« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »
They will vote for Congress as it is, and Andrew
feited by the crime of treason, and that crime has not been expiated. There has been no forgiveness, there has been no restoration of that right of citizenship, and that forfeiture continues to-day, so that there has not been a legal vote cast by a rebel since the inauguration of the rebellion. "He forfeited his right to vote with loyal men when he sought to destroy our Government."
"We say to the most honest and industrious foreigner who comes from England or Germany to dwell among us and to add to the wealth of the country, Before you can be a citizen you must stay here for five years.' If we are so cautious about foreigners, who voluntarily renounce their homes to live with us, what should we say to the traitor who, although born and reared among us, has raised a parricidal hand against the Government which always protected him?"
Those were burning words, and how timely they are now. If the executive power were to carry those words into execution, Andrew Johnson would stand to-day among the honored men of the world, and as one of the first champions of liberty on the earth, if not the very first.
"My judgment is that he should be subjected to a severe ordeal before he is restored to citizenship."
That was said by Andrew Johnson when Governor of Tennessee. What ordeal is he subjected to before he is restored to citizenship, as Mr. Johnson now understands it? I will tell you. It is the ordeal of a trip to Washington to ask Andrew Johnson to pardon him. And that is all the ordeal he has to pass through. If he cannot get money enough to make his personal appearance, an application, I suppose, through the mail
A MEMBER. Or female. [Laughter.] Mr. INGERSOLL. Yes; I have heard it said that a female was quite as effective.
Let me continue this, for it is refreshing. "A fellow," says Mr. Johnson, in referring to a rebel. Does Andrew Johnson call one of these southern people a fellow? Oh, yes; but that was in 1862 and 1863. Now it is "the honorable gentleman from Mississippi,' friends from Virginia," "The noble chivalry of the South whom I have so long and intimately known, and can so thoroughly trust." [Laughter.] But he then said:
"A fellow who takes the oath merely to save his prop; erty, and denies the validity of the oath, is a perjured man, and not to be trusted. Before these repenting rebels can be trusted let them bring forth the fruits of repentance.'
If the loyal people ask Andrew Johnson to show the fruits he has gathered from repenting rebels, what can he show them? He can show them nothing but stacks of applications for pardons!
"He who helped to make all these widows and orphans, who draped the streets of Nashville in mourning, should suffer for his great crime. The work is in our own hands."
That is a good point well presented. Let it be reechoed by the people of the North, that he who helped to make these widows and orphans and drape the land in mourning should suffer for his great crime. But how does he suffer for his great crime under Andrew Johnson? By receiving a pardon with the seal of the Executive upon it or a commission to a Federal office. That is all the suffering I have heard of as yet.
Sir, let Andrew Johnson remember that the very people who are sustaining him to-day, the very men who are calling upon the country to support the President's policy, are the same men who so vehemently denounced him and hounded him but a few months ago. They are the men who were against him and all others who were fighting for the Government during the bloody years of war. None of his old friends support him now, except it may be some parasite, some lick-spittle who wants some contemptible office within his gift. They are the only ones. Every high-minded man who was for this war and this Government, for freedom and justice, is against Andrew Johnson to day. Yes, sir, let him remember he could not to-day in the grand State of Illinois, who sent forth two hundred and fifty thousand of her sons to fight for the maintenance of the principle and sentiments he uttered in his speech at Nashville, get those men to go for him now although they voted for him in 1864. There is but one place they would go to now on his account, and that is to his' political funeral. They would gladly follow him to his political grave.
"The work is in our own hands." Ah! that was true and would be to-day if Andrew Johnson was true to the principles he advocated a few months ago. The work is in my opinion in our own hands yet, whether he is with us or against us. We shall rely upon the steady and unflinching loyalty of the people, and Andrew Johnson though President will find when he opposes the executive power against the eternal principles of right which have been sustained by all this blood and treasure that he will be as powerless as a rush; that he will be overborne by the power of the people, and will find that the people in the right are greater and more powerful than the President in the wrong. I shall trust the people. I shall appeal from Andrew Johnson to the people, and I fear not their verdict.
Mr. Speaker, if he were a high-minded and honest man, when he finds he cannot carry out the principles of the party which placed him in power, that he cannot maintain the policy maintained by his true friends, he should resign his office. I believe we had an example of that kind in the Thirty-Eighth Congress. Mr. Stebbins, elected by the Democratic party in New York, found, when he came here, that he could not carry out the principles of the party which had elected him, and he accordingly resigned his seat like an honest man! Andrew Johnson should follow that example, and resign, for I declare that he is not carrying out nor intending to carry out the principles of the party which elected him Vice President!
But let me proceed with his speech:
"Ah, these rebel leaders have a strong personal reason for holding out-to save their necks from the halter; and these leaders must feel the power of the Government."
They did not know that he was going to be President, or that " reason for holding out" would not have existed.
That is not all. "Treason must be made odious." Is that all? "And traitors must be punished and impoverished!" In 1862 he declared they must be punished and impover ished, and now, sir, he is restoring every acre of land they enjoyed or occupied which by the military power had been turned over to the poor freedmen, taking it from them and handing back to these rebels. That is the way in which Andrew Johnson makes treason odious. Failing to make it odious by punishing southern men, he himself has made it odious by his treachery to the party and the principles of the party which placed him in power! If he is not a traitor to the Government and Constitution of the United States he is a traitor to the party which elected him Vice President, and to the sentiments which fell from his lips in 1862, and which found a welcome response in the hearts of the loyal men of the country. Hear him again:
"Treason must be made odious, and traitors must be punished and impoverished. Their great plantations must be seized, and divided into small farms, and sold to honest, industrious men. The day for protecting the lands and negroes of these authors of rebellion is past. It is high time it was.'
It was past then, and you, Andrew Johnson,
I now read from his speech upon the fall of
"If we had an Andrew Jackson he would hang them as high as llaman, but as he is no more, and sleeps in
his grave in his own beloved State, where traitors and treason have even insulted his tomb and the very earth that covers his remains, humble as I am, when you ask me what I would do, my reply is, I would arrest them, I would try them, I would convict them, and I would hang them."
A little further on, in the same speech, he says:
"In my opinion, evil-doers should be punished. Treason is the highest crime known in the catalogue of crimes, and for him that is guilty of it, for him that is willing to lift his impious hand against the authority of the nation, I would say, death is too easy a punishment. My notion is that treason must be made odious and traitors must be punished and impoverished; their social power must be broken, and they must be made to feel the penalty of their crimes. Hence I say the halter to intelligent, influential traitors."
Suppose, sir, he should declare such sentiments to-day, what would be the effect? The throng that now surrounds him at the White House would disappear; the smiles of northern Democrats and the caresses of southern rebels would cease at once.
But let us see what further he says:
"The American people must be taught, if they do not already feel, that treason is a crime and must be punished; that the Government will not always bear with its enemics; that it is strong, not only to protect, but to punish."
Sir, under the rule of Andrew Johnson it is neither strong to protect loyalty nor to punish treason, for he refuses both. By his vetoes of the Freedmen's Bureau bill and of the civil rights bill, he refuses that protection which he declared it was the duty of the American people to extend to the freedman and to the poor southern Unionist. And he refuses to punish traitors. He has had within his power Jefferson Davis, the head and front of the rebellion, for one year, and has not yet ordered him to trial. He refuses to punish everybody that held any leading position in connection with the rebellion. Again, Mr. Johnson says:
"When we turn to the criminal code and examine the catalogue of crimes, we there find arson laid down as a crime, with appropriate penalty; we find there theft and robbery and murder given as crimes; and there, too, we find the last and highest of crimes, treason. With other and inferior offenses our people are familiar; but in our peaceful history treason has been almost unknown. The people must understand that it is the blackest of crimes and will be surely punished. I make this allusion, not to excite the already exasperated feelings of the public, but to point out the principles of publicjustice which should guide our action at this particular juncture, and which accord with sound public morals. Let it be engraven on every heart that treason is a crime, and that traitors shall suffer its penalty. While we are appalled, overwhelmed at the fall of one man in our midst by the hand of a traitor, shall we allow men-I care not by what weapons-to attempt the life of the state with impunity? While we strain our minds to comprehend the enormity of this assassination, shall wo allow the nation to be assassinated?"
Shall we allow the nation to be assassinated? That is the question that is upon us to-day, and if Andrew Johnson persists in the course he is now following, this nation will be in danger of assassination by the same fell power that took the life of Abraham Lincoln. They may not use the same weapon, but it will be as murderous in its effects upon the life of the nation. The pretense is the restoration of the southern States and the readmission of rebels to the Congress of the United States. Carry out the policy of Andrew Johnson, and you will restore the old order of things, if the Government is not entirely destroyed; you will have the same old slave the power, enemy of liberty and justice, ruling this nation again, which ruled it for so
In a conversation with Sir Frederick Bruce, the President used this language:
The time has come when traitors must be taught that they are criminals. The country has fairly made up its mind on this point; and it can find no more earnest agent of its will than myself."
What egotism! No more earnest agent of the people's will than himself! Has he not falsified that by every act he has done for the last six months? Why, he could not make an address two years, or even one year ago, without speaking of the odiousness of treason and the certainty of its punishment. But now, though he has not ceased to make peeches, he has ceased to talk about treason being made odious
nels pacing before his door while he was securely and quietly sleeping through the watches of the night, while others braved the dangers he never met!
and that rebels must be punished; he has ceased saying anything about these matters, but talks about their restoration to political power in this Government. That is the difference between Andrew Johnson of to-day and the Andrew Johnson of 1864.
Now, I have shown but one phase of the character and history of Andrew Johnson. Let us look for a few moments at the other phase. After he came to be the Executive of the nation, he at first almost startled the nation by his earnest denunciation of the crime of treason, and his promises in reference to the certainty of its punishment. But soon his old associates came around him. They wheedled him and flattered him and made him believe that he was a great man, and had more power than the people of the Republic who had elected him. They represented to him that all he had to do was to cut loose from the friends who had placed him in power, and accept them as his counselors, advisers, and friends, and he has done so. And now, instead of being the man entitled to the gratitude, confidence, and love of the loyal American people, he has only the support of the late rebels in arms and their sympathizers and apologists in the North.
The American people have borne a great deal; they can still bear a great deal. But it does seem to me that it is hard that we should be afflicted with the rinderpest, the trichina, the cholera, and Andrew Johnson, all in the same year. [Laughter.] Yet, with the blessing of God, I believe we shall survive all this; and that we shall exist after the Administration of Andrew Johnson shall have ended; that we shall rise superior to it by the power of the loyal people; that we shall preserve this Government notwithstanding the mad policy of the Executive and in spite of his southern friends and his northern copperhead supporters. I believe that the day will come when the American people will show to the world that under the American Constitution treason is a crime and that traitors will be punished. But Andrew Johnson will never teach the world that lesson! Andrew Johnson is a consummate demagogue; he is one of the most unblushing demagogues that now exist in this country. And I will prove that by his own record; by the
record that he has himself made. He has been making some speeches recently, and I have only to refer to them to prove the truth of the assertion I have made. He has presented himself before the American people in his speech to the soldiers and sailors, and in his speech of the 22d of February, if you can call that a speech. He tells them how much he has done, what trials he has endured, what privations he has suffered, what hardships he has undergone, and how much property he has lost in his efforts to save the Government and the country, "and now," says he, " can you doubt my loyalty and my intentions and my good will?"
Sir, Andrew Johnson has made no sacrifices worthy of any mention, and if he has, an appreciative and grateful people would remember them without his thrusting them in their faces on every occasion. What has he suffered? He has not suffered so much as the humblest private that fought in our armies during the rebellion. The humblest private that fought at Gettysburg or in the Wilderness is entitled to more credit than is Andrew Johnson for what he has done. Has Andrew Johnson ever fought the enemy in battle? No, sir. Has he ever made an effort to find the enemy on the tented field? Never. Has he ever even smelled gunpowder? Has he ever camped on the frozen ground? Has he ever stood guard in the stormy and dreary nights numbed with the frosts of winter? Has he ever suffered any of the privations common to the soldier, or endured any of the hardships of campaign life? No, never; not even an hour!
What has Andrew Johnson suffered? He suffered being United States Senator in 1861; he has suffered being military governor of Tennessee, snugly ensconced in a mansion at Nashwille, with a brigadier general's straps on his shoulders, and feasted and toasted, with senti
And will the American people allow him to impose his infamous policy of "restoration" upon them because he claims to have suffered so much? No, sir, not even if his pretended sufferings were real. Andrew Johnson has sufered nothing worthy of remark. I will allow myself to be interrupted by any gentleman who can tell me what Andrew Johnson has suffered, unless it be that he has suffered the pangs of an uneasy conscience for his perfidy to the principles of the Union party. That kind of suffering would be good for him, and I hope he may have plenty of it. There is certainly plenty of cause and I trust it may have a good effect.
Andrew Johnson, as I was remarking, is a demagogue. In 1862, when he was in Nashville, he told the colored people that he, Andrew Johnson, military governor of Tennessee, was going to be their Moses and lead them out of the bondage of Egypt into the Canaan of liberty. He made a mistake, to say nothing more. Instead of being their Moses he has been their Pharaoh. And if I am not greatly mistaken this modern Pharaoh and his present admirers will be swallowed up and overwhelmed in the sea of popular indignation which is rising in the loyal States. Why, sir, Andrew Johnson had at one time words of cheer to the freedmen, to the negroes, who had suffered more than he ever did for the preservation of this country. Sir, of the two hundred thousand negro troops who volunteered under our flag and shouldered their muskets to do what they could for the unity of this Government and for their own liberties, there is not one of that sable host who is not more entitled to credit from the American people for what he suffered and endured than Andrew Johnson, yet he is continually reminding the people of the great sufferings and hardships he has endured. In his address to the negroes in this city the other day he made this modest statement in reference to the abolishment of slavery by the constitutional amendment:
"I feel, and know it to be so, that my efforts have contributed as much, if not more, in accomplishing this great national guarantee than those of any other living man in the United States.'
Oh, sir, he had kind and cheering words for those men who marched, with the utterances of his lips still ringing in their ears, to Fort Pillow, where they were massacred, and to Port Hudson, where they fought and fell heroically. And, sir, upon the other battle-fields of this war the words of Andrew Johnson encouraged and cheered them to heroic deeds. But he has no such words for them now. We have had an illustration of that fact in his late speech to the negroes in this city when they were celebrating the anniversary of their emancipation.
In that speech, which I will not quote at length, but merely state its substance, he said to those negroes that he thanked them for this token of respect to him; that they had taken the pains to come through the presidential grounds and stop at the Executive Mansion and pay their personal respects to him. He did not repeat the declaration that he was going to be their Moses and lead them through the wilderness to the land of liberty. He did not tell them that he was going to stand by any of the pledges of the Government that they should be protected in their liberty in the States where they may live. No, sir; he made no such declaration; it would have been useless. His
veto messages of the Freedmen's Bureau bill and the civil rights bill, the very measures of this Congress calculated to insure that protection, would have been witnesses against him. In his letter to Governor Sharkey of August 15, 1865, he said:
'If you could extend the elective franchise to all persons of color who can read the Constitution of the United States in English, and write their names, and to all persons of color who own real estate valued at not less than $250, and pay taxes thereon, you would completely disarm the adversary, and set an example the other States will follow. This you can do with
perfect safety, and you thus place the southern States, in reference to free persons of color, upon the same basis with the free States."
This was encouraging to the poor souls who had worn the galling chains of bondage all their weary lives. But we hear nothing of this kind in his late speech.
In this speech he simply tells them, as he has often said before, what he has suffered and what he has done, and begs them to take upon credit the assertion that he will turn out some day to be their best friend. Well, sir, I do not believe in those who are friends on credit. I like a man who is a friend at the time when you need him; and if there ever was, in the history of this Government, a time when the loyal black people of this country-and they are all loyal-needed a friend it is now, when the South, being relieved from the military power of the Government, will seek to again enslave them, not perhaps by a sale on the auction-block as in the olden time, but by vagrant laws and other laws and regulations concerning the freedmen, which subject them to a surveillance, and will eventually subject them to a servitude little less degrading and no less galling than the old chains of slavery which they wore so long. Here is what the " stored" State of Mississippi has done already in this regard:
"1. 'An act to regulate the relation of master and apprentice, as relates to freedmen, freed negroes, and mulattoes.'
2. An act to amend the vagrant laws of the State.'
3. An act to punish certain offenses therein named, and for other purposes.'
"In the third net, section four is as follows:
Be it further enacted, That all the penal and criminal laws now in force in this State, defining offenses and describing the modes of punishment for crimes and misdemeanors committed by slaves, free negroes, or mulattoes, be, and the same are hereby, reenacted and declared to be in full force and effect against freedmen, free negroes, and mulattoes, except so far as the mode and manner of trial and punishment have been changed or altered by law.' "Some of the penal and criminal laws' which have been reenacted for the freedmen are as follows: Article fifty-eight, section eleven, page 248, Revised Code, makes it punishable with death for a negro to murder, commit rape, burn houses, commit robbery, or attempt to commit such crimes. White persons are not punishable with death for most of the offenses mentioned in this section, nor for the attempt to commit any one of them.
Article forty-five, of the above named act, page 245, provides that a slave shall receive twenty lashes if he be found away from the place of his employment without a pass. This is reenacted for freed
"Article forty-six, page 246, awards thirty-nine lashes to the slave for buying or selling without written permission. Reenacted for the freedmen. Article four hundred and seventy-six, page 24, allows civil officers, and others to appropriate to their own use any article a slave may be seeking to sell. Reenacted for the freedmen.
"Article fifty-one, page 247, makes it punishable for negroes to congregate at night, or hold schools, &c. Reenacted as above.
Article sixty-three, page 249. Both ears are to be cut off for false witness. (No white ears to be served so.) Reenacted as above."
Here you have a fair sample of the legisla tion of a State which has "accepted the situ ation." Is such a State fit to be represented now in Congress? Let the loyal people an
Sir, the laws which have been passed by the southern States in reference to the freedmen are of the most degrading and oppressive char acter. I have given one sample; let that do for all; I have no time to present any more to the House. Many of those States have reënacted, it may be said, their old code of slave laws, simply striking out the word "slaves" and inserting the words "freedmen," "persons of color," mulatto," &c., and giving them no more rights than if they were still chattels. So it would be in every single southern State, unless by the strong arm of this Government you protect the black man who aided in the preservation of the Republic, and the preser preservation of your liberties, who aided in the vation of that Constitution which is now being sought to be used as an instrument for their oppression by the Executive of the United States!
He tells us that the passage of these laws for their protection was unconstitutional. Sir,
that I have stated the question fairly, let me
has it come to this, that to protect the citizen's
Mr. INGERSOLL. Mr. Speaker, the truth is that the people are not so simple or so easily deceived as these gentlemen in high positions suppose. This game they are playing will be uncovered, it will be detected by the people and condemned. Their whole game involves an apostacy and an abandonment of the prin- || ciples which they once announced, and which we, in common with them, believed and sustained, and yet believe and sustain.
Now, a word about this question of representation. I leave it to any gentleman on the other side of the House who is with the President on his reconstruction policy, whether or not, it is not held by him, and by those who support him, that the southern States are entitled to representation without conditions; that we have no right to impose conditions on the South precedent to their being represented in this Congress. That is their position, and that all you can ask is, whether the representatives can take the oath prescribed by law. Now
I hold this to be the position of the Union
He claims that peace exists. Why?
Does that fact give the right to these people of the southern States to representation? The President and the Democratic party say that it does. I deny it. It gives them no such right. If they had any right after the surrender of Lee, it was not by virtue of any action of the President. He can confer no such right upon
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. Does the gentleman want an answer to that question?
Mr. INGERSOLL. I am going to answer it myself. The Constitution clothes the President with no such power. He cannot make a citizen of an alien. He cannot make a naturalization law. Those people in the southern States became aliens by virtue of their rebellion and treason, and he cannot restore them to citizenship. It requires a greater than he. The legislative power of the country is the only power that can restore them to citizenship, the right of which they have forfeited.
the slightest degree. If they were States in the Union by what authority did he go into them and do what he did? It was in violation of their constitutions that existed prior to the rebellion. He set those State constitutions aside, he disregarded them; he called new conventions without authority of State laws, simply as the executive head of this nation, without any authority expressed in the Constitution, and against the constitutional rights of the States thus invaded. If they were States in the Union, and entitled at that time to representation in Congress, he had no more authority to go there and revamp their old constitutions, or refurbish them, or dictate new laws and designate men to execute those laws in South Carolina, Georgia, and Mississippi, than he had in Wisconsin, Indiana, and Illinois. He would not dare to go into any of the northern States and tell the people to call a consaying that such a portion were citizens and entitled to vote, and such a portion not, and calling upon them to incorporate such and such provisions and expunge others from their State constitutions. He would be denounced as a usurper for undertaking to do such an act, and would be hung as a traitor unless he could find a pardoning power like that he exercises now.
Upon his own hypothesis, he has no more right to invade a rebel State than a loyal one, and every proclamation he has made and every act he has done in regard to the southern States since the cessation of hostilities has been a violation of their rights under the Constitution of the United States.
Then what follows? Unless the rebels were entitled to representation in Congress immediately upon the surrender of the rebel army they are not entitled to it to-day unless Congress has intervened and by appropriate legislation has given them that right, and we all know that Congress has done nothing of the kind.
And here let me say that the President himself once recognized the fact that the rebels lost their political rights; that their State goyernments had ceased to exist by reason of their rebellion and treason; that they had no power inherent in themselves to resuscitate those governments; that they were no longer citizens of the United States but were alien enemies, conquered by the Federal power. That was his position less than one year ago, as I will prove. The present President recognized the effect of the rebellion upon the southern people in the forfeiture of their political and civil rights by stepping in, in the absence of Congress, and proclaiming to these men what to do, and directing them to do it; by appointing over them provisional governors; by pardoning rebels for the purpose of making them Governors; by instructing them how to exercise the duties of their office; by telling them to call the people together in convention, and what kind of a constitution to make; by declaring who should and who should not vote, who should and who should not hold office; in short, by directing from beginning to end what the people should and what they should not do. What was that but a clear recognition of the forfeiture of their political and civil rights?
Now, I maintain that if the States wherein he exercised that power were States within the Union, or in the Union as he now claims they were, and that they were never out of the Union, then he was a usurper, an invader of State rights in undertaking to control them in I
But I believe that he has not been a usurper to the extent that his own position indicates. He says they are entitled to representation So does the party that supports him. We say, on the other hand, that the men who sought to destroy this Government have no right to a voice in making the laws which direct the manner or mode of reconstructing their States.
Sir, it is a principle which the world will acquiesce in, which the people of this country will sustain, that the heroic people of the loyal States, who subdued this rebellion, shall, through their representatives in Congress, dictate the terms upon which the southern people shall be represented in Congress. And we must stand by that principle, for I would not give a rush for the Government, unless it can be preserved by the heroic and persistent effort of the northern people from the overwhelming ruin which these southern men would inevitably bring upon it if they should now be permitted to assume control of national affairs. Restore these unrepentant sinners to Congress, with Andrew Johnson standing by them, and with the support of those who are here ready to receive them with open arms, and your country will be on the down grade to certain destruction.
Why, sir, do you suppose that the people we have subjugated are coming here to Congress to vote a repudiation of their debt? Do you imagine that they are going to forget their own rebel soldiers who have been disabled in the war, or the widows and orphans of their own soldiers? Think you they are going to vote for a constitutional prohibition upon the claims of their own people, who sacrificed their treasure and their blood in the war against this Government? No! every man of them will vote to assume the rebel debt and pension the disabled rebel soldiers, and the widows and children of those who lost their lives in the rebel cause, and pay for the property that has been destroyed by our armies that marched through the South.
And when Congress votes to do all that the bankruptcy of this Government is achieved, your own loyal debt is repudiated, and the credit of your Government is annihilated. You will no longer be able to pay the pensions to your own disabled soldiers, or the widows and orphans that have been caused by this war. The vote of the southern Representatives will impoverish your Treasury and wide-spread ruin will follow. Loyal men of the North, are you
The Clerk read as follows:
"Soon after the first battle of Bull Run he ventured out as far as Fairfax Court-House, and there was made acquainted with some of his secesh friends. On his return to Peoria he declared in substance that the people of Virginia were the noblest men of God's creation, and that the Government might as well attempt to pluck the stars from the heavens as to crush them, fighting, as they believed they were, for their rights and liberties.'
"About three weeks before the last nomination of Mr. Lovejoy to Congress, Mr. Ingersoll stated that 'his defeat by a conservative man would be worth fifty thousand men to the cause of the Union."
prepared to welcome the rebel States into your Congress now?
God forbid that that day should come. The loyal people of this country have suffered too much to endure that humiliation and disgrace. I appeal not to Andrew Johnson, because I feel that it would be appealing in vain. I appeal to the people to stand by their Represent atives until we have put it beyond the power of the rebels of the South and their northern sympathizers to destroy this Government. And let us, the Representatives of the people, legislate for the interest of the country and of freedom. We must place such safeguards around this Government as shall secure its perpetuity, its grandeur, and its glory for all coming time.
Wait a little while, gentlemen on the other side. Do not be too anxious to allow this southern Samson to put his hands upon the pillars of this temple. You, too, may be crushed in the ruin as well as we. For your own sakes as well as ours let these southern Representatives stay out a little while until loyalty in their States gets a better foothold; until they shall send loyal men here; and if they have not the inherent sense of justice to do justice themselves, let us impose upon them such constitutional obligations as shall require them to do justice to all men, of all conditions, the low as well as the high; as shall require them to maintain a republican form of State government. Then, sir, I would admit them, but not till then. But till then let the same heroism, devotion, patriotism, and courage control and direct the legislation of the country for the preservation of that Government and that Constitution which has been saved by the indescribable valor of half a million heroes now sleeping their last sleep, and by that million of veteran survivors who are among us to remind us of their heroism and courage, and then not only will the present generation bless you, but future generations will treasure up your acts in grateful hearts, and God Himself will also add His blessing. Mr. LAWRENCE, of Pennsylvania, obtained the floor.
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. Will my colleague yield to me for a few moments? Mr. LAWRENCE, of Pennsylvania. For how long?
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. I think not more than five minutes.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Pennsylvania. I will yield for that time.
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. I have listened to the vehement declarations of the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. INGERSOLL] against the President.
Mr. ELDRIDGE. Will my friend from Pennsylvania [Mr. RANDALL] allow me to ask a question of the gentleman from Illinois, [Mr. INGERSOLL?]
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. I have no objection, so far as I am concerned.
Mr. ELDRIDGE. The gentleman from Illinois [Mr. INGERSOLL] has animadverted pretty severely upon the President on account of some alleged change of opinions. I desire to have read a passage from the Peoria Weekly Democrat, and then inquire of the gentleman if he has not somewhat changed his opinions. Mr. INGERSOLL. Is that a copperhead paper?
Mr. ELDRIDGE. I suppose you would call it so.
Mr. INGERSOLL. I deny its authority in toto. I would just exactly as soon
Mr. ELDRIDGE. I do not want to be interrupted by the gentleman from Illinois.
Mr. INGERSOLL. Very well.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Pennsylvania. I would suggest that I yielded only to my colleague, [Mr. RANDALL.]
Mr. ELDRIDGE. Then I would ask the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. RANDALL] to have this read.
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. At the request of my friend from Wisconsin [Mr. ELDRIDGE] I will ask the Clerk to read the extract referred to. I am not responsible for it in any respect, for I do not know what it is. ||
Mr._ INGERSOLL. Will the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. RANDALL] allow me
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. After I get through the gentleman can answer that. Mr. INGERSOLL. I want to answer it now, just where it is read.
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. Very well; I will yield if my colleague [Mr. LAWRENCE] is willing, for I hold the floor by his courtesy.
Mr. LAWRENCE, of Pennsylvania. I am willing that the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. INGERSOLL] should have a short time to reply to what has been read.
Mr. INGERSOLL. I suppose this paper, from which the Clerk has read, is the copperhead paper of my town, Peoria.
Mr. ELDRIDGE. It is the paper that supported the Union during the war, and now supports the Union and Andrew Johnson. It is the organ of the party that has just succeeded in carrying the election in that town.
Mr. INGERSOLL. The same old copperhead paper?
Mr. ELDRIDGE. The same old paper. Mr. INGERSOLL. I supposed it was the same old paper. I have been used to being vilified and abused by that little, mean, dirty, despicable sheet; a mean, miserable, dirty, lying, contemptible party paper of the meanest, most contemptible, and lowest stripe imaginable. It is a paper that cannot be excelled in meanness and lying and slandering in regard to the Union cause and Union men by any paper in rebeldom during the entire war. It is a filthy, dirty, lying
Mr. ELDRIDGE. Does the gentleman deny the statement in that paper?
Mr. INGERSOLL. I do not yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. ELDRIDGE] just now. Sir, the statement which has just been read, whether contained in that paper or in any other, is false from beginning to end. I never saw one of these Virginia rebels during the war, to my knowledge; never. If I had, and the occasion had offered, I should have said to him what I have said to-day. My utterances would have been just the same as they were in 1862, when, as a candidate for Congress for the State at large on her Union ticket, I received the abuse and vilification of that same contemptible, blackguard, copperhead, Andrew Johnson paper, [laughter, just as I receive it to-day. I then canvassed the State of Illinois, and met with just such slanders, not only from that paper but from the Memphis Avalanche and the Richmond Enquirer. They are all of a stripe and seek the same end, the elevation of the copperhead party to power, even, if need be, it is upon the ruins of the Republic.
Sir, never since the first utterances of treason in this country have my lips ever uttered one word, except in encouragement of the loyal North in their efforts to suppress the rebellion, and in denunciation of treason wherever it has reared its head, whether it be in the Halls of Congress, in the representative capacity of gentlemen who come here from northern States, or whether it be in the northern press, or where ever it may have been. I have been an uncompromising foe of every enemy of the Government, of every enemy of the Union party, whether he has been engaged in lauding Vallandigham or organizing Golden Circles throughout the northern States, or whether he had nothing better to do than to vilify the soldiers that were fighting for the holiest of causes by calling them "Lincoln hirelings." My voice
has ever been for the Union and those who have fought for it. I wish I could say as much for the gentleman from Wisconsin, [Mr. ELDRIDGE.]
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I have listened to-day with some interest to the vehement declamation of the gentleman from Illinois against the President. The gentleman has drawn his sword against the President, perhaps never to be sheathed until death ensues. I do not mean death by atrocious assassination; I mean political death only. I am not the defender of the President. He needs no defender. I judge that he is quite able, and I trust that he will be quite ready to defend himself against this strong, and I must add vindictive, bill of indictment against him. The characteristics which he has displayed in former life would give reason to expect that he will exhibit the same characteristics again.
But, sir, I rise as a friend of fair play. The distinguished gentleman from Illinois has charged the President of the United States with the desertion of the principles upon which he was elected. I desire to present here the Baltimore platform upon which Andrew Johnson was elected, so that those who read the gentleman's remarks may be able to judge of their truth and to decide for themselves who has adhered to that platform and who has not.
The Baltimore platform is as follows:
Resolved, That it is the highest duty of every American citizen to maintain against all their enemies the integrity of the Union and the paramount authority of the Constitution and laws of the United States; and that, laying aside all differences of political opinions, we pledge ourselves as Union men, animated by a common sentiment, and aiming at a common object, to do everything in our power to aid the Government in quelling by force of arms the rebellion now raging against its authority, and in bringing to the punishment due to their crimes the rebels and traitors arrayed against it.
Resolved, That we approve the determination of the Government of the United States not to compromise with rebels, nor to offer any terms of peace except such as may be based upon an "unconditional surrender" of their hostility and a return to their just allegiance to the Constitution and laws of the United States, and that we call upon the Government to maintain this position, and to prosecute the war with the utmost possible vigor to the complete suppression of the rebellion, in full reliance upon the selfsacrifice, the patriotism, the heroic valor, and the undying devotion of the American people to the country and its free institutions.
Resolved, That as slavery was the cause, and now constitutes the strength of this rebellion, and as it must be always and everywhere hostile to the principles of republican government, justice and the national safety demand its utter and complete extirpation from the soil of the Republic; and that we uphold and maintain the acts and proclamations by which the Government, in its own defense, has aimed a death blow at this gigantic evil. We are in favor, furthermore, of such an amendment to the Constitution, to be made by the people in conformity with its provisions, as shall terminate and forever prohibit the existence of slavery within the limits of the jurisdiction of the United States.
Resolved, That the thanks of the American people are due to the soldiers and sailors of the Army and Navy, who have periled their lives in defense of their country, and in vindication of the honor of the flag; that the nation owes to them some permanent recognition of their patriotism and valor, and ample and permanent provision for those of their survivors who have received disabling and honorable wounds in the service of the country, and that the memories of those who have fallen in its defense shall be held in grateful and everlasting remembrance.
Resolved. That we approve and applaud the practical wisdom, the unselfish patriotism, and unswerv ing fidelity to the Constitution and the principles of American liberty with which Abraham Lincoln has discharged under circumstances of unparalleled difficulty the great duties and responsibilities of the presidential office; that we approve and indorse, as demanded by the emergency and essential to the preservation of the nation, and as within the Constitution, the measures and acts which he has adopted to defend the nation against its open and secret focs: that we approve especially the proclamation of emancipation, and the employment as Union soldiers of men heretofore held in slavery; and that we have full confidence in his determination to carry these and all other constitutional measures essential to the salvation of the country into full and complete effect. Resolved, That we deem it essential to the general welfare that harmony should prevail in the national councils, and we regard as worthy of public confidence and official trust those only who cordially indorse the principles proclaimed in these resolutions, and which should characterize the administration of the Government.
Resolved, That the Government owes to all men employed in its armies, without regard to distinction of color, the full protection of the laws of war; and that any violation of these laws, or of the usages of
civilized nations in the time of war by the rebels now in arms, should be made the subject of full and prompt redress.
A reply on my part had been previously made to the action of the convention in presenting my name, in a speech delivered in this city, on the evening succeeding the day of the adjournment of the convention, in which I indicated my acceptance of the distinguished honor conferred by that body, and defined the grounds upon which that acceptance was based, substantially saying what I now have to say. From the comments made upon that speech by the various presses of the country, to which my attention has been directed, I consider it to be regarded as a full acceptance.
Resolved, That the foreign immigration, which in the past has added so much to the wealth and development of the resources and increase of power to this nation, the asylum of the oppressed of all nations, should be fostered and encouraged by a liberal and just policy.
Resolved, That we are in favor of the speedy construction of a railroad to the Pacific.
Resolved. That the national faith, pledged for the redemption of the public debt, must be kept inviolate; and that for this purpose we recommend economy and rigid responsibility in the public expenditures, and a vigorous and just system of taxation; that it is the duty of every loyal State to sustain the credit and promote the use of the national currency. Resolved, That we approve the position taken by the Government that the people of the United States never regarded with indifference the attempt of any European Power to overthrow by force, or to supplant by fraud, the institutions of any republican Government on the western continent; and that they view with extreme jealousy, as menacing to the peace and independence of this our country, the efforts of any such Power to obtain new footholds for monarchical Governments, sustained by foreign military force, in near proximity to the United States.
Mr. Speaker, I would be glad to present here, if I had it by me, the Chicago platform of 1860, in order to show the gentleman from Illinois his own inconsistencies and those of the party to which he belongs.
Mr. INGERSOLL. Does not the gentleman mean the Chicago platform of 1864?
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. No, sir; I mean the Chicago platform of 1860, on which Mr. Lincoln was nominated, and in which a just maintenance of the rights of the States is announced as a distinct principle to which the -party is pledged.
So much, sir, for the inconsistencies of the gentleman's party. Now, as to the question which he asks whether we were in favor of admitting Representatives from the South, and when that right of representation ceased, if it ever ceased. Sir, I maintain that the right of representation as belonging to the loyal people of the South has never ceased. The gentleman himself must be aware that, upon this principle Representatives from the State of Tennessee were admitted here in the Thirty-Seventh Congress, one of those Representatives being one of the gentlemen who are now claiming seats upon this floor as Representatives from that State. Sir, if those three Representatives, after the State of Tennessee had seceded, had a right to come here and be admitted as Representatives of the loyal people of the State of Tennessee, when and why did that right cease? Representatives from the State of Virginia were also admitted by the same Congress. If Virginia had the right to be represented in that Congress, when and how did her right of representation cease?
Mr. INGERSOLL. If I understand the gentleman, he claims that he is now supporting Andrew Johnson's policy.
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. I have not claimed anything with reference to supporting Andrew Johnson.
Mr. INGERSOLL. Well, the gentleman does claim that Andrew Johnson has not changed his political principles.
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. I have referred the gentleman to the Baltimore platform, which, I hold, corresponds precisely with the line of policy which was pursued with reference to "restoration" by Mr. Lincoln during the entire period of his Presidency, and which, if I have understood correctly the declaration of the Secretary of War, Mr. Lincoln would have continued to follow, had he lived. And that platform is in entire harmony with the policy now pursued by Andrew Johnson. So far as I am able to judge, his course in the work of restoration presents no inconsistency with the Baltimore platform or with his letter of acceptance written in response to his nomination at Baltimore.
Sir, that letter of acceptance was as follows: NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE, July 2, 1864. GENTLEMEN: Your communication of the 9th ultimo, informing me of my nomination for the Vice Presidency of the United States, by the National Un Convention held at Baltimore, and inclosing a copy of the resolutiens adopted by that body, was not reecived until the 25th ultimo.
In view, however, of the desire expressed in your communication, I will more fully allude to a few points that have been heretofore presented. My opinion on the leading questions at present agitating and distracting the public mind, and especially in reference to the rebellion now being waged against the Government and authority of the United States, I presume, are generally understood. Before the southern people assumed a belligerent attitude, (and frequently since,) I took occasion most frankly to declare the views I then entertained in relation to the wicked purposes of the southern politicians. They have since undergone but little if any change. Time and subsequent events have rather confirmed than diminished my confidence in their correctness.
At the beginning of this great struggle I entertained the same opinion of it I do now, and in my place in the Senate, I denounced it as treason worthy the punishment of death, and warned the Government and people of the impending danger. But my voice was not heard or counsel heeded until it was too late to avert the storm. It still continued to gather over us without molestation from the authorities at Washington until at length it broke with all its fury upon the country. And now, if we would save the Government from being overwhelmed by it, we must meet it in the true spirit of patriotism, and bring traitors to the punishment due their crime, and by force of arms crush out and subdue the last vestige of rebel authority in every State. I felt then, as now, that the destruction of the Government was deliberately determined upon by wicked and designing conspirators, whose lives and fortunes were pledged to carry it out, and that no compromise, short of an unconditional recognition of the independence of the southern States could have been, or could now be, proposed which they would accept. The clamor for 'southern rights," as the rebel journals were pleased to designate their rallying cry, was not to secure their assumed rights in the Union and under the Constitution, but to disrupt the Government, and establish an independent organization based upon slavery, which they could at all times control.
The separation of the Government has for years been the cherished purpose of the southern leaders. Baffled in 1832 by the stern, patriotic heroism of Andrew Jackson, they sullenly acquiesced, only to mature their diabolical schemes and await the recurrence of a more favorable opportunity to execute them. Then the pretext was the tariff, and Jackson, after foiling their schemes of nullification and disunion, with prophetic perspicacity, warned the country against the renewal of their efforts to dismember the Government.
In a letter dated May 1, 1833, to Rev. A. J. Crawford, after demonstrating the heartless insincerity of the southern nullifiers, he said:
"Therefore the tariff was only a pretext, and disunion and a southern confederacy the real object. The next pretext will be the negro or slavery question."
ferred without any solicitation on my part it is with the greater pleasure accepted.
In accepting the nomination, I might here close, but I cannot forego the opportunity of saying to my old friends of the Democratic party proper, with whom I have so long, and pleasantly been associated, that the hour has now come when that great party can justly vindicate its devotion to true democratic policy and measures of expediency. The war is a war of great principles. It involves the supremacy and life of the Government itself. If the rebellion triumphs, free government North and South fails. If, on the other hand, the Government is successful, as I do not doubt, its destiny is fixed, its basis permanent and enduring, and its career of honor and glory just begun. In a great contest like this for the existence of free government, the path of duty is patriotism and principle. Minor considerations and questions of administrative policy should give way to the higher duty of first preserving the Government, and then there will be time enough to wrangle over the men and measures pertaining to its administration.
This is not the hour for strife and division among ourselves. Such differences of opinion only encourage the enemy, prolong the war, and waste the country. Unity of action and concentration of power should be our watchword and rallying cry. This accomplished, the time will rapidly approach when their armies in the field-the great power of rebellionwill be broken and crushed by our gallant officers and brave soldiers, and ere long they will return to their homes and firesides to resume again the avocations of peace with the proud consciousness that they have aided in the noble work of reestablishing upon a surer and more permanent basis the great temple of American freedom.
I am, gentlemen, with sentiments of high regard, yours truly, ANDREW JOHNSON. Hon. WILLIAM DENNISON, Chairman, and others, Committee of the National Union Convention.
Time has fully verified this prediction, and we have now not only "the negro, or slavery question" as the pretext, but the real cause of the rebellion; and both must go down together. It is vain to attempt to reconstruct the Union with the distracting element of slavery in it. Experience has demonstrated its incompatibility with free and republican Governments, and it would be unwise and unjust
longer to continue it as one of the institutions of the country. While it remained subordinate to the Constitution and laws of the United States I yielded to it my support, but when it became rebellious and attempted to rise above the Government and control its action, I threw my humble influence against it. The authority of the Government is supreme, and will admit of no rivalry. No institution can rise above it, whether it be slavery or any other organized power. In our happy form of government all must be subordinate to the will of the people, when reflected through the Constitution and laws made pursuant thereto, State or Federal. This great principle lies at the foundation of every Government, and cannot be disregarded without the destruction of the Government itself. In the support and practice of correct principles we can never reach wrong results, and by rigorously adhering to this great fundamental truth the end will be the preservation of the Union and the overthrow of an institution which has made war upon and attempted the destruction of the Government itself.
The mode by which this great change-the emancipation of the slave-can be effected, is properly found in the power to amend the Constitution of the United States. This plan is effectual and of no doubtful authority; and while it does not contravene the timely exercise of the war power by the President in his emancipation proclamation, it comes stamped with the authority of the people themselves, acting in accordance with the written rule of the supreme law of the land, and must, therefore, give more general satisfation and quietude to the distracted public mind. By recurring to the principles contained in the resolutions so unanimously adopted by the convention I find that they substantially accord with my pubic acts and opinions heretofore made known and exp" sed, and are therefore most cordially indorsed and approved; and the nomination having been con
Mr. INGERSOLL. I will show the reason why I ask permission to put a question to the gentleman from Pennsylvania. I will state what I understand him to state: that Andrew Johnson had not changed from the platform of the party upon which he was elected in 1864; but the party who elected him then, and oppose him now, has changed.
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. Yes, sir, I think you have changed; that your party has shown the cloven foot; that they never expressed any purpose before the people to do what they have since done.
Mr. INGERSOLL. Has not your party changed in so far that your party opposed Andrew Johnson in 1864?
Mr. RANDALL, of Pennsylvania. The gentleman has a Yankee way of answering one question by asking another. [Laughter.] If the gentleman will answer my question perhaps he may have a right to ask another.
One remark more and I will yield the floor. I want to say there are but two positions to occupy, according to my apprehension, as to the question of the restoration of the Union, the principle enunciated by the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations [Mr. STEVENS] at an early part of this session, that these States are conquered provinces and we can therefore do what we please with them; and on the other hand, the Constitution of the United States and the decision of the Supreme Court, as delivered by Judge Grier, which the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. INGERSOLL] himself has quoted to-day to sustain his argument, in which that court determined that these States had not by reason of the treason of any individual in any manner been interfered with in their status as States. That is the gentleman's own decision of which he quotes, and that is the decision of the highest tribunal known to the country.
And I now say, as an humble member of the Democratic party, so far as I have been able to judge, it represents the conservative sentiment of the country. I claim to be a conservative Democrat myself, and not such a Democrat as the gentleman has described, not such as the gentleman would charge with treason, for, on the contrary, I represent a Democracy as loyal as the gentleman from Illinois. I represent, sir, a people who went with as much zeal and perhaps as far as the gentleman from Illinois in bearing arms to put down this rebellion. I am not a defender of rebellion in any particular. I am against anybody who seeks to overthrow the Government or the Constitution; and while I was in favor of putting down the rebellion when it emanated from the South, I am now today in favor of preventing the success and for putting down that party which seeks to change,