003 866 669^ HoUinger pH S3 MiURunH)3-2193 F 291 .BS8 Copy 1 RECONSTRUCTION OF GEORGIA. SPEECH HOE BENJAMIN F. BUTLER, OF m:a.ssa^chusetts. DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 4 DECEMBER 20 AND 21, 1869. "5 WASHINGTON: F. & J. RIVES & GEO. A. BAILEY, UEPOIITERS AND nUNTliUS OF THE DEBATES OF CONQUKSS. 1869. n RECONSTRUCTION OF GEORGIA. The House having under consideration the bill to promote the reconstruction of Georgia- Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts, said : Mr. Speaker: I desire to call the attention of the House for a moment to the action of this bill. I do not propose to discuss the merits of the great question which is involved in its passage, because that for two years has been before the country and is thoroughly and fully understood ; but I wish to call the attention of the House to the several provisions of the bill, and the objections in detail which may be brought against them. This bill was carefully drawn by the Senate committee, then debated at great length, espe- cially by the Opposition, and now comes before this House. In regard to the mere details of the bill amendments might be proposed which would or would not be of any very great con- sequence. There may be matters which if one had his own way exactly he would prefer to the exact wording of the bill as it stands. But I must call the attention of the House to the fact that in order to get any such immaterial amendment we must endanger the bill, and thereby endanger the lives of many good peo- ple in the State of Georgia. An attempt to secure the adoption of any little amendment which a man might think would make the bill a little better, and which, perhaps, might make it a little better, would simply endanger great rights. Therefore I hope that no merely ver- bal amendments, or any amendments which are not vital in the judgment of gentlemen on this side of the House, will be either offered or pressed. The first section of the bill provides that the Governor of the State of Georgia shall forth- with by proclamation call together the Legis- lature. The amendment of the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. Beck] proposes that the Legis- lature shall not be convened within less than thirty nor more than sixty days after the date of the proclamation. Wrong and murder have gone on in the State of Georgia long enough ; and it is our duty at the earliest pos- sible hour to interpose ; and I may be per- mitted to call attention to the fact that the other branch of Congress thought it so clearly their duty to take prompt action that they did a thing almost unheard of at this stage of a ses- sion ; they sat out this bill at a night session in order that they might afiPord relief to the suffer- ing Union men, black and white, in the State of Georgia. This section calls upon the Gov- ernor to convene the Legislature forthwith. The next amendment of the gentleman from Kentucky provides that the Governor shall order elections to be held to fill vacancies before the Legislature shall be called together. Sir, if I could suppose that the Congress of the United States would listen for one moment to that proposition I should suppose the com- mission of a great wrong. Let me state some of the vacancies that there exists in that body. One senator has been murdered ; two repre- sentatives, white and colored, have been mur- dered since we adjourned, and two murdered before. Standing here in my place in the spring, at our late session, I warned members of the House that if they postponed a bill for the settlement of the affairs of Georgia on their heads would be the blood of more than one man. And two of the Legislature who came up here with the Governor to represent the condition of Georgia, and were in the House and heard my words of warning, who went out from this floor, were murdered before they had reached their liomes, to which they were returning. And the Governor of the State of Georgia has offered in vain since a reward of $5,000 for the arrest of their murderers. General Terry, the able and efficient commander in that district, has been searching in vain to ferret out the slayers of those who have been murdered in Georgia in the plain sight of many men. There have been fifteen other members of the Legislature of Georgia, colored and white, driven from their homes and are to-day refu- gees from the counties they were elected to represent, driven off by Kuklux Klans. The Governor was requested to give the names of some of them to the committee, and did give the names of some ten or eleven of such refu- gees from rebel violence. Now, sir, shall we listen to the proposition to wait until the rebel element of Georgia shall elect men in the place of those who have been murdered because they were loyal to the Union ? Not much, I think. I think it is a new way in Republican government to change your major- ities to murder your opponents, aud then ask for time to elect others in the place of those who have been murdered. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, a great wrong would be done to allow this rebel element, these men whose opponents have been murdered for their loyalty, to take ad- vantage of their own wrong. I trust that that amendment will not prevail. You will observe that the bill allows the Gov- ernor to call together every member of the Le- gislature except those who have been murdered and two who have died. When they meet it provides for a separation of the "sheep from the goats," and the good and true loyal men will have a test put to them. The men who opposed the Government and who are still opposing the Government will also have a test put to them to try their loyalty to the Govern- ment. What is that test? Let me read : Each and every member aud each and every per- son claumngtobo elected as a member of said senate or house of representatives shall, in addition to tak- ms the oath or oaths required by the coustitution of Georgia, also take and subscribe and file in the ofiBco of the secretary of State of the State of Georgia one of the following oaths or atlirmations, namely: "I do solemnly swear (oraflirm, as the ease may be) that I have never held the office or exercised the duties of a Senator or Ilepresentative in Congress, nor been a member of the Legislature of any State of the Uni- ted States, nor liold any civil office created bylaw for the administration of any general law of a State, or for the administration of justice in any State or under_ the laws of the United States, nor held any office in the military or naval service of the United States, and thereafter engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or gave aid or comfort to its enemies, or rendered, except in con- sequence of direct physical force, any support or aid t^o any insurrection or rebellion against the United States, nor held any office under, or given any sup- port to, any government of any kind organized or acting in hostility to the United States or levying war against tlic United States. So help me God, (or on the pains and penalties of perjury, as the case may be.)" Now, you will observe that it recites almost the words of the fourteenth amendment, and excludes all those who cannot swear that they have not been Senators and Representatives of the Congress of the United States, or held any civil office created by law for the administration of any general law of a State or for the admin- istration of justice in any State or under the laws of the United States, because all those officers are required by law to take an oath to support the Constitution of the United States. Now, ray friend from Kentucky, [Mr. Beck,] with his usual keenness and foresight, comes in to move to amend this by adding ''and those taking an oath to support the Constitution of the United States ;" that is to say, that you are not only to prove that the man held an ofiBce, but also that he took the oath he was required by law to take. They propose to dodge between the two. A man who is known to have been a judge, although it may be a dishonest and unlaw- ful judge, if hedidnottaketheoath which quali- fied him, and it also may be that no one can prove whether before he entered upon the per- formance of his office he took the oath pre- scribed by the Constitution, and yet he is not disqualified because of the defect in proof. Men will be found who will say, I do not remember whether I took the oath of office or not. We shall find very many men with short memories in this regard, and who, although they held these offices cannot remember whether they took the required oath or not, and if they take the oath will be qualified because it cannot be proved whether or not they did ac- tually take their oflScial oath. If that amendment be adopted this provision will be rendered nugatory and useless in prac- tice. As it is we take the presumption that every man who has held any one of these offices took the oath of office which the con- stitution required he should take ; and having taken the oath of office and then gone into the rebellion he is therefore disqualified. The next amendment that ray friend from Kentucky [Mr. Beck] wishes to make in this section is to put in the word " voluntarily." I call the attention of the House to the fact that the fourteenth amendment disqualifies men who afforded aid to the rebellion, whether voluntarily or involuntarily. Now, the Senate of the United States, believing that it might be felt to be a little hard to disqualify a man who was forced into the rebellion, and wishing to be tender toward all such, and being more kind and more magnanimous than any Govern- ment in the world ever was before, have put in the words "every man who gave any aid except where he was overcome by physical force." Now, what was the reason of putting in that clause in the oath ? It was this : every man in the South, if you would believe them now, was, with a few leading exceptions, forced into the rebellion. Go down South, and you wonder where the men came from who fought against the Union. The men you meet on every hand declare to you, " We were always Union men ; we stood up for the Union cause till we were driven against our will into the rebellion ; we were overcome by superior force." If you admit such statements to be true you would wonder who fought the battles on the part of the enemy when it required a million of northern soldiers to overcome the armies of the rebellion. They use this salve for their consciences down there. Many men say, " I did not go volun- tarily into the rebellion. I kept out of the rebel- lion until my State seceded, and then I was forced by ray oath of allegiance to the State to follow her in the rebellion. I was obliged to go with my State, and therefore my aid to the rebellion was involuntary." There are thou- sands and thousands who will take the oath with that reservation ; and, in order that there may be no mistakes, it is enacted in this bill that, except given under thepressure of physical force, aid to the rebellion shall be taken to be voluntary. And such has been the law of all nations. It is held by every rule of public international law to be the duty of every subject of every Government, to resist even unto death all attempts to force him into rebellion against the Government and no man has ever been held excused under any Government for taking part in rebellion against it until it is shown that he was actually overcome by superior physical force. The law ©f nations requires that the physical force used shall be to an extent to endanger life and limb; and this has always been held to be only an excuse and not a justification in the subject for participation in a rebellion. Therefore this bill in this provision follows the great law of nations. I trust, then, that the amendment will not prevail. It is a very specious argument to use when it is said, "Are you going to disqualify a poor man who was driven into the rebellion?" I answer, no. But when the question is put, ' 'Are you going to disqualify a man who thought he must go into the rebellion because he con- sidered when his State seceded he owed alle- giance to his State and must follow it?" I an- swer, "Yes; he ought not to have admitted for a moment there was any allegiance higher than that which he owed to the Government." That distinction we make in this bill. A man con- scripted and forced into the rebellion is to be excused ; a man who for the sake of gaining or retaining the applause of men or smiles of women went into the rebellion, under whatever circumstances, is not to be excused. The other oath provided in this is simply an oath that all disabilities have been removed. Then we go on to say that any person declining to take these oaths is excluded; and that, I believe, is the entire action of the second sec- tion. The third section provides for punishment in cases of perjury and false swearing. The fourth section provides that the Legis- lature, purged in the way prescribed in the previous portion of the bill, shall have power to organize and shall proceed to organize. Now, I need hardly call the attention of the House to 6 the fact so well known, that when this Legis- lature got together on a former occasion a large number of its members were negroes, and a still greater number of them were rebels at heart ; and with singular magnanimity the colored men said to the other class of members whom I have mentioned: " We will not bring up your rebellion ortheblacknessofyour hearts against you to exclude you if you will not bring up the blackness of our faces against us to exclude us;" and so they made a fair agreement that there should be no disqualification of anybody, either because of color or previous rebellion; but the moment the black-hearted men got in their seats by the permission of the colored men they voted out the black-faced men. This section proposes to undo that great wrong, so that the true-hearted men shall be in and the black-hearted men out. Those men who did the meanest political act that history ever re- corded are to be purged from that Legislature. The next section, the fifth section, provides that every one who by force, violence, or fraud shall interfere with the men so elected to pre- vent them from taking their seats shall be deemed guilty of felony. I take is that no man here will have the face to say anything against that section when it is admitted that ten or fif- teen of the members of the Legislature are driven from their homes by the Kuklux Klan and that senators and representatives have been murdered because they were Republican sen- ators and representatives. I think that there should be some provision which should punish as felony — ay, as the highest felony — any such act of force or fraud, Nov/, sir, I have heard it said — a gentleman who argued the case of Georgia before the committee dared to stand up and tell us — that Georgia is as quiet and peaceful and always has been as any northern State. I put the ques- tion to him, "Sir, do you know any northern State where they murder senators and repre- sentatives and the murders are unavenged?" In answer he told us to look at the report of the Secretary of the Interior and we would find that there are more crimes committed in this District than in the whole of Georgia. I asked him what he meant by '' crimes," and he said, "I mean arrests for crime." That is true, I have no doubt ; and he might have said the same of almost any village in the land, because we arrest crimes and the criminals, so that it appears on our records in the northern States who commit crimes and how many are com- mitted ; but in Georgia there is neither arrest nor punishment, and it does not appear who commit crimes. The assent of the whole community seems to shield the men who there commit the foulest crimes against loyal men. With all these mur- ders there has been no white man punished. No white man has been tried, or arrested even, for the murder in the case of Dr. Ayer. The Conservatives seemed to think they must get up something to meet the cry of his blood to the northern heart, and they arrested a poor old negro man for killing him and telegraphed North that they had caught the murderer ; but the negro went before the magistrate and the grand jury and nothing was found against him. Tliere was not a scintilla of evidence that he had murdered his friend, the man that stood by him ; and that murder is yet unavenged. And yet there are gentlemen in this House who, I understand, will move to postpone this bill, that the rest of the Republican majority of that State Legislature may be murdered, even during the Christmas week, the time when the Son of God came on earth to bring peace and good will to man ! Give them the time asked for, until the third week in Janu- ary, and the Kuklux of Georgia can alter the Union majority in that Legislature. At any rate, they may have enough killed or driven out of the State, so that when the Legislature comes together and the incompetent men are weeded out, there will not be a quorum with which to pass the fifteenth amendment or do anything else ; and then they will claim that as there is no quorum there must be anew election, and in that new election they will take care to elect men who are just as bitter as those we shall get rid of because of their disabilities, but who can by stretch of con- science or otherwise take the oath prescribed by this bill. Are you about to make your- selves parties to any such proceeding as that or tempt other misguided men into that course ? I trust, therefore, there will be no postpone- ment to allow the rebels to work their wicked wills on the Union men of Georgia. The argu- ment for postponement will be pressed that these men have promised, if we will give them time, to reinstate the negroes in the Legisla- ture ; that they passed a resolution to submit the question of the eligibility of negroes to ofGce to the courts, which Governor Bullock vetoed. He vetoed it rightly, because he un- derstood, as the Democratic majority under- stood, that they did not mean to stand by the resolution, and that its passage was a mere political dodge to stave off action by Congress at the last session. But the question was sub- mitted to the supreme court of Georgia on a case made for that purpose, and the supreme court decided that negroes are eligible to office in that State. The Conservatives now say that Governor Bullock has not reconvened the Legis- lature for the purpose of reseating the negroes. Governor Bullock testified before the commit- tee that he bad been ready at all times to recall the Legislature whenever any considerable por- tion of it or any leading gentlemen on the Dem- ocratic side would say that they intended to reseat the negroes or do justice in any way ; that no man on that side has ever called on him to give him any assurances of that sort, but that every one of them has given assurances to the contrary, that they never intend to reseat the negroes. A former Democratic member of this House, Mr. Tift, whoappearedbefore the committee — and he is the only man who has given the assur- ance to us that the negroes would be reseated — said that he had no doubt that, if the Legislature is called together, they v/ill reseat the negroes and unseat their friends, but he is repudiated by all the leading papers in the State. Now, I will ask the Clerk to read a resume of the opinions of the leading papers of the State of Georgia upon this subject, which will be found in the Daily Intelligencer, of Atlanta, Georgia, under date of December lo, 18G9, The Clerk read as follows : " The Democrat ic Press United. — The Democratic press of the State, with perhaps two individual ex- ceptions, have pronounced atcainst the plan of Mr. Tift for squaring the legislation of the State to accord with the Republican party in Congress. Wc do not now call to mind a single Democratic paper of recog- nized position and influence in the party that has not declared boldly in opposition to the tame and humil- iating scheme which would exchange the Democratic platform for a few seats in Congress. Among the last to take position on this point is the Augusta Chron- icle, which closes an article in its issue of the 12th as follow.s: " 'If the Radicals in Congress desire the reseating of the negroes let them pass an act to that effect in accordance with Grant's recommendation. Leading Radicals seem to be well posted in regard to the pre- vailing sentiment of the Legislature and are content to give us time to accomplish our dishonor. We pre- fer—infinitely prefer— the course recommended by General Grant.'" Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. I also hold in my hand a statement signed by the ablest representative in Georgia on that side of tke House, the Democratic speaker of the house of delegates of the Georgia Legislature, tending to prove that they never intended to be bound by any decision the supreme court of that State should make as to the eligibility of the negroes. I ask the Clerk to read it. The Clerk read as follows : Hall of the House of Representatives. Atlanta, February 18, 1869. Dear Sir: Your reporter has verbally informed me that you desired to obtain from me the language used by me a few days since while discussing the veto message of Governor Bullock, of a certain reso- lution which I had introduced, and which the In- telligencer had seen proper to discuss in several issues. That I may not be misunderstood I will comply with the request, and give, as well as I can, the language used by me on that occasion, which was substantially as follows: * * * * "Now, Mr. Speaker, I resist the construction which has here been placed upon my resolution. There is no attempt whatever by that resolution to reseat the negroes in the Legislature. I deny that the supreme court has any right under the constitution of the State to determine the question of the qualifications of members to this Legislature. The only question to be referred to the supreme court is the right of the negro to hold office in Georgia. And while it may be true that a decision of the court to the effect that color should be no disqualification, it could only apply to the next General Assembly to be elected. There can be no appeal from the decision of the last session on behalf of the excluded members to the court. In the absence of any judicial decision upon that subject they decided for themselves, and their decision, so far as this General Assembly is con- cerned, will stand without appeal, unless reversed by the strong arm of military power. No person can, without doing violence to language, place the construction upon the resolution now before the house, which has been placed upon it by certain of its opponents. No one can do it without risking his reputation for intelligence." * * :s * I have the honor to remain, your obedient ser- vant, . N. P. PRICE. Judge J. J. Whitaker, of Intelligencer. Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. Now I think that no gentleman in this House will say that there was ever any intention on the part of the Legislature to submit to the supreme court of the State of Georgia the question of reseating the negroes, or of allowing the opin- ion of that court to have any effect. Mr. Speaker, I was told by a Democratic gentleman who represents a constituency io 8 Georgia, that while he believed and so repre- sented to Congress at its last session that the negroes would be reseated if the supreme court so held, still from his knowledge of the temper of the majority of the house of representatives of Georgia now he had not the slightest hope afit. Now, why are we, the Congress of the United States, to be called upon to wait on bended knees, and with suppliant attitude ask the Legis- lature of Georgia to do what is just and right and what their own supreme court have decided they ought long since to have done, and what they would have done before now if they meant to do it at all? When the supreme court pub- lished their decision if the Democratic major- ity meant to be bound by it every man who voted for the exclusion of the negroes should have signed a petition to the Governor to call the Legislature together at once for the pur- pose of having these men reseated ; but not one of them has done so. Mr. WOODWARD. Will the gentleman allow me to ask him a question? Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. Certainly. Mr. WOODWARD. The Legislature has not been in session since that decision of the supreme court. Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. Well. Mr. WOODWARD. You admit that? Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. Certainly I do. Mr. WOODWARD. The Legislature had no power to convene themselves. Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. No, sir. Mr. WOODWARD. And the Governor has refused to convene them. Now, will the gen- tleman tell us how the Legislature could have complied with the decision of the supreme court? Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. If I ad- mitted all the premises of the gentleman I should have to admit his conclusions. But I am sorry he did not hear what I said ; I suppose it was for want of clearness of speech on my part. I did not say the Governor had refused to call the Legislature together, for he has never done so, nor has he ever been moved by anybody to do so. I said that he had talked with all the leading men on that side that he could get in communication with, and found that they neither desired the Legislature to be called together for that purpose nor to have the negroes reseated in case they were called to- gether. He did not think it advisable, and I agree with him, to put the State to the expense of calling together a Legislature whose action would be of no use and no validity. Mr. WOODWARD. Does the gentleman admit that the Governor has not issued any proclamation convening the Legislature ? Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. Certainly I do. Mr. WOODWARD. Then, sir, the Gov- eraor, who alone under the constitution of the State of Georgia could have convened the Legislature, has not done so ; and I now ask the gentleman to explain why he holds the Legislature at fault for not complying with the decision of the supreme court of the State? Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. I thought I had made myself plain ; but I will restate my position, so that it can be understood by any man of the most ordinary capacity. The majority of that Legislature having ex- cluded the negroes, and by the letter of their speaker which has just been read at the desk having declared that they never meant to re- seat those negroes, and the members of the Legislature with whom the Governor conversed having all said, as the Governor testified this morning, that they did not mean to reseat the negroes, and when he had kept open all sum- mer, as he told us, an offer to call the Legis- lature whenever he could be assured that they would be reseated, I say the burden is on them and not on him to explain the non-action of the Legislature, unless they can show that they asked him to convene the Legislature and that he refused. That is my view of the matter. Now, sir, the seventh section of this act pro- vides — That upon the application of the Governor of Georgia the President of the United States shall employ such military or naval forces of the United States as may be necessary to enforce and execute the preceding provisions of this act. I have heard outside a criticism upon this section that it means such military and naval forces as the Governor of the State may think necessary. By no means. The intention is that such troops may be employed as the Presi- dent of the United States may deem necessary. 9 The Governor, when he thinks any military force is needed, must call upon the President, and it is for the President to send down there under his officers such force as upon a view of the whole case he may think necessary. I am aware, Mr. Speaker, that there is about to be launched upon this House an argument to the prejudice — an argument having for its subject an attack upon the personal character of the Governor ; for I have heard such an argument elsewhere. I, however, call gentle- men's attention to the question of the fairness of dealing with the personal character and repu- tation of a man who has no voice on this floor by making charges against him which he has no opportunity to answer, and putting on rec- ord criminations to which he is unable to reply. Such considerations will be only arguments to the prejudice, and I trust the vote of the House will show they have no weight with them. I cannot see their pertinency to the matter in hand.. The Governor under this bill has but two things to do. One is to call the Legislature together by proclamation ; the other is to call upon the President whenever military forces may be needed to preserve order and property and life in the State of Georgia; and in desig- nating the Governor as the officer to call upon the President for military forces, the bill follows the analogy of the Constitution of the United States, which provides that the President shall send forces to aid in suppressing domestic in- surrection in a State whenever the Governor shall call upon him so to do. Mr. MOORE, of Illinois. I would like to ask the gentleman one question. As I under- stand, this Legislature, while in session and while all the members were present, elected Senators to represent the State in the Senate of the United States. Now, if this bill be passed, and the original Legislature be called together, will the status which existed at that time be restored, and will the election of those Sen- ators be considered valid under the bill ? Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. I am very much obliged to my friend for putting that question, for I had intended to refer to it. This bill does not interfere with that matter at all. The question of the qualifications of persons Ghoaeo as Senators must be referred to the body in which they are to sit. I hold in my hand the report of the Senate committee, who, upon the question of the admission of Mr. Hill, reported "that the Legislature violated the conditions under which it was allowed to or- ganize by permitting disloyal persons to parti- cipate in its proceedings;" and the committee conclude with the following recommendation : " Wherefore your committee focls called upon to recommend that Mr. Hill be not allowed to take his seat in the Senate, for the reason that Georgia is not entitled to representation in Congress.'' So that the passage of this bill will not affect that question. There may or may not be a new election of Senators after a loyal Legisla- ture is assembled in that State. The eighth section provides : That the Legislature shall ratify the fifteenth amendment proposed to the Constitution of the Uni- ted States before Senators and Representatives from Georgia arc admitted to seats in Congress. Thisprovisionis objected toby some because it is feared the Democratic party will allege that coercion was brought to bear upon the State to pass the amendment, and that the ratification given under such cireum&Lances will be invalid. I wish to call the attention of the House a moment to that, and in so doing I wish to re- mark that in the case of almost every admis- sion of a new State into the Union before the war, as in the cases of Michigan, Missouri, Texas, and I might almost say of every new State, conditions-precedent were fixed by the Congress of the United States. Certain things were to be done or certain things were omitted to be done by a State before its admission into the Union could take place, and it was never until these latter days that we heard for the first time that all tliose conditions-precedent were null and void because such congressional actioa was a coercion of a State. Now, sir, such is the bill before you. I have only touched very generally upon its provisions. For one I have no more doubt of the power of Congress to set this great wrong done in Georgia right than I have in the power of Congress to legislate upon any other subject relating to the general welfare of the United States. We admitted this State upon the implied condition that it should have a government to carry out the laws of the United States in good earnest and good faith. Ou the contrary, the State has 10 undertaken to fly in the face of every just and proper law of the United States. We have now the right to resume the power which we gave when we allowed the State to emerge from rebellion and be admitted as a part of the Union, and to require such further conditions and restrictions as to its conduct as wrong- doing on its part has made necessary. I am sorry, Mr. Speaker, to have so long occupied the attention of the House in explain- ing this bill ; I have been much longer than I intended. I trust that our friends on the opposite side will be allowed the full measure of debate within the time. Tuesday, December 21, 1869. Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. In rising to close this debate, having but a few minutes left, I shall not expect, nor will it be expected, that I shall answer at length each one of the elaborately prepared arguments of the gentle- men on the other side, and more especially those which I much more deplore, the argu- ments of the gentlemen [Messrs. Bingham and Fauksworth] who have heretofore acted with us, but who now seem to have caught some- thing of infection from the neighborhood which surrounds them. The first argument, presented by the able gentleman from Indiana, [Mr. Voorhees,] was that we are estopped now from doing any- thing to Georgia, because we have admitted her into the family of States ; because, as he exj^ressed it, we have placed her star among the stars of the cerulean blue of the firmament of our Union, and we cannot strike it out. No ; I agree with the gentleman we cannot strike it out ; but Georgia herself can do so ; and although we put that star there, those who are now in charge of that State have within a very few days refused to raise our flag, with the star in it, over her public buildings when invited in the most solemn manner so to do. And I press this bill to-day because I desire to put the State of Georgia into the hands of those who will raise that flag with every star true and loyal to the Union, representing loy- alty and truth, not rebellion and treason. The gentleman from Wisconsin, [Mr. Eld- ridge,] not content to advocate the cause of hia party friends in Georgia, saw fit to attack the State of Massachusetts. He should have been well aware that Massachusetts is never attacked without finding a defender; feeble, it may be, but she is generally able to defend herself. He caused to be read at the desk a synopsis of the report of a commission ap- pointed by the Governor of Massachusetts to ascertain the abuses existing in the treatment of the insane of that State. I agree with the gentleman that there are in that report very unfortunate, nay, very improper, exhibitions of treatment of those unfortunates; but the gentleman does not seem to comprehend the difference between the State of Georgia and the State of Massachusetts in that regard. la Massachusetts when anybody is harmed in life, property, or estate, there is an investigation, the harm is relieved, and those committing the wrong are punished; in the State of Georgia there is neither investigation nor punishment. To bring about in Georgia a state of things like that in Massachusetts we desire the pas- sage of this bill. Mr. Speaker, the very doc- ument which was read, and which is made the subject of railing accusation, shows that the Governor of Massachusetts was instant in the investigation of private wrongs wherever they were alleged to exist. But I was not especially alarmed at what seemed to be the gentleman's threat that when hereafter his party shall get into power in Con- gress they will treat Massachusetts as we are now treating Georgia because of Massachu- setts' neglect of her insane. There is a distinc- tion in the cases which the gentleman does not seem to take. What we are now doing is this : we, the Representatives of the loyal men of the country, learning that Georgia by her author- ities ill treats the Union men, the loyal men of that State, and does not protect them in life or property or assure them civil or political rights, therefore we are about to interpose to give the direction of affairs of the State to loyal men there because we and they are loyal men. The gentleman from Wisconsin by this same rule threatens us that the Representatives of Massachusetts may be turned out of Congress for her treatment of her insane. Yes, sir, that may happen when insane men are in a majority in this House as loyal men now are. They may then turn Massachusetts out for her want of 11 proper treatment of the insane as we turn out the Representatives from Georgia because of her treatment of loyal men. I agree that such a course may be anticipated when the gentle- man's insane party gets into power, but not untilthen. Mr. ELDRIDGE. Mr. Speaker TheSFEAKEB, pro teynpore, (Mr. Welker.) Does the gentleman from Massachusetts yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin, [Mr. Eld- ridge?] Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. I cannot yield, for I have not the time. Mr. ELDRIDGE. I trust the gentleman will not misrepresent me; I made no such statement. Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. I knew that the gentleman would not like his words, and so I had them written out by the reporters and I incorporate them in my remarks. Here they are, and I leave it to the House whether they bear out my construction of them : After the reading of the treatment of the insane in Massachusetts he says: " The gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Butler] charged that the people of the State of Georgia had forfeited their State government, had forfeited their rights in the Union, had subjected themselves to the control of Congress, in consequence of the murders and crimes which they had committed. Does the gentleman not see that in this admission he subjects his own State, when the time shall come, when a different organization of this House shall exist, when another party may be in power, to the same recon- struction, to the same disposition that he would iutlict upon Georgia." Then the young member from New York [Mr. Cox] comes to the rescue, and I thought he was rather infringing an old proverb that "dog should not eat dog." On that principle I thought that " carpet-bagger'' should not at- tack "carpet-bagger." [Laughter.] I was a little surprised, too, that my friend from New York, with a name so likely to be punned upon, should. make a bad joke upon the name of the Governor of Georgia. [Laughter.] The gentleman insists that Georgia cannot be reconstructed as a State because she is al- ready a State. I insist, sir, that her recon- struction may be promoted notwithstanding she has some of the attributes of a State; and that is the point of difference between us. But he says there can be no reason for reconstruct- ing the State because of the celebrated " white- washing report" of the President, then General Grant, which said that the people of Georgia and other southern States were then in a repentant humor which fitted them to come into the Union. When was that report made ? In the summer of 1865. That was before the Democratic party, assisted by Andrew John- son, had given courage to the rebels to come and demand other rights than the right they then had — therightof each man to be hanged. I agree th?,t in 18G5, almost immediately after the surrender of General Lee and of General Johnston, after the crushing of the rebellion, the rebel people of Georgia went round pray- ing the negroes to take care of them, praying the Union men to intercede for them. They were then in condition to come into the Union and obey the laws of the Union and give to others the rights they desired for themselves. If the same state of feeling, if the same state of submission to the authority of the Government and the laws of the Union now obtained in Georgia as in 1865, when General Grant went through the State, I agree we should have no need to pass this bill. General Grant then saw the surrendered legions of Lee and Johnston ready to accept any terms from the conqueror, while we now see on the con- trary only repentant, recalcitrant, and defiant rebels committing manifold acts of wrong and murder of Union men ; so that, in the language of General Terry as read from the Clerk's desk, life, liberty, and property are not safe in the State of Georgia. The gentleman from New York [Mr. Cox] was mistaken when he told the House that we never thought of this act of reconstruction of Georgia until the message of the President came in here. Sir, this bill differs in no essen- tial particular from the bill I introduced into this House at the last session under the in- struction of the Reconstruction Committee and which failed for want of time, which could not be passed for that and other reasons to which I need not stop now to advert to. This is no new thought of the majority of the House. It is the same bill in all essential particulars. It ought to have passed at the last session, and we would then have saved many valuable lives. For. says General Terry again, negro murders in Georgia are so numerous as hardly to be the subject of comment. 12 We would have saved many lives if we had passed this bill at the last session, and I thank God again, standing in the presence of the House as before, that upon my skirts is none of the blood of these martyred men — martyred in the cause of human freedom and equal rights. Let him who can say as much vote for the proposed postponement of this bill, for only such are entitled to vote. Postpone this bill, will you ! so that when the Governor and the members of the Legislature of Georgia who have been up here with us urging its passage shall return home they may be, by bloody hands of Kuklux Klans, sent to join the ranks of the murdered Ayer and his fellow-members of the Legislature of Georgia who last session stood here with us in defense of the Union and its laws. The gentleman says there is no word of our former legislation which requires the passage of this bill. Be it so. We are now making law, and if we did not make good laws before is that any reason why we should not make good laws now ? But I tell him there is a por- tion of our legislation which does require this. The civil rights bill requires it : that declaration of human rights second only to Magna Charta ; that declaration of rights which shall hereafter be proudly referred to by posterity wherever freedom and equal rights shall exist. The provisions of the civil rights bill are not exe- cuted to-day in Georgia in any one of its safe- guards, and it is time that we should have some kind of government there to put it in force. We are told by the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Bingham] that General Terry can protect life and liberty in Georgia. General Terry says that he cannot, and his words have been read at the Clerk's desk; and he further says that the only way to make life, liberty, and property safe in Georgia is to pass a bill with exactly such provisions as this contains ; and upon this topic I would rather take the word of General Terry than the word of my friend from Ohio. Right here, Mr. Speaker, the stock denun- ciation against Massachusetts of my friend from New York [Mr. Cox] comes in. He says that Massachusetts requires that her voters shall be able to read her constitution and to write their names. True ! Mr. COX. With the gentleman's permission I will strengthen my remark, by saying that Massachusetts requires her senators to live five years in the State, putting them under some sort of servitude Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. I cannot yield. I beg the gentleman's pardon, for he could have moved there and become a senator in Massachusetts in about the same time he became a Representative from the State of New York. [Laughter.] Mr. COX. The gentleman is himself a sort of carpet-bagger, having got here by moving from one place to another, and he ought there- fore to be tolerant to others who are in the same condition. [Laughter.] Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. I am in favor of carpet-baggers. [Laughter.] Mr. COX. With the permission of the gen- tleman Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. I cannot yield any further. Mr. COX. I wish to state only one point. Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. I cannot yield, as I have not time. Mr. COX. I refer the gentleman, then, to his colleague [Mr. Dawes] for the information I was about to state. Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. He is an excellent reference. [Laughter.] Now, sir, allow me to finish what I was say- ing. Everybody in Massachusetts can vote, irrespective of color, who can read and write. The qualification is equal in its justice. An ignorant white man cannot vote there and a learned negro be excluded. But in the Georgia Legislature there was a white man that could hardly read and write, if at all, voted in because he was white, while a negro who spoke and wrote two languages was voted out solely be- cause he was black. It is well that Massachu- setts requires her citizens should read and write before being permitted to vote. Almost every- body votes there under that rule. Certainly every native-born person of proper age and sex votesthere. And thereare hundreds and thou- sands in this country who would thank God continually on their bended knees if it could be provided that the voters in the city of New York should be required to read and write. They would then believe republican govern- ment in form and fact far more safe than now. 13 The gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Bingham] has made an argument for the postponement of this bill. In that he is seconded by the gentleman from Illinois, [Mr. Farxsworth.] They ask to have it postponed till the third Wednesday of January. What advantage do they expect to gain from this? They have told us of none. The gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Bixgham] did not state one advantage which would be yielded by postponement. His whole argument was to show that this is not a good bill. What is the use, then, of postponing it? Why not vote it down now ? Why does he want this bill to live at all for any time? It is, according to the gentleman, so bad, so utterly vile, that he said it was not worthy to be con- sidered in the House of Representatives of the people. If so. why does he want to keejj it alive till the third Wednesday of January? Why not vote it down at once? His argument is suicidal. It is not an argument for postpone- ment ; it is only an argument against the pas- sage of the bill, and as such I am quite willing it should receive the due weight it deserves. It will not harm the bill. But the gentleman insists that the bill is in conflict with our laws heretofore passed. Well, assume that to be true. Why do we pass it at all ? It is because the laws heretofore passed have proved inoperative, and we mean that this bill should be in conflict with those inoperative laws. This is the first time that in a legisla- tive body I have heard it argued against a law that it repealed or made operative another law which it is desirable should be repealed or made operative. Such a law is passed simply because it is necessary to repeal or render oper- ative another law. The gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Bixgham] has not dared to say, he was bound too strongly by the noble record he made duringthe war to be permitted to say that this bill is in contravention of any principle of the Constitution of the United States. He would not so far go back on that record as to agree in that with the party with which he is now acting in opposition to this bill. I was glad to see that the gentleman was bound in this way, and that he only put it that this bill was in con- travention of some of the reconstruction laws passed in 18G7. Now, I want to serve notice on the gentle- man from Ohio, and on everybody else, that all political experience and all legislative wis- dom and all care for the interests of this coun- try did not die out when the Thirty-Ninth Congress adjourned without day. There was a little left then for our present use. But there was one thing said by the gentleman from Ohio which very much pained my ear. He tells us that there was a "line in the message of the President of the United States to Congress which the President of the United States never intended should have been there, and that he knew it." Now, if the gentleman means by "knowing it" that he knew it from the con- text, that is one thing; if he means that he knew it be because the President has told him so, I think he should make known to the House that he is authorized to make that statement. Is the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Bingham] authorized to inform this House from the Presi- dent of the United States of what the Presi- dent has told him? Has the President author- ized him to say to this House that the President has made him a special messenger to inform this House that in a solemn message sent by the Executive to both Houses of Congress there was a line which he never intended should be in that message? Will he say that the Presi- dent has left this line in that document sent to us for our guidance, that he left it there for so many weeks and never let anybody know that it should not be there but the gentleman from Ohio? Are we to understand from him that the Executive thus deals with the Congress of the United States? I think there ought to be no mistake as to this. I have over and over again deprecated any one's undertaking to control the action of this House by means of pretended private commu- nications from the President of the United States. I never for my own part made any such intimations to the House, and I have no respect in that regard for any gentleman who does. When the President of the United States undertakes to communicate with a mem- ber of Congress as a private gentleman with a private gentleman neither of the parties ceases to be gentlemen, and no gentlemen report such a conversation. But if the President of 14 the United States makes such statements for the purpose of being repeated and influencing legislation, then he undertakes to log-roll with members of Congress, which I do not believe ; and then Mr. BINGHAM. I call the gentleman to order. He has no right to talk about the President log-rolling the House. I said noth- ing to justify any such language. I stand upon what I said. And the gentleman from Massa- chusetts [Mr. Butler] has no power to move me a moment in the assertion I made here, that the President of the United States never meant by anything in his message that this House should impose upon Georgia the test- oaths of the reconstruction acts. Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. What the gentleman says I take as he now says it, and am very glad to take it. What he said in his speech was what I commented on. Mr. BINGHAM. What I said was what I say now, sir. Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. The rec- ord will show. Mr. BINGHAM. Well, the record will show. My memory and judgment are as good as yours. Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. I will repeat what the gentleman at first said, so that there can be no mistake : " There is a line in the President's messagre -which he never intended should be there, and I know it." That was what I was deprecating, and the gentleman had no occasion to call me to order. I do not believe the high functionary that we have chosen the President, I do not believe General Grant undertakes to communicate to this House his recommendations in that way, and I do not want any gentleman to tell me that he does. Mr. BINGHAM. Mr. Speaker The SPEAKER. Does the gentleman from Massachusetts yield ? Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. I cannot. Mr. BINGHAM. I only want to say that nobody said he communicated to this House. Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. I do not desire to have members come here, as we had all last session, and say the President wants this and the President wants that. I do not know, I ought not to know, what the President of the United States wants of the Legislature, except what he says to them through his solemn messages. I am quite content with such rev- elations of his purposes and policy, and satisfied with them. I have only adverted to it that we may never have anything more of what I be- lieve to be a most unseemly, as I know it is unparliamentary, exhibition of supposed exec- utive influence that has ever disgraced Con- gress, not from the Executive, but from those who pretend to give his words to control our votes. There is a single other argument to which the moment I have will allow me to call atten- tion. It is that this bill delegates power to the Governor of a State, and that this never was done before by United States laws, and never can be done again. I hold in my hand the Constitution of the United States, and sec- tion four of the fourth article provides that the Executive of a State shall have power to call upon the President of the United States to put in exercise his high functions and send troops to a State to put down domestic violence. At this point I only desire to send to the Chair and have read a letter from the Governor of Georgia, in which he says that the hour this bill becomes a law he will call a ineeting of the Legislature to assemble on the 12th day of January. The Clerk read as follows : Washington. D. C. December 21, 1869. General : The moment the bill under discussion becomes a law I will issue a proclamation conven- inpr the Legislature, as provided in the bill, on the 12th day of .lanuary, 1870. Respectfully. RUFUS B. BULLOCK. General B. F. Butler, Chairman, &c. Mr. MAYHAM. Will the gentleman allow me to ask him a question? Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. If I have time I will. Mr. MAYHAM. I wish to ask the gentle- man if the same provision of the Constitution to which he refers does not provide that the Executive may call upon the President when the Legislature cannot be convened ? Mr. BUTLER, of Massachusetts. Yes, sir; unquestionably it does ; but still it authorizes an exercise of power by a State officer, which is the point at issue. LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 15 The question was taken ; and it was decided in the affirmative — yeas 121, nays 51, not voting 39 ; as follows : YEAS— Messrs. Allison, Ambler, Armstrong, Ar- nell, Asper, Bailey, Beaman. Beatty, Benjamin, Bennett. Benton, Boles, Bowen, Boyd, George M. Brooks, Buck, Buckley, Buffinton, Burchard, Bur- dett, Benjamin F. Butler, Roderick K. Butler, Cessna, Amasa Cobb, Coburn, Cook, Conger, Cullom, Dawes, Deweeso, Dickey, Dixon, Donley, Duval, Ela, Ferriss, Ferry, Finkclnburg, Fisher, Fitch, (lar- field. Halo, Hamilton, llawley. Hay, Heaton, Hill, Hoar, Hoge, Hooper, Hotchkiss, Ingersoll, Jenckes, Alexander H. Jones, .Judd, Kellcy, Kellogg, Kelsey, Knapp, Lash, Lawrence, Logan, Loughridge, May- nard, McCarthy, McCrary, McGrew. Mercur, Elia- kim H. Moore, .Jesse H. Moore, William Moore, Daniel J. Morrell, Samuel P. Morrill, Myers, Neg- ley, O'Neill, Orth, Packard, Packer, Paine, Palmer, Peters, Phelps, Poland, Pomeroy, Prosscr, Roots, Sanford, Sargent, Sawyer, Schenck, Scofield, Shanks, Lionel A. Sheldon, Porter Sheldon, John A. Smiti, William J. Smith, Worthington C. Smith, William 003 865 569 3 Smyth, Starkweather, Stevens. Stevenson, Stokes. Stoughton, Strickland, Strong. Taffe, Tanner, Town- send, Twichell, Tyner, Upson, Van Horn, Cadwalader C. Washburn, Welker, Wheeler, Whitteniore, Wilk- inson. Williams, John T. Wilson, and Winans— 1l:L NAYS— Messrs. Adams, Archer. Axtell, Beck. Biggs, Bingham. Bird, Calkin, Cox, Crebs, Dickin- son, Dox, Eldridge, Farnsworth, (xetz, Greene. Gris- wold, Haldeman, Hambleton, Hamill, Hawkins, Holman, Johnson, Thomas L. .Jones, Kerr, Knott, Marshall, Mayham, McCormick, JMcNccly, Morgan, Mungen, Niblack, Potter, Randall, Reeves, Kiee, Rogers, Joseph S. Smith. Stone, Strader, Swann, Sweeney. Trimble, Van Trump. Voorhees, Wells, Eugene JI. Wilson, Winchester, Witcher, and Wood- ward — 51. NOT V0TIN(1!— Messrs. Ames. Banks, B.arnum. Blair, James Brooks, Burr, Cake, Churchill, Clarke, Cleveland, Clinton L.Cobb, Cowles, Davis, I)ockery, Dyer, Fox, GilfiUan. Gollad.Ty, Haight. Hays, Heflin, Hoag, Hopkins, Julian, Ketcham, Laflin, Lynch, Morrissey, Reading, Schumaker. Shcrrod, Slocuin, Stiles, Tillman, Van Auken, Ward, William B. Washburn, Willard, and Wood— 39. So the bill was passed. % 003 HoUing pH 8. MiURmiF 003 866 669^ HoUingier pH 8 J MiURunH)3.2193