Mr. DAWES. I rise to a question of privilege. It is to make a report from the Committee of Elections.

The SPEAKER. The House is acting upon a question of privilege at the present time.

Mr. DAWES. Task the consent of the House to make a report to be laid on the table and printed.

Mr. ELDRIDGE. I object.

THE PEACE CONFERENCE.

A message in writing was received from the President of the United States, by Mr. NicoLAY, his Private Secretary.

The SPEAKER. Is it the pleasure of the House that the pending business be postponed until the message of the President is presented to the House?

Mr. GARFIELD. I object.

Parke, who refers it to me for my action. I refer it to you in Lieutenant General Grant's absence. E. O. C. ORD, Major General Commanding. HEADQUARTERS ARMY OF POTOMAC, 4 p. m., January 29, 1865.

Major General E. O. C. ORD, Headquarters Army of James: The following dispatch is forwarded to you for your action. Since I have had no knowledge of General Grant's having had any understanding of this kind, I refer the matter to you as the ranking officer at present in the two armies. JOHN G. PARKE, Major General Commanding.

HEADQUARTERS NINTH ARMY CORPS, January 29. Major General JOHN G. PARKE,

Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. Would it not be in order to move to postpone this privi-City Point to-night, if they can. leged question?

The SPEAKER. It would; and then a motion to go to the Speaker's table would be in order, when the President's message would be first reached.

Mr. STEVENS. I move to postpone the privileged question before the House.

The motion was agreed to.

Mr. STEVENS. I now move that the House proceed to the business on the Speaker's table. The motion was agreed to.

The first business taken from the Speaker's
table was a message from the President of the
United States, which was read, as follows:
To the honorable the House of Representatives:

In response to your resolution of the 8th instant, requesting information in relation to a conference recently held in Hampton Roads, I have the honor to state that on the day of that date I gave Francis P. Blair, sr., a card written as follows:

Allow the bearer, F. P. Blair, sr., to pass our lines, go
South, and return.
A. LINCOLN.

December 28, 1864.

That at the time I was informed that Mr. Blair sought the card as a means of getting to Richmond, Virginia, but he was given no authority to act or speak for the Government; nor was I informed of anything he would say or do on his own account or otherwise. Afterward Mr. Blair told me that he had been to Richmond, and had seen Mr. Jefferson Davis; and he (Mr. B.) at the same time left with me a manuscript letter, as follows,:

RICHMOND, VIRGINIA, January 12, 1865. SIR: I have deemed it proper, and probably desirable to you, to give you, in this form, the substance of remarks made by me to be repeated by you to President Lincoln, &c. I have no disposition to find obstacles in forms, and am willing, now as heretofore, to enter into negotiations for the restoration of peace; am ready to send a commission whenever I have reason to suppose it will be received, or to receive a commission if the United States Government shall choose to send one.

That notwithstanding the rejection of our former offers, I would, if you could promise that a commissioner, minister, or other agent would be received, appoint one immediately, and renew the effort to enter into conference, with a view to secure peace to the two countries.

Yours, &c.,

F. P. BLAIR, Esq.

JEFFERSON DAVIS.

Afterward, and with the view that it should be shown to Mr. Davis, I wrote and delivered to Mr. Blair a letter as follows:

WASHINGTON, January 18, 1865.

SIR: You having shown me Mr. Davis's letter to you of the 12th instant, you may say to him that I have constantly been, am now, and shall continue, ready to receive any agent whom he or any other influential person now resisting the national authority may informally send me, with the view of securing peace to the people of our one common country.

Yours, &c.,

F. P. BLAIR, Esq.

A. LINCOLN.

Afterward Mr. Blair dictated for and authorized me to make an entry on the back of my retained copy of the letter last above received, which entry is as follows:

[Indorsement.]

JANUARY 28, 1865. To-day Mr. Blair tells me that on the 21st instant he delivered to Mr. Davis the original of which the within is a copy, and left it with him; that at the time of delivering it, Mr. Davis read it over twice in Mr. Blair's presence, at the close of which he (Mr. Blair) remarked that the part about "our one common country” related to the part of Mr. D.'s letter about "the two countries," to which Mr. D. replied that he so understood it. A. LINCOLN. Afterward the Secretary of War placed in my hands the following telegram, indorsed by him, as appears:

[Cipher.]

OFFICE UNITED STATES MILITARY TELEGRAPH, WAR DEPARTMENT. The following telegram received at Washington, January 29, 1865, from headquarters army of James, 6.30 p. m., January 29, 1865:

To Hon. EDWIN M. STANTON, Secretary of War:

The following dispatch just received from Major General

Headquarters Army of the Potomac : Alexender H. Stephens, R. M. T. Hunter, and J. A. Campbell desire to cross my lines in accordance with an understanding claimed to exist with Lieutenant General Grant, on their way to Washington as peace commissioners. Shall they be admitted? They desire an early answer to come through immediately. Would like to reach If they cannot do that, they would like to come through at 10 a. m. to-morrow morning. O. B. WILSON, Major General Commanding Ninth Corps. Respectfully referred to the President for such instructions as he may be pleased to give. EDWIN M. STANTON, Secretary of War.

[8.30 p. m., January 29, 1865.]

It appears that about the time of placing the foregoing telegram in my hands, the Secretary of War dispatched General Ord as follows: WAR DEPARTMENT, WASHINGTON CITY, January 29, 1865, 10 p. m. Major General ORD:

This Department has no knowledge of any understanding by General Grant to allow any person to come within his lines as commissioners of any sort. You will therefore allow no one to come into your lines under such character or professions until you receive the President's instructions, to whom your telegram will be submitted for his directions. EDWIN M. STANTON, Secretary of War.

[Sent in cipher at 2 a. m., 30th.] Afterward, by my directions, the Secretary of War telegraphed General Ord as follows:

WAR DEPARTMENT, WASHINGTON, D. C., 10 a. m., January 30, 1865. Major General E. O. C. ORD, Headquarters Army James : By direction of the President you are instructed to inform the three gentlemen, Messrs. Stephens, Hunter, and Campbell, that a messenger will be dispatched to them at or near where they now are without unnecessary delay. EDWIN M. STANTON, Secretary of War. Afterward I prepared and put into the hands of Major Thomas T. Eckert, the following instructions and message: EXECUTIVE MANSION, WASHINGTON, January 30, 1865.

SIR: You will proceed with the documents placed in your hands, and on reaching General Ord, will deliver him the letter addressed to him by the Secretary of War, then by General Ord's assistance procure an interview with Messrs. Stephens, Hunter, and Campbell, or any of them, deliver to him or them the paper on which your own letter is written, note on the copy which you retain the time of delivery and to whom delivered; receive their answer in writing, waiting a reasonable time for it, and which, if it contain their decision to come through without further condition, will be your warrant to ask General Ord to pass them through as directed in the letter of the Secretary of War to him. If, by their answer, they decline to come, or propose other terms, do not have them passed through. And this being your whole duty, return and report to me. Yours truly, A. LINCOLN.

Major T. T. ECKERT.

GENTLEMEN: I am instructed by the President of the United States to place this paper in your hands, with the information that if you pass through the United States military lines it will be understood that you do so for the purpose of an informal conference on the basis of that letter, a copy of which is on the reverse side of this sheet, and that if you choose to pass on under such understanding, and so notify me in writing, I will procure the commanding general to pass you through the lines and to Fortress Monroe, under such military precautions as he may deem prudent, and at which place you will be met in due time by some person or persons, for the purpose of such informal conference; and further, that you shall have protection, conduct, and safe return, in all events.

THOMAS T. ECKERT, Major and A. D. C. Messrs. ALEXANDER H. STEPHENS, J. A. CAMPBELL, and R. M. T. HUNTER.

Afterward, but before Major Eckert had departed, the following dispatch was received from General Grant :

[Cipher.]

OFFICE UNITED STATES MILITARY TELEGRAPH,
WAR DEPARTMENT.

The following telegram, received at Washington, January 31, 1865, from City Point, Virginia, 10.30 a. m., January, 1865:

His Excellency ABRAHAM LINCOLN,

President of the United States: The following communication was received here yesterday: PETERSBURG, VIRGINIA, January 30, 1865.

SIR: We desire to pass your lines under safe conduct, and to proceed to Washington, to hold a conference with President Lincoln upon the subject of the existing war, and with a view of ascertaining upon what terms it may be terminated, in pursuance of the course indicated by him in his letter to Mr. Blair of January 18, 1865, of which we presume you have a copy; and if not, we wish to see you in person, if convenient, and to confer with you on the subject.

Very respectfully yours,

ALEX. H. STEPHENS, J. A. CAMPBELL, R. M. T. HUNTER. Lieutenant General U. S. GRANT, Commanding Armies United States.

I have sent directions to receive these gentlemen, and expect to have them at my headquarters this evening, awaiting your instructions. U. S. GRANT,

Lieut. Gen. Commanding Armies United States. This, it will be perceived, transferred General Ord's agency in the matter to General Grant. I resolved, however, to send Major Eckert forward with his message, and accordingly telegraphed General Grant as follows: EXECUTIVE MANSION, WASHINGTON, January 31, 1865. Major General GRANT, City Point, Virginia:

A messenger is coming to you on the business contained in your dispatch. Detain the gentlemen in comfortable quarters until he arrives, and then act upon the message he brings as far as applicable, it having been made up to pass through General Ord's hands, and when the gentlemen were supposed to be beyond our lines. A. LINCOLN. [Sent in cipher at 1.30 p. m.]

When Major Eckert departed, he bore with him a letter of the Secretary of War to General Grant, as follows: WAR DEPARTMENT,

WASHINGTON, D. C., January 30, 1865. GENERAL: The President desires that you will please procure for the bearer, Major Thomas T. Eckert, an interview with Messrs. Stephens, Hunter, and Campbell, and if, on his return to you, he requests it, pass them through our lines to Fortress Monroe, by such route and under such military precautions as you may deem prudent, giving them protection and comfortable quarters while there, and that you let none of this have any effect upon your movements or plans. By order of the President: EDWIN M. STANTON, Secretary of War. Lieutenant General GRANT, Commanding, &c.

Supposing the proper point to be then reached, I dispatched the Secretary of State with the following instructions, Major Eckert, however, going ahead of him: EXECUTIVE MANSION, WASHINGTON, January 31, 1865. Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD, Secretary of State:

You will proceed to Fortress Monroe, Virginia, there to meet and informally confer with Messrs. Stephens, Hun. ter, and Campbell, on the basis of my letter to F. P. Blair, Esq., of January 18, 1865, a copy of which you have. You will make known to them that three things are indispensable, to wit:

1. The restoration of the national authority throughout all the States.

2. No receding by the Executive of the United States on the slavery question from the position assumed thereon in the late annual message to Congress, and in preceding doc

uments.

3. No cessation of hostilities short of an end of the war and the disbanding of all the forces hostile to the Government.

You will inform them that all propositions of theirs not inconsistent with the above will be considered and passed upon in a spirit of sincere liberality. You will hear all they may choose to say, and report it to me. You will not assume to definitely consummate anything. Yours, &c. ABRAHAM LINCOLN.

On the day of its date the following telegram was sent to General Grant:

WAR DEPARTMENT, WASHINGTON, D. C., February 1, 1865. Lieutenant General GRANT, City Point, Virginia: Let nothing which is transpiring change, hinder, or delay your military movements or plans.

A. LINCOLN.

[Sent in cipher at 9.30 a. m.] Afterward the following was received from General Grant:

[In cipher.]

OFFICE UNITED STATES MILITARY TELEGRAPH,
WAR DEPARTMENT.

The following telegram received at Washington 2.30 February 1, 1865, from City Point, Virginia, February 1, 12.30 p. m.:

His Excellency A. LINCOLN, President of the United States: Your dispatch received. There will be no armistice in consequence of the presence of Mr. Stephens and others

within our lines. The troops are kept in readiness to move at the shortest notice, if occasion should justify it.

U. S. GRANT, Lieutenant General.

To notify Major Eckert that the Secretary of State would be at Fortress Monroe, and to put them in communication, the following dispatch was sent:

WAR DEPARTMENT, WASHINGTON, D. C., February 1, 1865. Major T. T. ECKERT, care General GRANT,

City Point, Virginia: Call at Fortress Monroe, and put yourself under the direction of Mr. S., whom you will find there. A. LINCOLN.

On the morning of the 2d instant the following telegrams were received by me, respectively from the Secretary of State and Major Eckert:

FORTRESS MONROE, VIRGINIA, 11.30 p. m. February 1, 1864. The President of the United States: Arrived at 10 this evening. Richmond party not here. I remain here. WILLIAM H. SEWARD.

CITY POINT, VIRGINIA, 10 p. m., February 1, 1865. His Excellency A. LINCOLN, President United States:

I have the honor to report the delivery of your communication and my letter at 4.15 this afternoon, to which I received a reply at 6 p. m., but not satisfactory.

At 8p. m. the following note, addressed to General Grant, was received:

CITY POINT, VIRGINIA, February 1, 1865.

SIR: We desire to go to Washington city to confer informally with the President personally in reference to the matters mentioned in his letter to Mr. Blair of the 18th January ultimo, without any personal compromise on any question in the letter. We have the permission to do so from the authorities at Richmond.

At 9.30 p. m. I notified them that they could not proceed further unless they complied with the terms expressed in my letter. The point of meeting designated in above note would not, in my opinion, be insisted upon. Think Fortress Monroe would be acceptable. Having complied with my instructions, I will return to Washington to-morrow, unless otherwise ordered.

THOS. T. ECKERT, Major, &c.

On reading this dispatch of Major Eckert, I was about to recall him and the Secretary of State when the following telegram of General Grant to the Secretary of War was shown me:

[In cipher.]

OFFICE UNITED STATES MILITARY TELEGRAPH,
WAR DEPARTMENT.

The following telegram received at Washington 4.35 a. m.. February 2, 1865, froin City Point, Virginia, February 1, 1865:

Hon. EDWIN M. STANTON, Secretary of War:

Now that the interview between Major Eckert, under his written instructions, and Mr. Stephens and party has ended, I will state confidentially, but not officially, to become a matter of record, that I am convinced, upon conversation with Messrs. Stephens and Hunter, that their intentions are good and their desire sincere to restore peace and union. I have not felt myself at liberty to express even views of my own or to account for my reticency. This has placed ine in an awkward position, which I could have avoided by not seeing them in the first instance. I fear now their going back without any expression from any one in authority will have a bad influence. At the same time, I recognize the difficulties in the way of receiving these informal commissioners at this time, and do not know what to recommend. I am sorry, however, that Mr. Lincoln cannot have an interview with the two named in this dispatch, if not all three now within our lines. Their letter to me was all that the President's instructions contemplated to secure their safe conduct if they had used the same language to Major Eckert. U. S. GRANT, Lieutenant General.

This dispatch of General Grant changed my purpose, and, accordingly, I telegraphed him and the Secretary of State respectively, as follows:

WAR DEPARTMENT, WASHINGTON, D. C., February 2, 1865. Lieutenant General GRANT, City Point, Virginia: Say to the gentlemen I will meet them personally at Fortress Monroe, as soon as I can get there.

[Sent in cipher at 9 a. m.]

A. LINCOLN.

On the night of the 2d I reached Hampton Roads, found the Secretary of State and Major Eckert on a steamer anchored off the shore, and learned that the Richmond gentlemen were on another steamer anchored off shore, in the Roads, and that the Secretary of State had not yet seen or communicated with them. lascertained that Major Eckert had literally complied with his instructions, and I saw, for the first time, the answer of the Richmond gentlemen to him, which, in his dispatch to me of the 1st, he characterizes as "not satisfactory." That answer is as follows:

CITY POINT, VIRGINIA, February 1, 1865. MAJOR: Your note, delivered by yourself this day, has been considered. In reply, we have to say that we were furnished with a copy of a letter of President Lincoln to Francis P. Blair, Esq., of the 18th of January ultimo, another copy of which is appended to your note. Our instructions are contained in a letter of which the following is a copy:

RICHMOND, January 28, 1865.

In conformity with the letter of Mr. Lincoln, of which the foregoing is a copy, you are to proceed to Washington city for informal conference with him upon the issues involved in the existing war, and for the purpose of securing peace to the two countries.

With great respect, your obedient servant,

JEFFERSON DAVIS.

The substantial object to be obtained by the informal conference is to ascertain upon what terms the existing war can be terminated honorably.

Our instructions contemplate a personal interview between President Lincoln and ourselves at Washington city, but, with explanation, we are ready to meet any person or persons that President Lincoln may appoint, at such place as he may designate. Our earnest desire is that a just and honorable peace may be agreed upon, and we are prepared to receive or submit propositions which may, possibly, lead to the attainment of that end. Very respectfully, yours,

ALEX. H. STEPHENS, R. M. T. HUNTER, JNO. A. CAMPBELL.

THOMAS T. ECKERT, Major and A. D. C.

A note of these gentlemen, subsequently addressed to General Grant, has already been given in Major Eckert's dispatch of the 1st instant.

I also here saw, for the first time, the following note, addressed by the Richmond gentlemen to Major Eckert:

CITY POINT, VIRGINIA, February 2, 1865. MAJOR: In reply to your statement that your instructions did not allow you to alter the conditions upon which a passport could be given to us, we say that we are willing to proceed to Fortress Monroe and there to have an informal conference with any person or persons that President Lincoln may appoint on the basis of his letter to Francis P. Blair, of the 18th of January ultimo, or upon any other terms or conditions that he may hereafter propose, not inconsistent with the principles of self-government and popular rights, on which our institutions are founded.

It is our carnest wish to ascertain, after a free interchange of ideas and information, upon what principles and terms, if any, a just and honorable peace can be established without the further effusion of blood, and to contribute our utmost efforts to accomplish such a result.

We think it better to add that in accepting your passport we are not to be understood as committing ourselves to anything, but to carry to this informal conference the views and feelings above mentioned. Very respectfully, yours, &c.,

ALEXANDER H. STEPHENS,
J. A. CAMPBELL,
R. M. T. HUNTER.

THOMAS T. ECKERT, Major and A. D. C.
NOTE. The above communication was delivered to me
at Fortress Monroe at 4.30 p. m., February 2, by Lieuten-
ant Colonel Babcock, of General Grant's staff.

THOMAS T. ECKERT, Major and A. D. C. On the morning of the 3d the gentlemen, Messrs. Stephens, Hunter, and Campbell, came aboard our steamer, and had an interview with the Secretary of State and myself of several hours' duration. No question of prelimninaries to the meeting was then and there made or mentioned; no other person was present; no papers were exchanged or produced, and it was, in advance, agreed that the conversation was to be informal and verbal merely.

On our part the whole substance of the instructions to the Secretary of State, hereinbefore recited, stated and insisted upon, and nothing was said inconsistently therewith; while by the other party it was not said that, in any event, or on any condition, they ever would consent to reunion, and yet they equally omitted to declare that they never would so consent. They seemed to desire a postponement of that question, and the adoption of some other course first, which, as some of them seemed to argue, might or might not lead to reunion, but which course we thought would amount to an indefinite postponement. The foregoing, containing, as is believed, all the information sought, is respectfully submitted.

ABRAHAM LINCOLN.

The message was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed.

Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. In view of the last clause of that message, I move that twenty

thousand extra copies be printed. I desire to say here that I think this message will meet the cordial approbation of the entire loyal people of this country, and shows wisdom and discretion in the President of the United States in acting upon this whole matter.

Mr. BROOKS. But for the remarks of the gentleman from Illinois, [Mr. WASHBURNE,] I do not know that I should have felt it my duty just now to express any opinion upon these documents, for it is difficult to comprehend them as they are rapidly read here; but I rise to say, as I understand them, I do not think the President will meet the cordial approbation of all the loyal people of these United States. From the documents that are submitted by the President of the United States, and also the report which comes to us from the rebel chief and his commissioners, these two facts seem to be evident: first, that the President of the United States will consent to no armistice whatsoever between us and the rebel States without the previous absolute submission on the part of those rebel States; and next, that the President will enter into no consultation whatsoever with any single State of those rebel States. The President of the United States is silent upon that last particular subject; but it is positively affirmed, both in the remarks of the chief of the rebel States and his commissioners, that our President would not treat with any one of the rebel States. The President is silent upon the subject, while Mr. Davis says:

"I herewith submit, for the information of congress, the report of the eminent citizens above named, showing that the enemy refused to enter into negotiations with the confederate States, or any of them separately, or to give to our people any other terms or guarantees than those which the conqueror may grant, or permit us to have peace upon any other basis than an unconditional submission to their rule, coupled with the acceptance of their recent legislation, including an amendment to the Constitution for the emancipation of all negro slaves, and with the right on the part of the Federal Congress to legislate on the subject of the relations between the white and black population of each State."

The three rebel commissioners and the rebel president thus positively affirm in their official report that the President of the United States would neither consult nor act without previous submission, nor agree to an armistice with any single State of that rebel government any more than with the rebel government itself.

Mr. Speaker, I am reluctant to say, but nevertheless I feel it my duty to say, that in a great civil war like this, where so much blood has been shed and so much treasure expended, the President of the United States, without all these preliminary conferences and arrangements but calculated to embarrass any negotiations whatsoever, should, in the spirit of a larger and nobler mind, have thrust away all these petty intricacies and approached the great subject under consideration. And yet I should be unjust to him if I did not say that under the embarrassments surrounding him he deserves the thanks of the country for even approaching these commissioners, and for making any effort whatsoever for the attainment,of peace.

am aware, Mr. Speaker, of the difficulties that already beset any civil power in any effort to make a peace; and I sometimes fear that even now we have reached a period in our history like that which has existed in other nations heretofore engaged in great civil wars, when no legislative or civil power can end a war like this, and when peace is to be obtained by military chieftains only, not altogether on the field of battle, but by the control and subjection of the people in their respective districts to their arms and their wills. The spirit of peace exists; but there is no civilian or statesman great enough to lead or guide it. Thousands and tens of thousands of all parties, North and South, would welcome it on any honorable terms; but no man in power, North or South, dare take bold steps to forward it. The armies, too, North and South, are panting for it, as was shown when, amid the loudest cheers, the rebel commissioners departed from the rebel ranks, and with reechoing cheers were welcomed into ours. Soldiers even now could and would make honorable peace; but in the storm of passions excited by men in civil life, peace, I fear, is passing beyond the control of civil chiefs.

When the President of the United States left this capital, the fanaticism and the fanatics his policy has here created opened at once in full howl upon him. In view of the demonstrations which have been made in another branch of this

Government, to which it would not be parliamentary to refer, it required some courage on his part to take any steps whatsoever for the pacification of our country. If he had had the spirit of a Jackson, or the spirit of a Clay, the higher, the nobler, the more self-relying spirit of the men who, in crises like these, have hitherto controlled the destinies of this country, he would have allowed no men, not even Senators, thus booted and spurred, to mount and rowel him, or he would have unhorsed them and thrown them into that ditch where they ought to have been thrown when they attempted to thwart all pacification.

But the President deserves credit and thanks for resisting, even for a moment, the denunciations hurled forth against him when entering into consultation with the rebels on board of the steamers in the Chesapeake, near Fortress Monroe. I thank him for the effort, no matter what motives may have prompted it. It is what I asked and desired of him in December last, but what was met in some quarters on the other side of the House in a spirit highly condemnatory of the course I suggested. I should be inconsistent, then, with myself, and unjust to him, if I did not avail myself of this opportunity to thank him, amid the denunciations by which he was surrounded, for entering into any preliminary negotiations whatsoever with these rebel commissioners. But I deeply regret to say that, when the President approached these commissioners in consultation, he did not carry out the spirit with which he seemed to start, and then act on his own responsibility, that is, on rebel submission to the Constitution of the country, the Constitution which was handed down to us by our fathers, ask no other terms whatsoever, and add that on these terms alone he would enter. into preliminary arrangements for peace. It seems to me, also, that when the opportunity was offered to him to negotiate with any one of the rebel States he should have cheerfully availed himself of that opportunity.

Mr. Speaker, there arises a period in the history of civil wars when power passes from the civil to the military authorities alone. Sir, that period is passing, nay, may have already passed, when either an Abraham Lincoln or a Jefferson Davis, if both were never so much disposed, could hush the storm they have raised. Certain it is that while Abraham Lincoln is driven, as often he is, from positions he takes, by the howl of the hounds that beset him, the fate of Acteon in the fable affrights him, lest he be devoured by them; and hence, from the Potomac to the Passamaquoddy, he strives in vain to still the elements of passion and of pelf that there everywhere reign; while not less powerless is Jefferson Davis to put down the specter of rebellion he has conjured up from the Rio Grande to the Rapidan. Sir, neither of those men, high in position as they are, was cradled in the conciliatory school of a Washington, an Adams, a Jefferson, or a Hamilton; and into neither of them at their birth did God breathe the great spirit that could lift them above human passion to comprehend the awful responsibility of their influence over human life and human affairs. Both are but drifting, and drifting now, as if on the white crests of ocean billows, while both dread to steer their craft to any port or harbor for fear of the mutiny they may have on board when the surges cease to roll and to terrify their crews. Sir, when such a crisis arises in the history of civil wars, peace passes not only from the jurisdiction of Presidents but from Federal and rebel Congresses also. Peace passes then from all civil jurisdiction, and all the terms of peace. When the sword is unsheathed too long the toga and the robe can never drive it back to its scabbard. Is not peace already admitted to be only with the sword, or the men of the sword? Are Congressmen anything? Are not armies everything? And in the end, in all probability, if this war is prolonged many years more, that power which dictated peace to the senate and people of Rome, to the commonwealth of England, and to the republic of France, some Augustus Cæsar, some General Monk, or some rising Bonaparte will dictate peace to all of us-the peace of despotism and of civil death upon the ruins of the Constitution of our country. This is the peace of civil wars. This is the peace of history, This is the record of two thousand years. And may God avert that unhappy destiny from us

which I fear having been given to all other nations, is at last reserved to our unhappy country.

The President, so it seems to me, Mr. Speaker, threw away about the last opportunity he will have to make peace when he refused, as stated by the rebel commissioners, to entertain" terms or proposals of any treaty or agreement looking to an ultimate settlement either with the authorities of the confederate States or from the States separately." The refusal in any form to recognize the government of the confederate States-although a government de facto, yet not a government de jure-because not a government recognized by our Constitution, can be understood; but the refusal to recognize the well-known de jure as well as de facto governments of the States of the South seems to me as unwise and as impolitic as it is indefensible, under our mixed Governments, Federal and State. There are elements of peace in Georgia, in Alabama, in North Carolina, and if the executives of those States, or if those States were separately consulted and negotiated with, peace, in all probability, could be given to the land without further arbitrament of the sword and cannon on the field of battle. North Carolina is ready for peace if she could be preserved from the rebel army. Georgia (and Stephens represents the feelings of Georgia in a great degree) is in a condition to make peace if her institutions, her State rights and sovereignty, can be preserved. Indeed, Mr. Stephens says, in a letter that has been read here, to Major Eckert, that he desires peace "upon any terms or conditions that he," the President, Mr. Lincoln, "may hereafter propose, not inconsistent with the principles of self-government and popular rights, on which our institutions are founded." Give to Georgia, then, the guarantee of self-government and of popular rights within the State, and peace doubiless may be restored to this Union by a separate negotiation with the State. There are, too, elements of peace in Alabama. I regret that the President has thus closed the door of peace and opened the doors of everlasting war by declining any consultation with the separate States of North Carolina, Georgia, or Alabama. There is no other hope of peace now left. Even if Davis himself were to attempt peace in the rebel capitol I have but little doubt that civil war would ensue within his domain from resistance to it of wild men there. And if Abraham Lincoln were to restore peace here only on condition of the restoration of the Union, I think I can name five or six northern States that would be soon involved, if not in physical rebellion against the government of Abraham Lincoln

Mr. ASHLEY. Not by my vote.

Mr. BROOKS. I have an answer from the honorable gentleman from Ohio, that his State will not submit to peace on the restoration of the Union as it was. Let me ask him now what would Ohio do on condition that Abraham Lincoln negotiated a treaty of peace on the restoration of the Union as it was?

Mr. ASHLEY. If the constituted authorities of the country would sustain the President the State of Ohio would submit.

Mr. BROOKS. Then the gentleman contradicts himself.

Mr. ASHLEY. While Ohio is speaking herself for her own citizens, her voice would be, as mine shall be, against a restoration of the Union with the domination of the slave power and with the rebels back in this Capitol.

Mr. BROOKS. It is in the power of the President of the United States alone to negotiate a treaty of peace. This is not like a foreign war in which it is necessary to submit a treaty of peace to the Senate of the United States for ratification; but in this matter of a negotiation for peace the supreme power is in the President of the United States. I desire, therefore, to ask an explicit reply to this question from the gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. ASHLEY.] Suppose Abraham Lincoln, the constituted authority of this country, should make peace to-morrow with the rebel

authorities, and bring them back to this Capitol, upon the basis of the Union as it was, would 'Ohio submit then to Abraham Lincoln ?

Mr. ASHLEY. What does the gentleman from New York [Mr. BROOKS] mean by "the restoration of the Union as it was?"

Mr. BROOKS. I mean the right of self-gov. ernment within the States.

Mr. ASHLEY. Nobody denies that.

Mr. FARNSWORTH. Does the gentleman from New York [Mr. BROOKS] mean the Union of the States as it was on the basis of the forgiveness of rebels, and the return to them of the slaves who have been fighting the battles of the Union?

Mr. BROOKS. The President of the United States has absolute power of pardoning these rebels, and if he chose to pardon them and exercise that power, I have not a reply that I can quite understand from the gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. ASHLEY,] whether he would submit or not to the exercise of that prerogative by the President of the United States.

But as the gentleman does not choose explicitly to reply to my question, what I want to know from him, and what the country hereafter will want to know, is whether this war is expressly to be prosecuted on the basis of a new Constitution, new institutions, new Government, new laws, and a new country. I tell him here that if he realizes his project of giving free suffrage, universal, uncontrollable suffrage to the negroes of the South, who shall displace the white man's Government within that region, and bring up only the negroes of the South, to be represented here in this Congress; if that is his new Constitution, I desire no longer to prosecute war for any such purposes as that.

Mr. ASHLEY. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from New York [Mr. BROOKS] is very well aware of the fact that the question of the right of suffrage is confined exclusively to the States of this Union. If they choose, as the State of New York and other northern States have done, to permit blacks to vote, as many southern States formerly did, that is a question over which Congress has no power.

Mr. BROOKS. Then the honorable gentleman differs altogether from the honorable gentleman from Pennsylvania, [Mr. KELLEY,] and other honorable gentlemen, who are insisting that Louisiana shall not be readmitted into Congress unless the negroes there are first permitted to vote.

Mr. KELLEY. I do not understand the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. ASHLEY] to differ from me in opinion upon the question put in issue by the gentleman. I took occasion, some days ago, to spend a few minutes in illustrating the fact that the question of suffrage is a question belonging peculiarly to the people of each State. I have never entertained any other opinion. It has, however, always belonged to Congress to determine who might exercise the right of suffrage within the Territories; but in the States the question be longs to the States themselves.

Mr. BROOKS. Let me ask the honorable gentleman from Pennsylvania, [Mr. KELLEY,] in order that I may understand him thoroughly, has he proposed to let Louisiana enter into this Union without a preliminary provision permitting the negroes in Louisiana to vote?

Mr. KELLEY. I propose, so far as my vote shall be concerned, to admit Louisiana into the Union whenever she comes here with a constitution republican in form, which shall have been ordained by the people of that StateMr. ASHLEY. Loyal people. Mr. BROOKS. Black people?

Mr. KELLEY. After our armies shall have made conquest of the entire territory of the State, or the rebels now in arms against us shall have submitted to the authority of the supreme Government of the land; that is the administration to which the people for the time being have confided the administration of affairs and the enforcement of the Constitution and laws. I do not propose by any vote of mine, however, to subject the people of that State who are now and at all times have been loyal to the Government to the control of the pardoned but unconverted traitors who have attempted to overthrow my Government and divide my country.

Mr. BROOKS. The honorable gentleman from Pennsylvania makes a very good speech within my speech, and yet when he speaks of the "peo

ple" of Louisiana he means the black people as well as the white people of Louisiana, and more the blacks than the whites, because the black people are largely in the majority there.

Mr. KELLEY. Why, sir, I have always regarded an intelligent black patriot as a better man and a better citizen than the most lily-livered traitor that ever capered in a lady's chamber. [Laughter and applause.]

Mr. BROOKS. The honorable gentleman from Pennsylvania has made that speech once before in this House during this session

Mr. KELLEY. I would be glad if the gentleman would refer to the expression I have just uttered. I do not think he can find it in the Globe.

Mr. BROOKS. And if he repeats it again he may again have applause from the surrounding galleries and from certain members on the floor of this House.

But I tell the honorable gentleman from Pennsylvania and all other gentlemen, that while I am willing to recognize the equality of the negro before the law in the State from whence I come, yet, whatever may be the law of my State, I do not intend here in Congress to support any effort to impose upon other States or upon Territories terms which shall compel them to allow the negroes there to vote, thus to govern the whites.

Mr. KELLEY. Will the gentleman yield to me one moment?

Mr. BROOKS. I cannot yield except for a brief question.

Mr. KELLEY. I desire merely to ask a question. The gentleman speaks of Territories. I desire to ask him whether the Congress of the United States has not always regulated the question of suffrage in the Territories when giving them organic laws, and whether any territorial act, either of the Congress of the Confederation or of the Congress of the United States down to 1812, ever excluded the free negro from the exercise of the right of suffrage. Did Congress, by any act prior to 1812, when the Territory of Missouri was organized, ever exclude the free negro from the exercise of suffrage in the Territories?

Mr. BROOKS. Congress never attempted, before the assembling of this Congress or the preceding one, to impose negro suffrage upon any Territory of this Union.

Mr. KELLEY. The gentleman is mistaken. In 1812, the Congress of the United States for the first time excluded the free negro from suffrage in the Territories. Notwithstanding the fact that South Carolina undertook, as early as 1778, to force the insertion of the word "white" into the provision of the Articles of Confederation regulating the right of suffrage, Congress, from the very organization of the Government down to the year 1812, uniformly maintained the right of the negro to suffrage in all the Territories, whether they lay north or south of the slave line.

Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Speaker, it would be too much of a diversion from the main objects of my present remarks to enter into a historical discussion upon negro suffrage as it may have been exercised in different States or Territories. I am well aware that until the abolition excitement began, a small portion of the negroes of North Carolina, and even of Tennessec, had the right of suffrage. All this is aside from the President's message that I rose to discuss, and I do not propose to be further diverted from that discussion now.

Mr. ASHLEY. Will the gentleman yield to me for a moment?

Mr. BROOKS. I will hear the gentleman from Ohio.

Mr. ASHLEY. The gentleman stated some moments ago that in a certain contingency there were six northern States that would rebel against the Government. I asked the gentleman once before to name the States to which he referred, and he declined to do so. I now ask him again to name them.

Mr. BROOKS. The gentleman has declined to answer my question. I ask him again, if Abraham Lincoln should admit the southern States again, if the rebels formerly representing the southern States here should be pardoned and admitted upon this floor-say Toombs of Georgia, or Jefferson Davis-would the honorable gentleman submit to it?

Mr. ASHLEY. The President may pardon and this House may admit any gentleman elected

to the constitutionally expressed will of the majority of this or the other branch of Congress in admitting such men.

Mr. BROOKS. That is not an answer to my question. I ask whether, if the executive authorities of the United States were to exercise this power of pardon, and admit the rebels of the southern States to amnesty and pardon, and those rebels were to be elected to Congress and admitted within this Capitol, would he submit?

Mr. ASHLEY. So far as I am concerned I would submit to the constituted authorities of the land. So far, however, as my vote here is concerned, it shall never be given for the admission

of rebels here.

Mr. BROOKS. Is not the President, in the case of pardon, the constituted authority of the United States?

Mr. ASHLEY. I do not recognize the President of the United States as the constituted authority of the land. The coördinate branches of Congress, acting with the President, constitute the Government.

Mr. BROOKS. Then, if sixty or seventy rebel Representatives were admitted upon the floor of this House, and forty or fifty of us were to unite in admitting them, what would the gentleman do? Mr. ASHLEY. I would submit, of course. I have answered the gentleman's question before. Personally I would vote against them. If a majority of this House, or of the Government as it may be constituted now or hereafter, should permit gentlemen to be admitted from rebel States, I should submit.

Mr. BROOKS. The gentleman has answered my question now. Taking him, therefore, as the standard of opinion, I do not think then that five or six States would rebel against the authority of the United States, for I now understand him to say that when the President assumes the merciful prerogative of pardon, and exercises that prerogative which the people intrusted to him, and the doors of Congress are again opened to Representatives from the rebel States, the gentleman will sit here with me, if we both happen to be elected members of the House, and submit to amnesty and pardon and to Abraham Lincoln, receiving them as friends and brothers. I am glad to get that concession from so extreme a man as the honorable gentleman from Ohio. I desire that it may reach the ears of the President. I desire it to go out to the South as an invocation from him to the southern rebels to lay down their arms and come once more within the portals of this Capitol.

Mr. INGERSOLL rose.

Mr. BROOKS. I wish the gentleman would pardon me. I want to go on with my remarks. Mr. INGERSOLL. I wish to say that the American Congress

The SPEAKER. Does the gentleman from New York yield?

Mr. BROOKS. I would rather not. I will yield some other time.

I was about to say, when interrupted in the course of my remarks, that Mr. Lincoln, in refusing to negotiate with the States in rebellion, has not consulted the antecedents in our history. When the State of Pennsylvania was in rebellion against the Government of the United States on the subject of whisky, the then President of the United States, high and lofty as he was

Mr. THAYER, The State of Pennsylvania never was in rebellion.

Mr. BROOKS. Then I will correct my remark. When a large portion of the people of the State of Pennsylvania were in a state of rebellion, Washington himself did not deem it beneath his dignity to consult with those rebels and institute a commission to negotiate. When in the State of Rhode Island there was rebellion, or when a considerable portion of them was in rebellion, the then President of the United States did not deem it beneath his dignity to consult the rebels. A large portion of the people of Rhode Island were in rebellion.

Mr. JENCKES. Against whom? Mr. BROOKS. Against their own State. Mr. JENCKES. And they were treated as they deserved to be.

Mr. BROOKS. And a large portion of the

When in 1832 the State of South Carolina was in rebellion, when the Army and Navy of the United States were surrounding the city of Charleston, the high, imperious, and haughty General Jackson, who threatened to string up the traitors upon the lamp-posts, did not hesitate to send General Scott, Colonel Bankhead, and civilians, too, over and over again, to consult with Governor Hayne and General Hamilton, and other leaders of that rebellion, to propitiate the State of South Carolina and avert the storm of civil war. When civil war was imminent, when the armies were approaching each other, Clay, even the fiery spirit of Henry Clay, in the other House of Congress, did not hesitate, for the sake of peace, to throw aside the protective tariff interests of the States of Pennsylvania and Massachusetts and to surrender that mere question of money in order to propitiate that State. And a bill of compromise and concession General Jackson cheerfully signed. Men of such lofty spirit did not hesitate to consult with the leaders of actual organized rebels in South Carolina, in order to avert the storm of civil war; and why should President Lincoln hesitate now to follow in such illustrious steps?

These are the precedents of our history which it seems to me the President of the United States should have consulted when he entered into this negotiation with the rebels in the Chesapeake bay, and when one of their propositions was separate negotiations with the rebel States of the Federal Union.

Mr. INGERSOLL. I would like to inquire of the gentleman where he obtains the evidence that there was a proposition made to the President of the United States, that the separate States would enter into negotiations for peace upon the basis of the Union, or upon any other basis.

Mr. BROOKS. I have already read the authority.

Mr. INGERSOLL. Where is it to be found? Mr. BROOKS. It is in the communication made by Jefferson Davis to the rebel congress, and in the letter of the three commissioners to the rebel congress. That is my authority, and there is no denial of it in the documents read at the desk from the President of the United States.

Mr. INGERSOLL. There is no affirmation of it in the document sent to us by the President. Mr. BROOKS. I regret also that all terms of armistice have been refused by the President of the United States. 1 deeply regret that there is to be no cessation, no pause in this horrible civil war. And when I heard the honorable gentleman from Indiana yesterday, [Mr. JULIAN,] and the gentleman from Vermont also, [Mr. MORRILL,] anticipate an early conclusion of this war, I could not but recall the illusions I have heard from the floor of this House now for four years past; though I could not help pray from the bottom of my heart that now they might turn out to be better prophets than they have been heretofore. I will not now reëxpress my opinions upon that subject. It is unnecessary. The history, the Anglo-Saxon history, records what must be the result, without any prediction of mine-long and continued war. Even with the suppression of armies and the sack of southern cities, guerrilla warfare will be protracted, no man can tell how long. Why, if there be any part of the South which has been subjugated it is that part within ten or fifteen miles of this Capitol; and yet twice within this winter the guerrillas have been formidable within fifteen miles of this Capitol, once at Rock creek, and again out on the Fairfax road; and no man at this day or hour can venture alone and unarmed over the Potomac twenty miles from this Capitol, or even ten miles within this subjugated country. The overthrow of armies, the sack of cities, the removal of all apparent forces, is not the subjugation of the people nor the end of the war. Hence I deeply regret that the President of the United States did not avail himself of this opportunity for an armistice, in order to give again to the people of the South the means of reasoning and con