executed.' Did not the President in his inaugural address declare: "I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the iiistitiuion of slavery in the States where It exists. I belit've I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no in- clination to do KO.'- And did he not, in liis annual message to Con- gress, in July last, say: '• Lest there be some uneasiness in the minds of candid men as to what is tlie course of the Government towards the soiitlicrn States, after the rebellion shall liavebeen sup- pressed, the Executive deems it proper to say it will he his purpose then, as ever, to he guided by the Constitution and the laws ; and that he will probably have no dirt'erent under- standing of the powers and duties of the Federal Govern- ment relating to the rights of the Statfs and the people under the Constitution, than that expressed in the inaugural address." Did not your present General-in-Chief, in May last, v/hen he entered my State at the head of our brave friends from Oliio and Indiana who re- sponded to the President's call, assure us that he caine not to make war upon us or our institutions, but that he catne to crush out treason and deliver us from the power of traitors. Hear him: " Notwitlistandins all that has been said by the traitors to induce you to br^liuve that our advent among you will be signalized by intiirference with yourslaves, umlorstand one thing clearly, not only will we abstain from all such inter- ference, hut we will, on the contrary, with an iron hand, crush any attempt at insurrection on their part." What was the mission of the brave Burnsidc, and the equally brave Goldsborough, as declared by them to the people of North Carolina.' They shall speak for themselves: Roanoke Island, North Carolina, February 18, 186^. To the People of North Carolina: The mission of our joint expedition is not to invade any of your rights, but to assert the autliority of the United States, ,111(1 to close with you the desolating war brought upon your State by comparatively a few bad men in your midst. Influenced infinitely more by the worst passions of hu- man nature (lian by any show of elevated reason, they are still urging you astray to gratify their unholy purposes. They in)pos(! upon your credulity by telling you of wicked and oven diabolical intentions on our part; of our desire to destroy your freedom, demolish your property, liberate your slaves, injure your women, and snoli like enormities— all of which, we assure you, is not only ridiculous, but utterly and willfully false. We are ('hristians as well as yourselves, and we profes.« to know full well, and to feel profoundly, the sacred obliga- tions of the character. No apprehensions need be entertained that the demandii of huinunlty or justice will be disregarded. We ahall in- diet no injury, unless forced to do .so by your own acts, and upon this you may confidently reJy. 11 J. hose men are your worst enemies. They, in truth, have idr;iwii you into your present condition, and are the real disturbers of your peace and the liappiness of your firesides. We invite you, in the name of the Constitution, and in that of virtuous loyalty and civilization, to separate your- selves at once from these malign influences, to return to your allegiance, and not compel us to resort further to the force under our control. The Government asks only tliat its authority may be rec- ognized ; and we repeat, in no manner or way does it de- sire to interfere with your laws, constitutionally established, your institutions of any kind whatever, your property of any sort, or vour usages in any respect. ■ L. M. GOI.DSBOROUGH, Flag Officer, CommandiHs, North Carolina Blockading Squadron. A. E. BUliNSIUE, Brigadier General. Commanding Department of North Carolina. What was the order of the acconiplisheil officer, g:allani soldier, and I may add, enliglitened states- ttian, General Halleck, as his troops were about to advance into Tennessee.' Proclamation of General Halleck. ME.4.DQnARTERS DePAUT.MKNT OF MISSOURI, St. Lovis, February ^^. The major general oommanding the department ilesiros to impress upon all officers the importance of preserving good order and discipline among their troa))s as the armies of the West advance into Tennessee and the southern States. liPt us show to our fellow-citizens in those States that we come merely to crush out rebellion, and restore to them peace and the benetits of the Constitution and the Union, of which they have been deprived by selfish and unprinci- pled leaders. They have been told that we come to oppress and plunder. By our acts we will undeceive them. We will prove to them that we come to restore, not to violat'.', tile Constitution and the laws. In restoring to them the glo- rious flag of the Union, we will assure them that they shall enjoy under its folds the same protection of life and prop- erty as in former days. Soldiers ! let no excess on your part tarnish the glory of our arms ! The order heretofore issued in this department, in regard to pillaging and marauding, the destruction of private prop- erty, and the stealing or concealment of slaves, must be strictly enforced. Itdoes not belong to the military to de- cide upon the relation of master and slave. Huoh questions must be settled by the civil coints. No fugitive slave will tlierefore be admitted within our lines or camps, except when specially ordered by the general commanding. Women and children, merchants, farmers, mechanics, and all persons not in arms, are regarded as non-combat- iints, and are not to be molested either in their persons or property, ff, however, they aid and assist the enemy, they become belligerents, and will be treated as such. As they violate the lliws of war, they will be made to sutler the penalties of such violation. iMilitary stores and the public property of the enemy must be surrendered, and any attempt to conceal such property, by franduU nt transfer or otherwise, will be punished, but no private property will be touched unless by order of the general coinmandiiig. Wherever it becomes necessary to obtain forced contributions I'or the supply and subsistence of our troops, such levies will be made as light as possible, and be so distributed as to produce no distress among the people. All property so taken must be receipted and fully accounted for, as heretofore directed. These orders will be read at the head of every regiment, and all officers are commanded to strictly enforce tiiem. Bv command of Major G(!neral Halleck. N. H. McLEAN, Jidjvtant General. How did Congress speak in February, 1861, upon the motion, 1 believe, of my friend from Ohio, [Mr. Sherman:] •• Resolved, That neither the Federal Govcrninent nor the peopleor governments of the non-slaveholding States liave a purpose or a constitutional right to legislate upon or in- terfere with slavery in .•my of the Stales of the Union. " Resolved, That those "persons in the North who do not subscribe to the foregoing proposition, are too insignificant ill numbers and influence to excite the serious attention or alarm of any portion of the people of the Kepublic, and that the increase of their numbers and influence does not keep pace with the increase oi' the aggregate population of the Union." How, again, did Coiigrcs.s speak in July last, in the House of Representatives, upon the motion of the hero, patriot, and sage, tlie venerable Crit- tenden: " Resolved liy the House of Rejircsentatives of the Congresi of the United States, 'J'liat the present deplorable civil war has been t'orced upon the country by the disunionists of the southern States, now in arms against the constitutional Government, and in arms around the capital ; that in this national en^^gency, Congress, banishing all feelings of mere passion or resentment, will recollect only its duty to the whole country ; that this war is not waged on their part in any spirit of oppression, or for any purpose of conquest or subjugation, or purpose of overthrowing or interfering with the rights or established institutions of those States, but to defend and maintain the supremacy of the Constitu- tion, and to preserve tiie Union with all the dignity, equal- ity, and rights of the several States unimpaired; and that as soon as these objects are accomplished the war ought to cease."- — Journal House of Rejircsentatives, first session, Thirty-Seventh Congress, p. \-i'.i. Shall it be said that this resolution was adopted under the fearful excitement growing out of the battle of the day before, at Bull Run.' No, sir; never will the nation allow any such intimation to be made against its honor. What said the Senate in July last upon the motion of the distin- guished Senator from Tennes.see, [iVIr. Johns ON i*] " iJeso/ic?, That the present deplorable civil warhas been forced upon the country by the disunionists of the southern States, now in revolt against the constitutional Government and inarms around the capital; that in this national emer- gency Congress, banishing all feeling of mere passion or re- sentment, will recollect only its duty to the whole coun- try ; that this war is not piosecuted upon our part in any spirit of oppression, nor for any purpose ol'conquestorsub- jugation, nor purpose of overthrowing or interfering with the rights or established institutions of those States, but to defend and maintain the supremacy of the Constitution and all laws made in pursuance thereof, and to preserve the Union, with all the dignity, equality, and rights of the sev- eral States unimpaired; that as soon as these objects are accomplished the war ought to cease." — Senate Journal, first session Thirty-Seventh Congress, pp. 84, 85. Now, I call the attention of the Senate to the vote upon that resolution. Every Senator present and voting, save one, voted for that resolutio !t is^ significant, and the country should know who it was that, on the 25th day of July, refused to vote for that resolution. Breckinridge, now an open traitorat the head of rebel forces, Johnson of INlis- souri, in the saino position, Polk, in the same po- sition, Powell, and Trumbull. I was about to do my friend from Illinois, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, injustice. I find, what I did not notice before, that his name is recorded with the names of Breckinridge, Johnson of Missouri, Polk, and Powell, against the resolution. He is consistent, I must confess. Mr. President, what did the distinguished gen- tleman at the head of the State Department, Mr. i Seward, in his letter of instructions, in April last, i to Mr. Dayton, our minister to Paris, say: I '• I need not further elaborate the proposition that the rev- I olution is without a cause. It has not even a pretext. It ' is just as clear that it is without an object. Moral and physical causes have determined inflexibly the character of each one of the Territories over which the dispute has arisen, and botli parties, after the election, harmoniously agreed on all the Federal laws required tor their organiza- tion. The Territories will remain in all respects the sanw. whether the revolution shall succeed or shall fail. The con ditioii of slavery in the several States will remain just the same whether it succeed or fail. There is not even a pre 12 text for the cnmplaint that tlie disaffected States are to be conquered hy the ('iiited State? if the revolution fail; for the rights ofthe States and the condition of every human bcins in them will remain subject to exactly the same laws and ibrms of adnilnistranon whether the revolution shall succeed or fail. In the one case the Slates would be fed- erally connected with the new confederacy ; in the other they would, as now, lie members of the United States ; but their constitutions and laws, customs, habits, and Institu- tions in either case will remain the same. " It is hardly necessary to add to this incontestable state- ment the further fact that the new President, as well as the citizens through whose suffrages he h.ts come iirto the Ad- ministration, have always repudiated all de>''iiis whatever and whenever imputed "to him and them of disturbing; the system of slavery as it is existing under the Constitution and laws. The case, however, would not be fully pre- sented if I were to omit to say that any such effort on his part wr)ul(l be unconstitutional ; and ail his actions in that direction would be prevented by the judicial authority, even though they were assented to by Congress and the people." I respectfully call upon the Senator from Illi- noi.s, taking tlie position that lie does, to read at his leisure this la.st |naragraph quoted from our Secretary of State, a statesman who lias spent tiie greater portion of his life in the service of his country. Think you, Mr. President, that these declara- tions had notiiing to do with our successes at Roanoke, Fort Henry, and Fort Donelson.' I would not detract in the sliglitest degree from the honor won by our lirave soldiers, but I assert it as my honest belief that we owe mucji to the Union sentiment that was in the confederate ser- vice. If the rebel force had been animated by the spirit that inaugurated this rebellion, it would never have surrendered as it did, and it is the re- alization of this fact that made Jeff Davis admit in his message that they had undertaken more than they could achieve. The same fact was pressing upon the rebel ofRcer who wrote to the Richmond Examiner the extract 1 read: "The Roanoke alfair is perfectly incomprehensible. The newspapers are filled Willi extravagant laudations of our valor; the annals of Greece and Rome otl'er no parallel; whole regiments were defeated by companies, and we yielded only to death. Our men finally surrendered 'with noJjlQio on their bayonets,' and what is the loss.' Rich- mond bines, two killed and five wounded; McCulloeh Rangers, one killed and two wounded; the other four com- panies lost in all two killed and eleven wounded. Com- ment is needless. The whole army had better surrender at once, for it will eventually come to it." I think so, too. I concur in opinion with him. Let us never, Mr. President, violate our faith. It has been well remarked by soiine writer that the chief of all powers is moral power, and I belic've we owe more to-day to our moral position which we secured by the declarations I have read than we do to our armies, great as I know our obliga- tions are to thein, which obligations I take pleas- ure in acknowledging. Tliiiik you, Mr. Presi- dent, if General Halleck and Commodore Foote had announced to the people of Tennessee that their purpose was to confiscate their property and turn them houseless and homeless upon the world, and to free their slaves, Nashville and Clarksville would have been ours.' Would they not have been reduced to ashes, and would not their people liave rushed with eagerness to the field and arrayed themselves under the standard of rebellion ? Pass •his bill, disregard the tears of widowhood and the cry of orphans, visit upon the children to the third and fourth generation the sins of the father, im- Eoverish the wife and pauperize the child, as . ill proposes to do, and the mother, instead of tal{% ing upon her knee her lisping babe to instill into his infant mind sentiments of love for his country and gratitude for its beneficence, will cause her child to kneel by her side and swear undying hate and eternal hostility to the Government that took from her the means of support, and turned mother and child beggars upon the world. Pass this bill, and interminable, never-ending war will be the result. " Oh shame to men ! devil with devil damned Firm concord holds ; men only disagree Of creatures rational, though under hope Of heavenly grace, and God proclaiming peace, Yet live in hatred, enmity, and strife Among themselves, and levy cruel wars, Wasting the earth, each other to destroy." This bill proposes to do what the President for- bid General Fremont from doing, and what, in the opinionof the President, would have thrown Ken- tucky against us, and alarmed the Union men of the South. So impressed was the President of the danger to the cause of the country by the an- nouncement of such a policy, by a subordinate military officer, that he addressed to him the fol- lowing letter: Washington, D. C, September 2, 1861. My Dear Sir: Two points in your proclamation of August 'M give me some anxiety. First : Should you shoot a man, according to the procla- mation, the confederates would very certainly shoot our best men in their hands, in retaliation ; and so, man for man, indefinitely. It is, therefore, my order that you allow no man to be shot, under the proclamation, without first having my approbation or consent. Second: I think there is great danger that the closing paragraph, in reUuion to the confiscation of property, and ' iiberatini! slaves of traitorous owners, will alarm our southern Union friends, and turn them against us — perhaps ruin our rather fair prospect for Kentucky. Allow me, therefore, to ask that you will, as of your own motion, modify that paragraph so as to conform to theyirst and /'ourt/i sections of the act of Congress, entitled "An act to confis- cal<' pi cipirty used for insurrectionary purposes," approved August t), lb61, and a copy of which iict I herewith send you. This letter is written in a spirit of caution, not of cen- sure. I send it by a special messenger, in order that it may certainly and speedilv reach you. Yours very truly, " A. LINCOLN. To Major General Fremont. Mr. President, the path of duty is clear. Let us march steadily on observing the line of policy laid down by ourselves. Let us not violate our own solemn declarations by which we are bound not only to our own people but to the whole world. The declarations of our Chief Magistrate and our own solemn resolves have gone to the world, and have been read and approved of in Europe as well as upon this continent. We have a law for the punishment of treason; enforce it; try, convict, and hang by the neck the traitor leaders, the au- thors of this wicked conspirac)' to destroy our Government. Grant to the rank and file who have been seduced and unwillingly and unwillingly forced into t!ie rebellion a pardon for past offenses. Leave it to tlic loyal Legislatures of tlie States, which will have to bring back into the Union their respective States, to exclude from office all whose lives are spared, who willingly participated in this rebellion. In this way you will punish the guilty and protect the innocent. Soirnpressed was 1 with the importance of a declaration of policy such as I have briefly alluded to that, after the capture of /t Donelson,! called upon two gentlemen who uid reason to believe enjoyed the confidence of ne President, and asked them to urge upon liim the propriety of issuing a proclamation announc- ing such a policy as I have indicated. I believed that the hour of victory was the hour of magna- nimity, and I now believe if this had been done, we siiould have had peace in less than ninety days, be mistaken, but I am glad to find that in pinion I am not alone. Hon. James Guth- a speech the other day, expressed similar I will read an extract or two fr:m his s: s day"— >. was the 22d of February, the anniversary .shington's birthday — ■ ''av, if the power was with me, an amnesty anil 3uld be proclaimed to all, whether in arms .iO, in a prescribed time, give up their arms and jcl cause, acknowledge the supremacy of the Consti- .)« and the laws, and agree to submit to them. I am led what I would do vvitli the leaders.' I reply, 1 would \e them to the tribunals and the punishment prescribed lie laws they have violated, but I am for the largest for- less consistent with the restoration of the Constitution ..il the safety of the Union. All are not leaders in this re- bellion who have acted a.s its noisy champions, through the press, or on the stump, or filled high places in the strife." "I would declare this amnesty and pardon as a war measure. It may draw thousands who feel that rebellion is not a remedy for existing or supposed evils, and are earn- estly and hopefully awaiting to escape, as far as possible, from the consequences of their acts. I would open the door for them. Many of the seceded States have always been for the Union, and only await the time they may safely take ground for it." I know, sir, my State has always been, and is to-day, if a fair expression of the opinion of her people could be had, for the Union by fifty thou- sand majority: " I would declare the amnesty and pardon as a financial measure — as a measure of economy in this most expensive and wasteful civil war. 1 believe it would act promptly in the restoration of the Constitution and the Union, and be 1 more effective in rej