« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »
The House bill provides for one brigadier
while this substitute provides altogether for
Mr. THAYER. If the gentleman will allow me, I will state for his information that the proposed amendment is cut bodily from the Senate bill, and is precisely the provision of the Senate bill, except that I have stricken out the words, "three chief quartermasters general, with the rank, pay, and emoluments of a brigadier general," those words involving the creation of a new office. It is exactly the provision of the Senate bill, omitting that new grade of Chief Quartermaster General.
Mr. SCHENCK. Now, I do not know that. I have in regard to this matter superior advantages to those of any other gentleman; we all think that we know something about the matter. But I undertake to say this: the first bill reported in the Senate was called Senate bill No. 67, in which these matters were arranged just as each of the bureaus wanted them. That bill was afterward withdrawn, and a new bill, No. 67, was introduced. That new bill was the bill presented to the military council. Those officers went over that bill, suggesting changes in regard to the number of the Army and many other matters; but in scarcely a single instance did they touch these bureau concerns. In general, I believe, they made no recommendation one way or the other in regard to them. Afterward there was introduced into the Senate another bill, No. 138, the bill which has been passed by that body, both the bills No. 67 having been abandoned. In the bill No. 138, the Senate departed from the bills No. 67, and also departed in many respects from the recommendations of this military council. So far as concerns the quartermaster's department, the Senate proposes to have eighty officers in that department, being, as the gentleman says, something like this substitute, with the exception of the three quartermasters general, which the Senate bill provides for, but which he does not include in his substitute.
The Committee on Military Affairs of this House, after a full consultation with the Quartermaster General, hearing all he said upon the one side and the other, during a session of some two or three hours, came to the conclusion not to allow all that he claimed. Nor did they agree entirely with the Senate. There was no question made with this military council. The committee, after full consideration, reported this bill, and I will state the differences in this respect between it and Senate bill No. 138.
The present quartermaster's department, as left at the close of the war-very much increased from what it was before the warhas one brigadier general, three colonels, who are called assistant quartermasters general, four lieutenant colonels, who are called deputy quartermasters general, eleven majors, who are called quartermasters, and forty-six captains, who are called assistant quartermasters; making a total of sixty-five. The Senate bill, departing from the present arrangement, gives us one quartermaster, ranking as a brigadier general; three other brigadier generals, to be called chief assistant quartermasters general; four colonels, to be called assistant quartermasters general; eight lieutenant colonels,, to be called deputy quartermasters general; sixteen majors, to be called quartermasters; and forty-eight captains, to be called assistant quartermasters; making a total of eighty.
I know that a great many more quartermas ters might be employed. I know that the chiefs of bureaus are reluctant to give up any of the|| offices which they now have. I know officers may be ordered here who will do good service, but no better than clerks can do it. But I will not repeat the argument which I made in reference to the Adjutant General's bureau.
I call attention to the fact that the substitute, so far as brigadier generals are concerned, differs from the Senate bill. It is not what passed under the inspection of the military council. It is not what the House proposed. It is something which gentlemen offer, and which they have a right to offer. We arrived at our results after much examination, finding out how many were necessary for posts and so on, and we submit them to the House and to the country. Mr. CONKLING obtained the floor, but yielded to
Mr. DAVIS, who said: I desire to say that the amendment which I sent to the desk to be read as a substitute was cut from the Senate bill. It is Senate bill No. 67. I know they passed a bill, No. 138. I understand that perfectly. I am credibly informed that this amendment received the sanction of the distinguished military gentlemen to whom I have alluded. The original Senate bill provided for eightyseven. Bill No. 138 reduced that to eighty.
Mr. CONKLING. I now resume the floor. I am persuaded, no matter how amended, this bill will continue to afford harmless occupation; and I therefore move that the House adjourn.
Mr. MOORHEAD. I ask the gentleman to yield to me for one moment to move that the Committee on Commerce be allowed to report back a bill for the relief of Thomas F. Wilson. Mr. CONKLING. I withdraw my motion for that purpose.
THOMAS F. WILSON.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, by unanimous consent, from the Committee on Commerce, reported back Senate bill No. 146, for the relief of Thomas F. Wilson, late United States consul at Bahia, Brazil, with a recommendation that it do pass.
The bill, which was read, provides that the Secretary of the Treasury be authorized to pay to Thomas F. Wilson, late United States consul at Bahia, $1,500 out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, in full compensation for extra services, and for all other claims he may have against the Government, while in the service of the United States as consul.
Mr. WASHBURNÉ, of Illinois. Mr. Wilson was consul of the United States at Bahia, Brazil, during the years 1862, 1863, and 1864. During almost the entire time that the petitioner was consul at Bahia, that port was the rendezvous of the rebel pirates for the south Atlantic, where they landed large numbers of prisoners who were captured on board of American vessels on the high seas, and where they met their consorts and tenders for the purpose of obtaining coals, powder, and other supplies. Three of these rebel pirates made the port
of Bahia their calling place; two of them, the Alabama and Georgia, being on one occasion there at the same time, where they met their tenders to obtain supplies. One, and sometimes more, of these pirates were constantly cruising in the south Atlantic, and liable at any time to enter the port of Bahia, or to send in prisoners.
The rebels had a regular agent at Bahia, who was the consignee of their supply vessels, discounted their bills, and furnished funds to purchase stores for the pirates.
The frequent visits of the pirates to this port imposed upon the consul the necessity of taking care of, and providing for, large numbers of prisoners landed at different times; also required the utmost activity and vigilance in watching the pirates, and thwarting their efforts to obtain supplies, and required a large amount of consular labor and correspondence with the local authorities at Bahia, the United States minister at Rio de Janeiro, the Department of State, and the commanders of the United States vessels-of-war, to whom he supplied valuable information.
The last of the rebel pirates which visited the port of Bahia, for the purpose of obtaining coals and supplies, was the Florida. Through the efforts of the consul she was prevented from doing so. He was the party who went on board of the Wachusett and gave the information which led to the capture of the Florida.
If the committee had done anything to change the bill it would have been to make the amount larger.
The bill was ordered to a third reading; and it was accordingly read the third time and passed.
Mr. MOORHEAD moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.
The latter motion was agreed to.
WINNEBAGO AND SUPERIOR RAILROAD. Mr. ELDRIDGE, by unanimous consent, presented the memorial of the Legislature of the State of Wisconsin, asking for a grant of land to aid in the construction of so much of the Winnebago and Superior railroad as extends from Doty's Island to Stevens Point; which was ordered to be printed, and referred to the Committee on Public Lands.
BUSINESS ON SATURDAY.
Mr. STEVENS. I ask unanimous consent of the House to offer the following resolution: lutions, for reference only, may be received by unaniResolved, That on Saturday bills on leave, and reso
mous consent, on condition that they shall not be brought back into the Ilouse by a motion to reconsider.
Mr. STROUSE. I object.
The SPEAKER. The resolution would relieve the House from much embarrassment,
MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE.
A message from the Senate, by Mr. FORNEY, its Clerk, informed the House that the Senate had passed the following bill and joint resolutions, in which the concurrence of the House was requested:
An act (S. No. 193) granting lands to the State of Michigan to aid in the construction of a harbor and ship-canal at Portage Lake, Keweenaw Point, Lake Superior, in said State;
A joint resolution (S. R. No. 31) manifesting the sense of Congress toward the officers and seamen of the vessels, and others, engaged in the rescue of the officers and soldiers of the Army, the passengers, and the officers and crew of the steamship San Francisco from perishing with the wreck of that vessel; and
A joint resolution (S. R. No. 61) to extend the time for the construction of the first section of the Western Pacific railroad.
WESTERN PACIFIC RAILROAD.
Mr. McRUER asked unanimous consent to take up from the Speaker's table joint resolution of the Senate No. 61, to extend the time for the construction of the first section of the Western Pacific railroad.
Also, the petition of P. Putnam, and others, citizens of Vernon, Waukesha county, Wisconsin, for increase of duty on foreign wools.
Also, resolutions of the Soldiers' and Sailors' National Union League of Wisconsin, in favor of the equalization of bounties.
Also, the petition of John McKibbin, and 29 others, citizens of Linn, Walworth county, Wisconsin, for increased duties upon foreign wools.
Also, the petition of W. M. Bingham, and 34 others, citizens of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, in favor of the enactment by Congress of a law regulating insur
ance in the United States.
Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois, and Mr. ROSS, objected.
STATE AND NATIONAL BANKS.
Mr. RICE, of Maine, asked unanimous consent to introduce the following resolution:
Resolved, That the Committee on Banking and Currency be, and hereby is, directed to inquire into the expediency of providing by law for the conversion of State banks now organized into national banks on or before the 1st day of July next, and to report by bill or otherwise.
Mr. ROSS objected.
Mr. CONKLING. I move that the House do now adjourn.
The motion was agreed to; and accordingly (at four o'clock and thirty minutes p. m.) the House adjourned.
The following petitions, &c., were presented under the rule and referred to the appropriate committees: By Mr. BOYER: The petition of Joel K. Markley. By Mr. BUCKLAND: The petition of J.W. Brecklin, and 37 others, citizens of Woodville, Ohio, for an increase of duties on foreign wools.
Also, the petition of J. T. Reynolds, and 30 others, citizens of Huron, Ohio, for the same.
Also, from E. J. Kellogg, and 52 others, citizens of Berlin, Ohio, for the same.
Also, from G. W. Mead, and 37 others, wool-growers of Huron county, Ohio, for the same.
Also, from Lewis Tucker, and 33 others, wool-growers of Huron county, Ohio, for the same.
Also, from Lucius P. Sisson, and 20 others, woolgrowers of Huron county, Ohio, for the same.
Also, from George Silliman, and 18 others, woolgrowers of Huron county, Ohio, for the same.
Alse, from Reuben Burras, and 18 others, woolgrowers of Huron county, Ohio, for the same.
Also, from N. Sutton, and 20 others, wool-growers of Huron county, Ohio, for the same.
Also, from U. B. Thomas, and 22 others, woolgrowers of Huron county, Ohio, for the same.
Also, from J. B. Hale, and 37 others, wool-growers of Huron county, Ohio, for the same.
Also, from J. N. Campbell, and 24 others, woolgrowers of Huron connty, Ohio, for the same.
By Mr. FARNSWORTH: The petition of Ira K. Mansfield, William Courtright, Frederick Brown, and others, citizens of Winnebago county, Illinois, for increase of tariff upon wool.
By Mr. HARDING, of Illinois: The petition of E. Shaw, and others, of Rock Island, Illinois, for uniform insurance laws.
By Mr. HALE: The petition of George J. Nicholson, and others, citizens of the sixteenth congressional district of New York, for increased compensation to assistant assessors of internal revenue.
Also, the petition of Jehial P, Spear, and others, citizens of Moriah, Essex county, New York, for increased duties on foreign wool.
Also, the petition of Thomas G. Shaw, and others, citizens of Minerva, Essex county, New York, for the same purpose.
Also, the petition of Frederick Nye, and others, citizens of Wilmington, Essex county, New York, for the same purpose.
By Mr. HUBBELL, of Ohio: The petition of Dr. McNutt, Dr. Weeks, and Dr. Thatcher, practicing physicians, of Caledonia, Ohio, upon the subject of duties on imported medicines.
Also, the petition of R. L. Noe, and 74 others, citizens and wool-growers of Marion county, Ohio, praying for increased duties on foreign wool.
By Mr. INGERSOLL: The petition of 40 citizens of Stark county, Illinois, asking for an additional duty on imported wool,
Also, the petition of 20 citizens of Stark county, Illinois, asking for increase of duty on imported wool, and for a tax of two dollars on dogs.
Also, the petition of 45 citizens of Peoria, Illinois, asking for the imposition of a tax of two dollars on all dogs.
Also, the petition of 50 citizens of Peoria county, Illinois, for an increase of duty on imported wool, and a duty of twenty-five cents on foreign shoddy
Also, the petition of 75 citizens of Stark county, Illinois, for increase of duty on imported wool. Also, the petition of 64 citizens of Walnut Grove, Knox county, Illinois, asking increase of duty on imported wool, and twenty-five cents duty on foreign shoddy and rags.
By Mr. LYNCH: The petition of W. F. Abbott, and others, asking that the tariff on imported cigars be changed from the present graduated scale to one of uniform rate, and that the rate be fixed at three dollars per pound, and fifty per cent. ad valorem.
By Mr. MORRILL: The petition of the Bishop Gutta Percha Company, of the city of New York. By Mr. MORRIS: The petition of Dr. Chase, and others, physicians of Genesee, New York, asking that certain medicines be placed upon the free list.
By Mr. MYERS: The petition of Mrs. Mercie E. Scattergood, for pension of the grade of first assistant engineer United States Navy, her husband having been entitled to the pay of that grade at the time
of his death.
By Mr. PAINE: The petition of John Plankinton, and 30 others, citizens of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, in favor of the enactment of a national insurance law. Also, the petition of Philander Judson, and others, citizens of Kenosha county, Wisconsin, for a modification of the duty on foreign wools.
Also, the petition of George Allen, and others, citizens of Linn, Walworth county, Wisconsin, for an increased duty on foreign wools.
By Mr. PHELPS: A memorial in behalf of miners and melters of copper ore.
By Mr. RICE, of Maine: The memorial of John W. Brazec, of Washington Territory, asking for disapproval of an act of the Legislative Assembly of said Territory, entitled "An act in relation to Skamania county," approved January 14, 1865.
Also, four petitions of the county officers and others, citizens of the county of Aroostook, Maine, asking that said county may be annexed to the Bangor customs district.
By Mr. TAYLOR: The petition of William H. Tray, and others, of the city of New York, calling upon Congress to submit to the several States an amendment to expunge from article five of the Federal Constitution the following words: "and that no State, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate;" and for such other and further change and amendment as to the basis of representation in the Senate as shall tend to promote justice, real equity, and harmony.
Also, the petition of George W. Bush, praying relief.
By Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois: The petition of the Mississippi Bar Dredging Company, for leave to open one or more of the passes of the Mississippi river, at their own expense, and for compensation after the work shall have been completed, and so long as they shall keep the same open.
Also, the petition of merchants of the city of New Orleans interested in shipping, praying Congress to adopt some practicable mode of opening and keeping open the passes of the Mississippi river.
Also, the petition of underwriters and bankers of the city of New Orleans, praying Congress to legislate in reference to opening the passes of the Mississippi river.
By Mr. WELKER: The petition of Charles Camp, and 73 others, wool-growers of Homer township; of A. Munson, and 107 others, wool-growers of Guilford township; and of T. W. Painter, and 50 others, woolgrowers of Medina township, Medina county, Ohio, asking protection on wool.
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, (two thirds of both Houses concurring.) That the following article be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, shall be valid as part of said Constitution, namely:
ARTICLE The Congress shall have power to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper to secure to the citizens of each State all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States, and to all persons in the several States equal protection in the rights of life, liberty, and property. So many and able have been the arguments already laid before this House against the adop tion, at this time, of this or any other of the proposed amendments to the Constitution, that I might well despair of throwing any new light upon the subject, or increasing by anything I
can say the weight of the objections already urged.
I feel additional discouragement in approaching the discussion of this question, from the strong determination evinced by the majority to make this or some other material alteration in our organic law. They seem unrestrained by the ordinary considerations of public policy. They seem insensible to every appeal. They are moved neither by the glorious memories of the past, the wonderful wealth, power, and prosperity we have achieved under the Constitution as it is, nor by the bright prospect that awaits us in the future under a restored Union if we but preserve the "ancient landmarks." Intoxicated with the sudden possession of power, they chafe at every obstacle interposed between them and the gratification of their desires. Assuming with partisan zeal that a certain object must be accomplished, and finding the Constitution standing in their way, they would lay violent hands upon it, and with one blow destroy the beautiful harmony of our entire system of government.
My love and admiration for this system, which has been our pride and boast, forbid that I should now remain silent and unmoved, but rather urge me to stand up, relying on the justice of my cause, and plead for the Constitution of our fathers.
To appreciate fully the great change that would be wrought in the entire structure of our Government by the adoption of the proposed amendment, it will be necessary to consider the history of its formation and its present character, so far as the same is pertinent to the subject under consideration; and I shall do so with that brevity which so familiar a subject and its heretofore frequent discussion demand.
The States which united in framing our Constitution were originally colonies, separate from and independent of each other. They were settled at different times and by people who differed from each other in their habits and their religious and political opinions. Their local customs and regulations differed accordingly. There was no political connection between them; and one thing alone was common to them all, and that was the allegiance which each owed to the British Crown; and I might add the injustice and oppression which finally drove them to arms. This view of their political condition is sustained by Judge Story in his Commentaries, section one hundred and seventy-seven, which I will quote:
"Though the colonies had a common origin, and owed a common allegiance, and the inhabitants of each were British subjects, they had no direct political connection with each other. Each was independent of all the others; each, in a limited sense, was sovereign within its own territory. There was neither alliance nor confederacy between them. The Assembly of one, Province could not make laws for another; nor confer privileges, which were to be enjoyed or exercised in another, further than they could be in any independent foreign State."
"And though their mutual wants and necessities often induced them to associate for common purposes of defense, these confederacies were of a casual and temporary nature, and were allowed as an indulgence rather than a right. They made several efforts to procure the establishment of some general superintending government over them all, but their own differences of opinion, as well as the jealousy of the Crown, made these efforts abortive."
Down to the formation of the Constitution this idea of separateness, distinctness, and individuality was maintained. The Continental Congress was simply a deliberative, advisory body. Its acts were in the form of resolutions, and not in the form of laws. It recommended, but did not command. The Declaration of Independence did not change their relation to each other, but changed each of them from a dependent colony to an independent State, with all the attributes of absolute sovereignty. In the earlier treaties with foreign Powers their distinct sovereignty is recognized in their enumeration by name. So in the provisional articles with Great Britain, in 1782, by which our independence was acknowledged, the first article declares that
"His Britannic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, to wit, New Hampshire, Massachusetts
Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Del
aware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, to be free, sovereign, and independent States; that he treats with them as such," &c.
It is not for me to eulogize their work, nor does this House need to be instructed in the nature of our Government. But I desire to present in contrast the Government as our fathers made it, and that Government, as gentlemen would have it could they succeed in the adoption of the proposed amendment, to say nothing of the long series of amendments and legislative enactments of a kindred nature that
have been introduced.
And further, from Lawrence's Wheaton, pages 36 and 37:
"Sovereignty is acquired by a State, either at the origin of the civil society of which it is composed, or when it separates itself from the community of which it previously formed a part, and on which it was dependent.'
Thus the internal sovereignty of the United States of America was complete from the time they declared themselves "free sovereign and independent States," on the 4th of July, 1776. It was upon this principle that the Supreme Court determined, in 1808—
"That the several States comprising the Union, so far as regards their municipal regulations, became enti.led, from the time when they declared themselves independent, to all the rights and powers of sovereign States, and that they did not derive them from concessions made by the British King. The treaty of peace of 1782 contained a recognition of their independence, not a grant of it."
Now, what are the powers of an independent sovereign State? The very statement of the question suggests its own answer. As to external sovereignty we are not inquiring; but in the exercise of internal sovereignty a State must necessarily find no other limitation upon its power than its own will. I will not stop now to enumerate the great variety of these powers, but as to a single point will read again from Wheaton, page 132:
"Every State, as a distinct moral being, independent of every other, may freely exercise all its soyereign rights in any manner not inconsistent with the equal rights of other States. Among these is that of establishing, altering, or abolishing its own municipal form of government."
The colonies, then, became "free, sovereign, and independent States," and formed with each other a "firm league," by the Articles of Confederation, the second of which reads thus, namely:
ART. 2. Each State retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States in Congress assembled."
The great variety of interests that were involved, as well as local prejudices and jealousies, notwithstanding the necessity of union for the common defense, made it difficult for the Congress to agree upon these articles, and they were not finally ratified until 1781, four years after they had been agreed upon by the Delegates in Congress.
Upon the establishment of peace and the achievement of their independence, having no longer the motive of a common danger inducing them to continue to acquiesce in the exercise by the Confederation of ungranted power, the defects of their Government became manifest. Then it was that, with hearts bursting with love and trembling with fear for the future safety of that precious boon, liberty and independence, which they had acquired, these unselfish patriots applied themselves to the task of remedying its defects. Their object was to form a Government which should possess all the power and energy necessary to constitute a national Government, and yet reserve to the several States the control of their own municipal affairs. Diflicult as this task was, we all know how successfully it was accomplished. We can but imperfectly know how great were the difficulties, how various and conflicting the interests, how strong the jealousies, and how opposing the views of the members of the Convention. In the words of James Madison, Federalist, No. 37:
"The real wonder is that so many difficulties should have been surmounted, and surmounted with a unanimity almost as unprecedented as it must have been unexpected. It is impossible for any man of candor to reflect on this circumstance without partaking of the astonishment. It is impossible for the man of pious reflection not to perceive in it the finger of that Almighty Hand which had been so frequently and signally extended to our relief in the critical stage of the Revolution."
The result of this deliberation was that Constitution under which we have lived so long, and to the peculiar character of which we greatly owe all that we have accomplished as a people and as a nation.
Our Constitution having been framed and adopted by "free, sovereign, and independent States," bears upon its face marks of conciliation, concession, and compromise, without which it would inevitably have failed. The Government created by it is of a mixed character, partly national and partly Federal. Its powers are delegated powers. Being the creature of the States, it possesses, and can rightfully exert no power with which it was not clothed at the time of its creation, or which it has not since lawfully received.
It follows necessarily that all other powers are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." But to exclude any other interpretation, the tenth article of the amendments was adopted. The Government having been formed for national purposes, as the common agent of all the States, received all the power necessary for these purposes, while the States retained the exclusive control of their own municipal affairs. Our Constitution derives its chief excellence, and the Government the more strength, from the spirit of conciliation and compromise which animated its framers. It possesses a power of adaptation to all the various stages of our progress which it could not have had it been framed according to the idea of some rigid theorist instead of being shaped and molded according to the requirements of the several States, until it presented a system of government without a model in the world. It cannot be judged by any technical rule. To illustrate and sustain the views I have expressed, the truth of which I have no doubt is conceded, I will read a few extracts from the Writings of James Madison, volume four, page 61:
"It has been too much the case in expounding the Constitution of the United States that its meaning has been sought, not in its peculiar and unprecedented modifications of power, but by viewing it, some through the medium of a simple Government, others through that of a mere league of Governments. It is neither one nor the other, but essentially different from both. It must, consequently, be its own interpreter. No other Government can furnish a key to its true character. Other Governments present an individual and indivisible sovereignty. The Constitution of the United States divides the sovereignty: the portions surrendered by the States composing the Federal sovereignty over specified subjects; the portions retained forming the sovereignty of each over the residuary subjects within its sphere."
The same, page 420:
The more the political system of the United States is fairly examined the more necessary it will be found to abandon the abstract and technical modes of expounding and designating its character; and to view it as laid down in the charter which constitutes it, as a system hitherto without a model, as neither a simple nor a consolidated Government, nor a Government altogether confederate, and therefore not to be explained so as to make it either, but to be explained and designated according to the actual division and distribution of political power on the face of the instrument.
A just inference from a survey of this political system is, that it is a division and distribution of political power nowhere else to be found; a nondescript, to be tested and explained by itself alone; and that it happily illustrates the diversified modifications of which the representative principle of republicanism is susceptible, with a view to the conditions, opinions, and habits of particular communities.'
And again the same writer in the Federalist, No. 45, says:
"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the Federal Government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State."
furnished with the key, is simple in the extreme. That key is the jealousy which has been apparent through all our history, for the right of each State to control its own domestic affairs, and the firmness with which that right has always been maintained.
From all these various conflicting causes harmony has been evoked; and the most perfect equilibrium is presented to our view in the equal distribution of the Federal powers, in the limitation upon State and Federal power, and the line that is drawn between them; like that huge mass of rock which nature has so nicely poised that a child's hand can disturb its balance, but a giant's strength could not move it from its base.
Thus we possess a system of government, which, to a foreign observer, may appear artificial and complex, but which to us, who are
That nicely adjusted balance is now, by this amendment, to be permanently overthrown. The line of demarkation between State and Federal power, which has been already too much obscured by the great latitude of construction given of late to the several grants of power, is now to be entirely obliterated. The barriers erected by the Constitution to protect the States in the absolute control of their municipal affairs are now to be thrown down for the Federal Government to enter this wide domain, to roam at will, and bring prostrate at the feet of Federal power the most inestimable and most fondly cherished of all civil or political rights. That instrument, framed with such affectionate solicitude by the great and good men of the Revolution, who were actuated by nothing but devotion to the common good, is now to be changed to gratify a savage sectional hate and an inordinate lust for power. Its beauty has already been sadly marred; and it bears upon its face the recently inflicted blow of sectionalism; but this amendment will completely subvert our present system of Government, and is a long stride toward ultimate consolidation. That I am just in thus characterizing it, a brief examination of its provisions will show. It reads as follows:
was most ably explained and illustrated by the honorable gentleman from Indiana, [Mr. KERR,] in his speech upon what is known as the civil rights bill, and he sustained his position by a full array of authorities. I will not detain the House with any further remarks upon this point, except to say, that in my opinion, and as far as I have been able to gather from authorities, this section was only intended to relieve the citizens of each State from the disabilities of aliens when removing to, or sojourning in, the several States.
But as the case of Abbott vs. Bayley, 6 Pick., 92, 93, expresses so fully all I would say upon this subject, and is always cited as an interpretation of this clause, I will give it somewhat at large:
"The jurisdictions of the several States as such are distinct, and in most respects foreign. The Constitution of the United States makes the people of the United States subjects of one Government quoad everything within the national power and jurisdiction, but leaves them subjects of separate and distinct governments. The privileges and immunities secured to the people of each State in every other State, can be applied only in case of removal from one State into another. By such removal they become citizens of the adopted State without naturalization, and have a right to sue and be sued as citizens; and yet this privilege is qualified and not
order and Government. We are asked to invest Congress with authority to go peeping and prying into all the multitudinous details, which can possibly be embraced under the general term of "rights of life, liberty, and property," and regulate them by such laws as may be deemed "necessary and proper." We are called upon to erect here the bed of Procrustes, lay the several States upon it, and torture them into conformity to its proportions. While I have the power to resist, I, for one, shall never consent to so dangerous an innovation, so complete a subversion of our present form of Government.
absolute, for they cannot enjoy the right of suffrage or of eligibility to office, without such term of residence as shall be prescribed by the constitution and laws of the State into which they shall remove. They shall have the privileges and immunities of citizens, that is, they shall not be deemed aliens, but may take and hold real estate, and may, according to the laws of such State, eventually enjoy the full rights of citizenship without the necessity of being naturalized. The constitutional provision referred to is necessarily limited and qualified, for it cannot be pretended that a citizen of Rhode Island coming into this State to live is ipso facto entitled to the full privileges of a citizen, if any term of residence is prescribed as preliminary to the exercise of political or municipal rights. The several States then remain ⚫sovereign to some purposes, and foreign to each other as before the adoption of the Constitution of the United States, and especially in regard to the administration of justice, and in the regulation of property and estates, the laws of marriage and divorce and the protection of the persons of those who live under their jurisdiction.'
Now, assuming this to be the true meaning of the clause referred to, why make the Constitution repeat itself, or why empower Congress to pass laws in respect to privileges and immunities which have never in the light of this interpretation been denied?
But there can be no mistake in the meaning or intention of the latter clause. By it Congress is authorized to legislate upon the internal affairs of the several States, and in so doing, the only restraint upon its power will be its own conception of what is " necessary and proper."
The immediate object to be accomplished by this amendment I will advert to presently; but let us now consider the propriety of thus robbing the States of their right to regulate their own domestic affairs, and putting such vast power in the hands of Congress.
The Congress shall have power to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper to secure to the free negroes of each State all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States, and to free negroes in the several States equal protection in the rights of life, liberty, and property.
As I have said before, the great excellence of our Constitution consists in the separation between State and Federal power, and the assignment to each of its proper sphere.
I am not only opposed to any limitation upon the power of the States, but that opposition is While, very properly, the Federal Govern- increased, if possible, by the very object which ment possesses all the powers necessary for the is sought to be obtained. The very fact that this legitimate objects of its creation, to the States amendment would authorize such legislation has been reserved the exclusive control over as the "civil rights bill' is an additional reaall those matters which most deeply affect our son why it should not be adopted. All the welfare and happiness as social beings. To arguments urged against the passage of that the States alone do we look for "protection in bill apply with still greater force to this; though the rights of life, liberty, and property." The gentlemen have not waited until they could greatness of the whole is but the sum of the obtain constitutional authority for its passage. greatness of the several parts; and it is beneath I certainly think that the negro should be prothe fostering care of the State government that tected in his life, liberty, and property, and the growth and development of each separate believe that he has always enjoyed this propolitical community has proceeded, each hav-tection, and that at this very moment he stands in no need whatever of those who have constituted themselves his especial friends, and clamor now so loudly for his rights. But I also contend that in giving that protection, in conferring rights and privileges, the several States should continue to exercise, as they do now, the power of declaring what shall be their extent, and by what means they shall be secured.
ing the power to devise just those measures best calculated to promote its own interest, subject only to the Constitution of the United States. We are dependent upon the State government in all the relations we sustain in life. To it and no other do we look for the administration of justice and the punishment of crime. By it are we shielded and protected In the quiet enjoyment of our own fireside. It regulates the transactions of business and trade, protects us in the acquisition of property, secures us in its enjoyment, and provides for its transmission to our posterity. From the cradle to the grave there is no right nor privilege essential to our security and happiness which we do not derive from our State government, and which we would not just as well enjoy if the Federal Government were blotted out of existence. It is right that this should be so. It is an axiom, I think, of political science that the nearer government is brought to the people the more conducive it is to the well-being of the governed. So it is much more likely that the people of a State, as a distinct political community, should know better how to advance their own interests than the people of another State or the representatives of other States could know for them, from whom they might differ in many important
But while the amendment is thus couched in general terms, and is intended to confer this general power, we must not forget that it is urged for a particular purpose.
Gentlemen have declaimed most eloquently on the broad principle of equality, fraternity; but it is nevertheless apparent that negro equality is what is meant. Manhood suffrage is a very pleasant euphemism; but when translated into negro voting it is not quite so captivating. "Equality before the law" is quite a highsounding phrase, and, as a general principle, is to be admired; but when you come to apply || it to all the elements of which our society is composed, the effect is rather startling. Let us substitute the known for the unknown quantity in this article, and then see how it would read.
This was originally their right, and they have reserved it in the Constitution, which forms our Union. And what is now proposed? We are seriously asked to pass this amendment, and invite the States to relinquish their freedom and independence and meekly submit to the interference by Congress in their internal
39TH CONG. 1ST SESS.-No. 131.
The object of government is not to benefit the individual, but to secure the welfare of the society over which, by common consent, it is established. The individual must yield to those restraints which a community for its own good sees fit to impose. Likewise, when there is a class which can be made certain and definite, it may be treated as an individual, and, if the peace and good order of society require it, may become subject to the same restraints and disabilities. Now, the negro race in this country constitute such a class which is easily and well defined; and the peace and welfare of a State, especially where they are found in great numbers, demand that the radical difference between them and the white race should be recog nized by legislation; and every State should be allowed to remain free and independent in providing punishments for crime, and otherwise regulating their internal affairs, so that they might properly discriminate between them, as their peace and safety might require.
For the negro is not actuated by the same motives as the white man, nor is he deterred from crime except by punishments adapted to the brutal, sensual nature which characterizes him. They are not his true friends who are striving to thrust him up to the same level
with the whites, when the inevitable result must be a war of races; nor are they true lovers of their country's weal, who for such an object are willing to strike down the power of the States and consolidate the Government into a centralized despotism.
As it is not likely that such an amendment as this will be adopted by three fourths of all the States, and as it has been reported for our consideration from the committee of fifteen on reconstruction, the suspicion naturally arises that the committee intend that its adoption by the southern States shall be a condition-precedent to their representation in Congress-I will not say restoration, for peace has long since restored them to the Union, but their Representatives are excluded by the mere exercise of arbitrary power on the part of the majority of this House.
Whether I am correct or not in this suspicion, one thing is certainly true, that so far as legislation for the benefit of the negro is concerned, under the authority of this amendment, those States are chiefly to be affected by it. At the risk of being laughed at, I would ask if it is fair and honorable to take such a mean advantage of a fallen foe, They deserve a better fate at our hands. They met our armies in the open field, and resisted with a courage and endurance that compelled our admiration. Their submission has been as complete as unexpected. This is a constitutional Government, however oblivious we may be of the fact. The cause of the war must have been a violation of the Constitution and laws. The power to carry it on must have been derived from the Constitution, or it nowhere existed. Whatever may have been its secret object on our part, in legal contemplation, and according to declarations at the time, it could only be to preserve the Union and enforce obedience to the Constitution and laws. This being the only object known to the Constitution for which the war was prosecuted, and having succeeded upon our part, it follows that the Constitution and laws have been vindicated and the Union preserved; and the Representatives of southern States have as perfect a right to their seats here as any gentleman on this floor. Their exclusion is revolutionary. And I seriously doubt whether this amendment if passed by Congress, as at present constituted, would be constitutionally before the States for their adoption. For it could never have been deemed possible, when power was given to two thirds of both Houses, to propose amendments, that a majority would have the power to exclude or expel a sufficient number to constitute itself two thirds, and then pass measures which it is conceded could not be passed were all the States entitled represented here.
But these absent States are more immediately interested in this question, by reason of the presence among them of a vast number of that inferior race whose condition has been so recently changed by the abolition of slavery. The negro's idea of freedom is to do nothing but bask in the sunshine. The negro woman now disdains to pick cotton, and her present ambition is to "send her daughter to boarding school, and keep a piano.' And they are assisted very much in these mischievous notions by such legislation as the Freedmen's Bureau and civil rights bill. With these ideas, they must, as a class, become idle and improvident, and a grievous burden upon those States. Already do we hear from many sections of Virginia that farmers despair of raising stock; that their poultry, pigs, and sheep disappear in the most mysterious manner. Now, it would be most destructive, just at this period of transition from one state of society to another, to fetter the power of the States while adapting themselves to this changed condition of things, by appropriate legislation to check their thiev ing propensities, discountenance vagrancy, and stimulate them to habits of industry. There is no reason why the most ardent philanthropist need fear that this power will be abused. The people of the South are honorable and highminded. When these creatures were their
slaves they were treated as part of their house-mies, she outrode the storm and anchored in
"The white race and the black race of the South have hitherto lived together under the relation of master and slave-capital owning labor. Now, suddenly, that relation is changed, and, as to ownership, capital and labor are divorced. They stand now each master of itself. In this new relation, one being necessary to the other, there will be a new adjustment, which both are equally interested in making harmonious. Each has equal power in settling the terms, and, if left to the laws that regulate capital and labor, it is confidently believed that they will satisfactorily work out the problem."
But the saddest feature of all this scene is the vindictive spirit which gentlemen manifest in everything that relates to the unhappy South. Have we had introduced here any measures for the relief of that sorely stricken land? Have gentlemen applied themselves to heal the ravages of war and encourage a defeated, humiliated people to resume their former position and contribute, as before, their share to the national greatness and wealth? Alas! no.
But what instead do we see? The carnival of death has ceased, but gentlemen are not willing yet to be cheated of their prey, and they carry on the war in another shape. Instead of shot and shell these valiant warriors now fire at them such acts of Congress as the Freemen's Bureau and civil rights bills; and when they think they have driven the iron still deeper into the soul, added another pang to the tortures already inflicted, their exultation, as exhibited here a few days since, marks the intense malignity of their hate.
Surely the war that is past has been punishment enough for the people of the South. It ought to satisfy the keenest thirst for vengeance, that their whole land has been swept with the "besom of destruction," that every house is filled with mourning, and every hillside and valley shows the blackened ruins of a once happy home. Let us cease this unmanly warfare. The work before us requires some of the same spirit that animated our forefathers -the spirit of kindness and conciliation. Let us apply ourselves now to the work of cementing wit brotherly love the fragments of a broken Union. While, in the providence of God it may have been necessary that sectional hate and fanaticism should have nerved the arm that struck for victory, they have no office to perform in the duties of the present hour.
Mr. PERHAM. During four long and bloody years the people of this country have struggled for national life and the vindication of the imperishable truths of the Declaration of Independence. Nearly half a million of newly made graves, the lamentations of mourning mothers, widows, and orphans, the presence of maimed and battle-scarred soldiers in the streets, and a debt of enormous proportions attest to the fierceness of the conflict. But thanks to our noble officers and men who, in the hour of danger, left the endearments of home and kindred, and, baring their breasts to the storm of battle, triumphantly bore our flag on a thousand battle-fields, until the weapons of treason were shattered in the hands of their supporters, and the supremacy of the national authority established throughout our entire jurisdiction. A grateful nation will do honor to its living heroes, and the people will make pilgrimages of love and affection to the graves of the slain.
State in this Union a republican form of
the peaceful waters. All this unparalleled trial
In Kentucky the courts hold that officers and men who have been in the Union Army are cit-personally responsible for arrests made and property taken during the war by order of their superiors. Many have been imprisoned, and actions are now pending against thirty-five hundred more in pursuance of this ruling of the courts; while officers and men who have been in the rebel army are by the same courts exempted from such liability because of their rights as belligerents. This is but foreshadowing what will take place in all the seceded States as soon as the military force shall be withdrawn.
The old ship of state which our fathers, eighty years ago, built according to the best model of that day, and freighted with the fondest hopes of the world, has recently encountered a terrible storm. During its severe trial it has braved the winds and billows, at times appearing almost ingulfed in the angry surges, then proudly rising in her majesty, the admiration of her friends and the envy of her ene
Much has been said and written upon this subject, and the theories are about as numerous as the people who advocate them. But, for our purpose, it is of but little importance whether we regard these States as dead, according to the theory of some members of Congress, or their functions suspended, as the President declares. In any view of this subject these great practical facts remain. In that portion of the South recently in rebellion there is territory, limited and defined by State lines, within the jurisdiction and subject to the control of the United States. And there are people, izens of the United States and owing allegiance thereto, but without State governments and without any power of themselves to create them. Theorize as we may on this subject, this is the common ground to which we must all
The President recognized this principle when he prescribed the manner in which these States are to be reorganized. If they are States in the Union now that the military power of the rebellion has been destroyed, entitled to the rights of loyal States, by what authority has the President exercised, practically, their judicial, executive, and legislative powers? By what authority has he appointed provisional governors, authorized conventions to form constitutions, prescribed the qualifications of voters for delegates to such conventions, and declared what the constitutions when formed should be, and exercised numerous other powers which he could not exe cise in the loyal States?
Finding the e States, then, at the close of the war without State governments and without power of theriselves to create governments, it becomes our duty, in accordance with that provision of the Constitution which makes it the duty of "the United States to guaranty to every
Governor Brownlow, of Tennessee, who did more, perhaps, than any other man to secure the nomination of Andrew Johnson at Baltimore, in a recent address said:
"You may think it a little strange that I give such counsel. I do it because if General Thomas were to take away his soldiers and pull up stakes and leave here, you would not be allowed to occupy this schoolroom a week; and if General Thomas and his military forces were to go away and leave us, this Legislature, at the head of which I am placed, would be broken up by a mob in forty-eight hours."
On the 8th of March, 1866, he wrote to a member of this House a letter, from which I make some extracts. He says:
"Since pardons have been so multiplied, and no man has been punished, they have everywhere become impudent and defiant, until in most counties in