r 
 E 
 

 Class _£L4is__ 
 
 Book 
 
SELF-PRESERVATION THE RIGHT AND DUTY OF THE GENERAL GOVERNMENT 
 REBEL STATES BUT ORGANIZED CONSPIRACIKS-^IOT CONSTITU- 
 TIONAL STATES. NOR ENTITLED TO STATE RIGHTS . 
 
 SPEECH 
 
 THE 
 
 HON. JOHN A. BINGHAM, OF OHIO, 
 
 In the House of Representatives, March 12, 1862. 
 
 The House being in Committee of the Who'.e 
 on the stite of the Union — 
 
 Mr. BINGHAM said : 
 
 Mr. Chairman : I recognize the right of every 
 Representative of the people to rise in his place 
 here, if he is so minded, and if it be according to 
 his convictions, when a bill is under considera- 
 tion to impose taxes upon the people to the ex- 
 tent of $100,000,0;)!) or more, and oppose the 
 bill on the ground that he has no confidence in 
 the Adn:iiuisiralion, or any part of it. 
 
 Mr. WADSWOilTH. The gentleman will ex- 
 cuse me. I did not say that. 
 
 Mr. BIN jrllAM. I will allow the gentleman 
 to make his corrections in the Globe. I used the 
 words vvtiich I took down from his lips — that he 
 had no confidence in the Administration, or in any 
 part of it. 
 
 I am very glad to know that the gentleman 
 has confidence in the Administration ; but 1 cer- 
 tainly understood him to announce to the House 
 that he opposed the bill because he had not con- 
 fidence in the Administration, under whose direc- 
 tion the money was to be disbursed ; and I un- 
 derstood perfectly well, as every gentleman un- 
 derstands perfectly well, that it is the duly of the 
 Representatives of the people to refuse to rai.se 
 revenue when they know it is to be expended 
 through an executive department of the Govern- 
 ment in which and in the members of which they 
 have no confidence. The first duty they owe to 
 themselves and to the people they represent, when 
 the attempt is made to raise revenue which they 
 believe is to be controlled by a corrupt Adminis- 
 tration for corrupt purposes, is to resist that at 
 tempt, and insist and demand, in the name of all 
 the peopK', that the corrupt oflficials be impeach- 
 ed and hurled from the high places which they 
 have dishonored and disgraced. 
 
 The gentleman, however, now disclaims an 
 entire want of confidence in the Administration, 
 and also diselaims opposition to this bill. It the 
 gentleman has confidence in the Administration 
 and is in favor of the bill, why did he start out 
 in his speech in opposition to this bill, and end 
 in opposiiion to the Administration and the 
 friends of tae bill and tiie Administration ? The 
 gentleman, in his oi<ening remarks, declared his 
 opposition to the bih on the ground that it cre- 
 ates offices unlimited as to time. I beg leave to 
 say to the gentleman that, as I read the bill, it 
 contains no such provision, it creates no such 
 offices. It is one of those statutes which expires 
 of its own limitation, or rather that is intended to 
 meet a temporary necessity, and all offices which 
 it creates fall with it. The bill provides only lor 
 the creatioa of such offices as are required to 
 
 execute it, and such other acts as have been or 
 may be passed for the imposition and collection 
 of internal duties, stamp duties, licenses, and 
 taxes, direct and indirect. 
 
 The gentleman is aware that it is^ot in hig 
 time or mine hitherto that in this Republic there 
 has been such legislation placed upon (he stat- 
 ute-book. It is only once in a generation that 
 such legislation is required ; and I believe the 
 day is not far distant when this bill, if it passes 
 into a law, as I hope it may, will, together with 
 all like enactments, be no longer needed, and 
 cease to be law. 
 
 The gentlem-iu will observe that the various 
 offices created under the bill are necessary to 
 the execution of its provisions, and that the bill 
 wou'd be useless without them. If, therefore, 
 his objection prevails, the bill is substantially 
 defeat' d. For aught that the gentleman has 
 said, the offices created by this bill are essential 
 to its practical operation. I submit, therefore, 
 that this objection, so earnestly urged by the 
 gentleman, falls and is not valid. Surely, sir, 
 1 am justified in sajingthat the gentleman seem- 
 ed to be against the bill. Certaialy, if he was in 
 favor of it, and of its passage, he pursued a very 
 singular course in attemptmg to aid its passage 
 by insisting that it contained provisions which 
 he could not approve, and not even intimating 
 that in any of its provisions he did approve it, 
 or would in any event vote for it. Having thus 
 stated his objections to the bill, the gpnileraan 
 proceeded to arraign the President of the United 
 States before this House, and then dir"cted hia 
 attacks against the venerable chairman of the 
 Comm ttee of Ways and Means, through whose 
 ins'rumentality, and that of his worthy col- 
 leagues on the committee, this well considered 
 and digested measure is now before the House 
 for aloption or rejection. For an hour the gen- 
 tleman rambles through an excited speech to 
 show the House why its members should distrust 
 those whom he pleases to admit constitute a ma- 
 jority of the Uepresenta ives upon nis fioor, and 
 who are tie known Iriends of the bill and of the 
 Administration. 
 
 Tue g-ulleman says that before he '<^ot?s for 
 this bi 1, he want to know what the money is 
 going to be used for. I suppose the gentleman 
 has some recollection of having indulged in 
 ut eraacfs of that sort. The purpose for which 
 the money is to be raised is declared i i general 
 terms by the title of the bill, to wit : to support 
 the Government and pay the interes'. on its debt. 
 A bill to raise money to support the Government 
 and sustain its credit, ought to command the 
 unqualified support of every patriot. But the 
 
<J 
 
 <-, 
 
 M 
 
 (p 
 
 gentleman, before he can support it, wants to 
 know the special uses to which the money is to 
 be put Why, sir, to limit the use of the money 
 specially in a general revenue bill "would be a 
 novelty in legislation. Whoever heard before 
 of inserting in a bill for raising general revenue 
 to supp'y the Treasury of a naliun, limitations 
 declaring precisely how and for what purposes, 
 and no other, all the money to be raised should 
 be ap[ilied ? That would be indeed a most ex- 
 traordinary proceeding. Why, sir, that is a 
 novelty so strange and nt;w, so unheard of in 
 the histt-ry of our legislation, that I think a 
 neutral border State alone is entitled to the 
 honor of originatirg it, and should be entitled 
 in all coming time to have a special patent for 
 it. The doctrine that there is to be no revenue 
 raised until you have carefully guarded the bill 
 60 that the money can only be applied to this 
 or that particular objecct, is, I repeat, novel, and 
 without precedent in our history. It will be 
 time enough specially to appropriate the money 
 after you shall have provided far raising it. 
 
 Mr. WADSWOIITH. I hope the geatleman 
 will allow me for a mcment to explain my seeming 
 opposition to this bill. The gentleman will 
 recollect thati was yesterday exceedingly anxious 
 to deliver some opinions 1 entertained about the 
 message of the President and the joint resolution 
 which was before thti House ; but having no op- 
 portunity to do it, I was compelled to siy what 1 
 could say upon that subj^ict, upon the tax bill. 
 The gentleman will recollect that I was frequently 
 intenupied by questions of order in the remarks 
 I ma .ft to-da}', and I was compelled to assume a 
 seeming ppotition to this bill, in order to enable 
 me to bring my remarks upon the other subject 
 within the rules of order, and afford me an oppor- 
 tunity of expressing my opposition to the policy 
 of the Administration. The gentleman I suppose 
 understands that. I expressed no real opposition 
 to the tax bill. 
 
 Mr. BINGHAM. The gentleman said that be- 
 fore he voted for this bill he WHuted to know 
 what was to be done with the money. I supposed 
 him to say it in good faith ; and that the bill 
 could n»t have his support, nor the Government 
 be provided with support by means of this gen- 
 eral revenue bill, unless with express limitations 
 annexed that this suspected Administration 
 should only use the money in a certain way. 
 What limitation upon the uses of this revenue 
 would the gentleman have? Would he have its 
 use 60 restricted that in supporting the Govern- 
 ment the patriarchal institution of slavery should 
 suffer no detriment? The thought which ran 
 through the gentleman's speech wa^^ that if 
 this r venue be raised, or if this bill be passed, 
 its uses should be restricted to the purpose, the 
 sublime purpose, of bringing the cotton States 
 back into the Union, and keep ng them in the 
 Union, with their ancient social system of chattel 
 slavery, if you please, intact. What else, sir, 
 can you infer, or can the House infer, from the 
 significant utterance of the g< ntleman, that un- 
 less the cotton iStates shall be brought back 
 into the Usiion, or, to use his words, if you hi 
 the coUon Slates go, Kentucky will not stay with 
 you? What do those strange words signify; 
 what do they import? Why, that the gentle- 
 man is willing to raise $100,000,000 of revenue, 
 to be collected for the time being from the loya 
 
 ^<^w 
 
 citizens of the United States, for the purpose of 
 getting the cotton States back into the Union upon 
 their former s^aiiw, with their slaves and slavery ; 
 and not otherwise. This idea pervaded the 
 gentleman's speech from beginning to end, 
 whether he was conscious of it or not He said, 
 in substance, that if you attempt, through the 
 instrumentality of your army — supported and 
 sustained, in part, at least, by means of this im- 
 mense revenue that you are to collect and put 
 into the Treasury by this bill, in the preserva- 
 tion of the Constitution and the Union, and in 
 defence of the good men and true who dwell 
 under the shield of the Constitution, and are 
 entitled to its protection, and to be made secure 
 in their persons, their property, and their homes — 
 to touch the divine institution of slavery, that 
 civilizer of the children of the kingdom of Da- 
 homey, the gentleman and his Slate will depart 
 fiom you. Touch not the civilizpr, says the 
 gentleman, or Kentucky leaves you. This divinity 
 of civilization, chattel slavery, is sacred ; for the 
 way to civilize men is to enslave them and con- 
 vert them into brutes! 
 
 Sir, if that is the condition upon which the 
 gentleman's a.legiance is to be retained to the 
 Union and the Constitution, the sooner all such 
 patriot! depart the better. I say that the sooner 
 they depart the better for the country. 
 
 Mr. WAD3W0RTH. Let me say "a word. 
 
 Mr B1NGH4M. No, sir; I am not misrepre- 
 senting the gentleman's position. He argued 
 that chattel slavery in America is the civilizer 
 of the children of the kingdom o? Dahomey. 
 
 Mr. WADSWORTH. I do say that the gentle- 
 man misrepresents mypositi^n. I annex no con- 
 di'ions to my loyalty. 
 
 Mr. BINGHAM. If the gentleman annexes no 
 condition to his loyalty, then his remarks about 
 the use of this revenue and the divine civilizer 
 of Africa, and retaining the cotton States with 
 their slaves and slavery untouched, in the Union, 
 were simply meaning' ess a'jd ought not to hive 
 been uttered. He said, if you allow, und r any 
 condition, the cotton States to depart from this 
 Union, then K-^ntu-ky would not stay in the 
 Union ; and an:iexed the condition that \ou must 
 not, in the great effort to retain the cotton 
 States, touch slavery. Who, in the name of 
 Heaven, wanti the cotton States in the Union, or 
 in any other place than the state o^' perdition, if 
 they are only to be in the Unionon the condition 
 tha', from day to day, from generation to gene- 
 ration, and from age to aee, slavery, this new 
 civilizer of the children of Dahomey, shall con- 
 tinue, and be uph-ld by the whol- power of the 
 Government? [Laughter.] The question is, 
 .whether the gentleman from Kemucky is in favor 
 of the Union ; whether he is for the G-vernment 
 of the United States, and for the .xercisp of all 
 the means which God and nature have given to 
 us, and wh ch may be jus'ly and lawfully em- 
 plo}ed under the sanction of humanity, for the 
 putting down of this infamous, infer al re ellion? 
 Is he fo the Union to that extent that be will 
 sanction the employment of all necessary and 
 just mean^ to preserve it? 
 
 Mr. WADSWORTH. Will the gentleman per- 
 mit me to answer? 
 
 Mr. BINGHAM. I want an affirmative or a 
 negative answer. 
 
 Mr, WADSWORTH. I want the Government 
 
to use such force as may be necessary to over- 
 come the force opposed to the execution of the 
 laws ; but I am not in favor of preserving the 
 Union by destroying the Constituuoa and inau- 
 gurating congressional usurpation. 
 
 Mr. BINGHAM. I put the qupstion again to 
 the gentlf man from Kentucky, and I want an 
 affirmative or negative response. If the majority 
 of the people of the United States, and a majority 
 of their Representatives in Congress, together 
 with tlie President of the United States, con- 
 clude that to suppress effectually this rebi'lion 
 and save the Union, there is an indispensable ne- 
 cessity to sweep away that " infernal atrocity," 
 the Dahomey civilizer, which has maddened the 
 brain and deadened the heart of the people of 
 half the territory of the Republic — will the gen- 
 tleman then stand by the Union and the Consti- 
 tutiou, and s-ustaia the President and his policy? 
 
 The gentleman has not yet answered my ques- 
 tion. 1 will state it again. Suppose that the 
 contingency shall arise when, in tho judgment 
 of the President, and in tlie judgment of a 
 majority of the peoples' Representatives in this 
 House and in the Senate, it becomes necessary 
 to utterly abolish this system of slavery, that the 
 Constitution may live and that the Union may 
 be preserved ; is the gentleman for it? 
 
 Mr. WADSWORTH. Whenever the President 
 and a majority of this House come to the con- 
 clusion that it is necessary to sweep slavery 
 out of the country in order to preserve the Union, 
 I will oppose such a law by couilitutional ac- 
 tion — always by constitutional action. If the 
 gentleman and his abolition allies come to our 
 State to ex cute such a law with force, I will 
 oppose them. 
 
 Mr. BINGHAM. The gentleman does not an- 
 swer whether he is going to leave the Union or 
 not. 
 
 Mr. WADSWORTH. Never will I leave the 
 Union. Wh^nerer it becomes necess.iry for either 
 the gentleman from Ohio or myself to leave the 
 Union, I will take care that the gjntleman and 
 not myself will have to go. 
 
 Mr. BINGHAM. The gentleman would have 
 a busy time of it before he got through with it. 
 [Laughter.] It now seems that the gentleman 
 is gomg to stay wiih us, but that he, or rather his 
 State, is going to stay with us, in the event sup- 
 posed, onlv as a rebel.* I want to know by what 
 right Kentucky or any other State comes upon 
 this floor and says in advance, by her Repre- 
 sentative, she will not abide by the decision of 
 a majority of the peoples' Representatives in the 
 House and the Senate. 
 
 Mr. WADSWORTH. I deny that they will get 
 the voice of a m<joiity of the people. 
 
 Mr. BINGH.AM. I assumed that they would, 
 and so stattd. 
 
 Mr. WADSWORTH. It makes no difference 
 with me. 
 
 Mr. BINGHAM. I object to these constant 
 interruptions. When the gentleman wants to 
 interriipt me he must first get my leave. 
 
 Mr. WADSWORTH. The gentleman put ques- 
 tions to me. 
 
 Mr. BINGHAM. I am not putting questions, 
 I beg leave to say now to the gentleman. The 
 
 Mr. WADSWORTH replied he would resist such a law by 
 force, aud fight. 
 
 gentleman says, in case of such a law being 
 passed as I have stated, and wh'ch if executed 
 will save the Constitution and the Union and put 
 an end to this w »r, he will stay in the Union and 
 fight. Fight whut? 
 
 Mr. WADSWORTH. Will you let it be broken 
 up ? 
 
 Mr. BINGHAM. Who is the judge? 
 
 Mr. W ADS WORT ^T. You. 
 
 Mr. BINGHAM. No, sir. The people, speak- 
 ing through a mnjority of their Representatives 
 and their E.tecuuve, mu3t rule by their laws and 
 under their laws, until those laws which they 
 may enact be by them repealed, or be set asid6 
 by the supreme judicial tribunal of thi country. 
 I submit that the gentleman is not the judge. 
 Judge, indeed ! On that ground Jtfferson Davis 
 has the r ght to carry on his treason, and no 
 man has the right to go forth and elay the trai- 
 tor. You have no right, sir, if this be the rule, 
 to place the m>irk of Cain upon his brow as hia 
 brother's murderer and drive him out a fugitive 
 and a vagabond in the earth, or hunt him down 
 as a traitor, and send forth legions i ix hundred 
 thousand strong 'o invest him in his treasonable 
 capital, drag him to the temple and the altar of 
 justice, convict him of his hellish treason, and, 
 in the solemn language of the old law, " hang 
 him by the neck until he be dead " I want to 
 know whether, if the gentleman's assumption is 
 good for him, it is not good for Jefferson Davis, 
 who has assumed to go out of the Union bo- 
 cause you did nof hy law g've protection to 
 slave property everywhere within the legisla ive 
 jurisdiction of the country, by land and by sea; 
 that is his position. There is no question about 
 it. He has spoken it more than on e in his 
 character of President of the confederate States 
 of America. 
 
 The gentleman seems to be an apt student of 
 the original leader in this rebellion. I say, sir, 
 for myself, and it is because I apply the rule to 
 myself that I believe it ought to apply to the 
 gentleman, that it is my duty as a citizen of the 
 Repub ic to bow to the majesty of the law in 
 whatever form it comes, and claiming for myself, 
 if 1 deem the law unjust, the right which always 
 belongs to the citizen, to seek its repeal by my 
 vote and my voice, and in the mode prescribed 
 seek its overthrow in the judicial t ibunals of 
 the country. That, sir, is the extent of my priv- 
 ilege and of the privilege of every individual citi- 
 zen acting in his individual capacity. In saying 
 this, I do. not deny the inherent, sacred right of 
 revolution in the people. I admit if the Govern 
 mentof the United States arrogates powers which 
 do not belong to it, imposes upon the people such 
 burdens as are too grievous to be borne, they 
 may, as a last resort, after all peaceable means 
 of redress have been faithfully tried and have 
 failed, and if further submission is more danger- 
 ous to their lives and liberties than armed re- 
 sistance—then, and not till then, may they em- 
 ploy force. That is the common judgment of 
 mankind 
 
 Mr. WADSWORTH. I subscribe to all that. 
 
 Mr. BINGHAM. I am glad that the gentle- 
 man does subscribe to it. If he subscribes to it 
 and acts upon it, he will not be swift to advise 
 Kentucky to arm to resist the Government of the 
 United States, if a majority of Congress, with the 
 President, conclude, and legislate acco dingly, 
 
that the slaves of rebels in arms shall be de- 
 clared freemen, and shall be no longer compelled 
 to sustain treason. 
 
 This Government has the right — which belongs 
 to every legitimate Government kcovrn among 
 men — of self-preservation. If it becomes neces- 
 sary, in order to preserve the f-tate, to sacrifice [ 
 the lives of the best, the bravest, the noblest in 
 the land, their lives must be saciificed. In the , 
 providence of God, it has always been and al- j 
 ways will be, to the end of time, a national ne- i 
 cessity thist some must die that the State may i 
 live. The ques'ion, then, is this : if it becomes i 
 necessary for the preservation of the Constitution '; 
 and for the maintenance of our nationality — the , 
 youngest born wnd the noblest of the earth, 
 known as the Republic of the United States of 
 America — -to sweep awa^^ this modern c'vilizer 
 of the children of Dahomey, will the gentleman, 
 on that account, rise in revolt against his coan- , 
 try? That is the question. 
 
 Mr. WADSWORIH. I prefer the Constitution 
 to nationality. \ 
 
 Mr. BINGHAM. The gentleman prefers the 
 Constitution to nationality. I prefer not to be 
 diverted from my argument, nor needlessly in- 
 terrupted. There is no nationality without a \ 
 constitution, either written or unwritten. There | 
 never was, and there never can be. "iou might j 
 as well talk of pulsation without arterial action 
 as to talk of a nationality without a constitution 
 or system of Government. 
 
 Mr. WADSVv'ORTH. Has France got any ? 
 
 Mr. BINGHAM. Yes, sir ; she is a nationality, 
 and she has a constitution of government, and 
 so has every other nationality. I said a written 
 or unwritten constitution was essential to nation- 
 ality. They are one and inseparable. They 
 never did exist and never can exist separately. 
 There can be no constitution without a nation, 
 and there can be no nation without a constitu- 
 tion ; they go together. But I am am:;zed that 
 a gentl?raau should come here and tell me that 
 the Consti utiou and thia new civilizer are one and 
 inseparable. That is whatexcites my speci il won- 
 der. The gentleman says he did not tell me so. It is 
 hard to tell what he d d mean by his interruption. 
 
 Mr. WADS WORTH. I beg he will not fight a 
 man of straw. 
 
 Mr. BINGHAM. I beg the gentleman's pardon 
 for supposing him to be a man of flesh and blood. 
 
 Mr. (Jbaiiman, there is nothing further from 
 my purpoe than to do injustice to the gentle- 
 man from Kentucky, or to anybodj' else. If the 
 remark which I made does not apply to thegen- 
 tlem in f om Kentucky he ought not to have in- 
 terrup'^ed me at all. For the honor of my coun- 
 try, and in [-acred regard for the Constitution of 
 my country, I f ffirm that slavery and the Con- 
 stitution are not one and inseparable. 
 
 1 do not say that the gentleman does in 
 express terms say so. But I stand here to 
 repel all iminuatiorui of that kind, come from 
 what quarter tliey may. I say, in the lan- 
 guage of Madison, that the Constitution is a 
 great charter of human liberty, and that it "would 
 have been wrong to admit in that instrument 
 that there can tie property in man;" and hence 
 its framere declared that it was not fit to incor- 
 porate even the word " slave" or " slavery" or 
 " servitude" in that instrument, for it was in- 
 tended to lire through all coming time, and it 
 
 should not transmit to all after generations of 
 men the fact that any such system of " civiliza- 
 tion" as the African or domestic slave trade, and 
 all its kindred atrocities, existed at any time 
 among the American people or within the limits 
 of the Republic. The Constitution declares for 
 libprty and justice, and not for slavery and des- 
 potism. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I am tired of the supercilious 
 air with which gentlemen assail as vi latorsof the 
 Constitution and enemies of the Union the friends 
 of every measure which is escusively for the com- 
 mon defence, or which proposes to condemn the 
 property and liberate the slaves of armed rebels. 
 Wherein do we violate the Constitution, pray? 
 The gentleman from Kentucky, [Mr. Wadsworth,"} 
 when I had the honor to address this House be- 
 fore on these great questions, that tovyer above 
 all o' her questions to-day because they touch the 
 preservation and safety of the Republic, seemed 
 to be filled with a holy horror because I ventured 
 to assert in my place here that the four millions 
 of slaves held by half a million of armed rebels, 
 and by whose unpaid toil their atrocious rebel- 
 lion is sustained, ought to be liberated, and pro- 
 tected, too, if they would seek shelter under the 
 flag of American liberty. 
 
 As the gentleman then and now has chosen to 
 assail me for this, I may be pardoned for calling 
 hij attention to the inquiry, what further did I 
 say in that connection on that day and in the 
 hearing of the gentlenuan ? I said that every 
 loyal citizen in this land held his life, his property, 
 his home, and the children of his house, a sacred 
 trust for the common defence. Did that remark 
 excite any horror in the gent'eman's mind ? Not 
 at all. I undertook, in my humble vray, to de- 
 monstrate that, by the very letter and spirit of 
 the Constitution, you had a right to laj' the lives 
 and the property and the homes, the very hearth- 
 stones of the honest and the just and the good, 
 under contribution by iaw,thatthe Republic might 
 live. Did that remark excite any abhorrence in 
 the genileman, or any threat that fifteen slave 
 States would be combined against us ? Not at 
 all. I stated in my place just as plainly, that by 
 your law you might for the common defence not 
 only take the father of the house, but the eldest 
 born of his house, to the tented field by force of 
 your conscription, if need be, and subject him to 
 the necessary despotism of military rule, to the 
 pestilence of the camp, and the deslructioa of 
 the battle-field. And yet the gentleman was not 
 startled with the horrid vision of a violated Con- 
 stitution, and there burst from his indignant lips 
 no threat that if we did this there would be a 
 union of fifteen slave States against th ^ Federal 
 despotism. I asserted in my place, further, that 
 after you had taken the father and his eldest bora 
 away, and had given them b)th to d?ath a sacri- 
 fice for their country,you could, by the very terms 
 of the Constitution, take away the shelter of the 
 roof-tree which his own hands had reared for the 
 protection of the wife and the children that were 
 left behind, and quarter your soMiers beneath it, 
 that the Republic might live. And yet the gen- 
 tleman saw no infraction of the Constitution, and 
 made no threat of becoming the armed ally of the 
 rebellion. But the moment that I declared my 
 conviction thiit the public exigencies and the 
 public necessities required, that the Constitution 
 and the oaths of the people's RepresentatiTCs re- 
 
 W«Bt. E^e. Hlat. 8o« 
 
quired, that by your law — the imperial mandate I 
 of the people — the proclamation of liberty should 
 go forth over a'l that rebel region, declaring that 
 every slave in the service of these infernal con- 
 spirators against your children and mine, against i 
 your homt-s and mine, against your Constitution ■ 
 and mine, agains' the sacred graves of your kin- [ 
 dred and mine, shall be free, the gentleman rises \ 
 startled wiih the horrid vision of broken fetters 
 and liberated bondmen, treason overthrown, and 
 a country rtdeeme<i, regenerated, and forever re- , 
 united, and cries, No; this shall not be; fifteen ; 
 States will combine against you. iSlavery is the : 
 civilizer; }0u shall neither denounce it as an j 
 "infernal atrocity," nor overthrow it to s 've the [ 
 Union. I re[)eat the word which so moved 'he 
 gentleman f om his propriety, that chattel slavery 
 is an "infernal atrocity." I thank God that I 
 learned to lisp it at my mother's knee. It is a 
 logical sequence, sir, disguise it a? you may, 
 from that golden rule whi<h was among the first 
 utterances of all of us, "whatsoever ye wduld 
 that men should do unto you, do ye even so unto | 
 them." And yet men are dragged away f om the 
 land of their nativity under pretence of civilizing 
 them, subjt-cted to the horrors of the middle 
 passage, reduced to the condition of chattels in 
 a strange land, where it is m ide a crime bj- stat- 
 ute to teach th^m the grand stirring wor^^s of, 
 John Milton, " Give me the liberty to know, to 
 argue, and to utter freely, according to conscience, 
 above all liberties;" words worthy to be spoken 
 by him who walked in his singing robes immor- 
 tal, without tasting death; words fit to be told 
 and interpreted to every man, that he has a con- 
 science, a right to kcow his duty, and a right to 
 do it. Milton, for teaching this and like lessons 
 to men centuries ago, has been enrolled among 
 the immortals. Milton, for teaching it to-day in 
 that vast rebel district of confederate conspirators, 
 would be douraed to the dungeon or the scafTjld 
 by the code of this " infernal atrocity." 
 
 Mr. WADSWORTH. Do you say that is the 
 case in Kentucky ? 
 
 Mr. BIjS'GHAM. I say it is the case in cot- 
 tondom, the Dahomey of America. I am not 
 speaking of Kentu:ky ; I am speaking of the 
 slavery and the slave code of the cotton States, \ 
 which the gentleman says we must keep in the 
 Union with their slavery, or Kentucky will not 
 stay. Wnen sh • throws off her allegiance to 
 the Union and joins this rebel carnival of blood, 
 I will spe;ik of her as she deserves to be spokea 
 of. I trust in God that day will not come, when 
 Kentucky, rather than see the Constitution and 
 Union saved by the liberation of the slaves of 
 rebels, will seek to destroy the Union to save 
 slavery. Why, sir, the very fact that the gen- 
 tleman has intimated such a result as possible 
 to flow from such a measure of justice ought to 
 teach the gentleman himself that a system which 
 could drive a Commonwealth to such an act 
 of wickedness is an " infernal atrocity." Ken- 
 tucky to leave the Union, or to band with trai- 
 tors against the Union, if we proclaim that sys- 
 tem abolished in the eleven rebel Stat<^s which 
 declares it a crime punishable by indictment 
 and imprisonment to teach a human being the 
 alphabet of his native tongue ; to teach him to 
 know that he is a man, and not a beast; to ! 
 teach him to know that his soul is his own, and , 
 that he has a right to enjoy the fruits of his i 
 
 own toil ; to teach him to know that there is 
 even a God, or a hereafter 
 
 Mr. WADSWORTH. Some white folks do not 
 seem to know that. 
 
 Mr. BINGHAM. Perhaps so; but does the 
 gentleman applv the remark to me? 
 
 Mr. WADSWORTH. I do not apply it to yon. 
 
 Mr. BINGHAM. I am glad to know it, sir. 
 Yes, sir; you must expect fifteen slave States 
 to wage war upon the Union, if you interfere 
 with the rebel's light to his slave, or with 
 the rebel's code, which declares it a crime 
 to whisper to his sl.ive there is a God, that 
 takes notice even of the sparrow's fall, and 
 hears the young raven when it cries for food, and 
 sometimes condescends to clothe with super- 
 human power the good right arm of an outraged 
 man when he strikes for the liberty of himself, 
 his wife, and children. To-day, sir, these rebels 
 iu arms, who have forfeited all rights, save the 
 right to a gallows, doom four millions of men to 
 chains and slavery ; su^lj^ct them to sale in 
 market overt, like the ox ; say to the father : 
 " Your little child that prattles its lipping 
 words upon your knee is only our chattel, and 
 will be sold with our pigs next m.irket day," 
 and the mother of your children shall be sold to 
 another. The victims of this infernal atrocity 
 are the native-born children of this land, and 
 yet are held by these rebf~ls o wage war upon 
 you. Their rights in their slaves must not be 
 touched, or you violate the Constitution. I 
 stand by my words, and denounce the system 
 an infernal atrocity. 
 
 1 speak in the spirit of one of the noble men 
 of Virginia, (former'y a Representative here,) who, 
 in his place a long time ago, said he looked with 
 scorn and conteoipt on the Northern man who 
 could get up and interpose any apology for sla- 
 very. He said he would at any time go a mile to 
 kifk a sheep. 1 believe he would have gone as 
 fir to kick a Norlh-^^rn pro-slivery flunkey. He 
 had no respect for a Northern flunkey, these 
 gentry who whisper with white lips, they come, 
 they come, when the angel of liber'y, beautiful 
 and immortal, shakes the door of the prison- 
 house in which men charged and chargeable 
 with no crime are buried alive. 
 
 Your Constitution is no res /ecfer of persons ; 
 it forges no fetters for the guiltless; it sanctions 
 no unjust tyranny over the mind or body of man. 
 And yet, sir, by th.t Constitution my friend who 
 stands near me, in the pridf of his manhood, may 
 be summoned to the battle-field that his country 
 may not die, that its free Corsiilution may live ; 
 the child of his house, the hope and (.ride of his 
 life, may be required to follow wiih unequ'^l Step 
 his father's martial tread to the same field of 
 honora'^le death ; the house and home which he 
 leaves behind him a sh<-lter and a refuge for his 
 wife and children, may be req lired to be given up 
 in the hour of the nation's p--ril ; and yet my 
 friend is to be mocked with the ribuld jest that 
 the atrocious institution of slavery is more sacred 
 than hi.^ life ani th-^ life of his son and the home 
 of his wife and children. Such argument, come 
 whence it may, is simidy vulgarity — blasphemy 
 against the divine beauty of life. l"he slave pen 
 and the barracoon more sucred than the free home 
 and the hearthstone I Judge them, sir, by their 
 fruits. From the households of the free, from the 
 hearthstone of the free, that nursery of all that is 
 
great, or beautiful, or good in human character, 
 come th". mighty body-guard of mankind, the 
 world's elect, who have made the scaffold and the 
 cross glorious, and have wrought out and brought 
 in, no' wi'Iiout s ff ring and martyrdom, that bril- 
 liant civilization in which we livp — the boast of 
 our country, and the bo ist of the Christian world ; 
 while 'rom the slave pen and the barracoon of the 
 slaver has come that fell inflaence, the stringe 
 sorcery, which has driven one half of this Re- 
 public mad, and converted the people thereof 
 into armed traitors against a government that 
 has done them no wr ng, but has hitherto crown 
 ed their lives with blessings and benefits, the only 
 return for which is a treason with no (arallel 
 save that first treason, the revolt of the fallen 
 ang'^ls against the God who made them. Sir, 
 there is not even a colorable excuse for these 
 traitors and their treason. There has b"en in no 
 instance an injury or hurt threatened or done to 
 them or theirs by the Government of the United 
 States. 
 
 The only question really in issue is whether 
 the majority in this Republic shall rule. That is 
 the question to be decided by this conflict of 
 arms. I take it to be a well-settled principle of 
 this Government that the majority shall rule. 
 In pursuance of this principle, the majority of 
 this nation, nay, sir, the majority of this Con- 
 gress, speaking fo" the nation, have the right un- 
 der the Consiiutinn to declare by law that all the 
 property of rebels in arms or aiding this unmatch- 
 ed treason shall be the lawful subject of prize 
 and capture, and shall be condemned as sui'h in 
 your cour s of ju-itic?", for the common defence. 
 
 Mr HICKMaN. Not excepting the slave. 
 
 Mr. BINGHAM. I do not ref-r to "slaves as 
 property. 1 would liber .te the slaves of rebels 
 in arras and of the r aiders and abettor?. 
 
 Sir, gentlemen have talked very loud in their 
 discussions here about indict'ng a whole people. 
 I hold ihem to the issue — let them meet it — ^hall 
 rebel property be made t'l pay, as far as it will go, 
 the expensp of suppressing their rebellion, and 
 shal' their slaves be tak^-n from ihem to weaken 
 their power. Ir is a uniform rule among civil zed 
 nations, aoplicable as well to civil war as ti for- 
 eign war, or a wir b^twoe two independent na- 
 tions, th-it all enemy property captured in wai is 
 the legi'imate subject of confi cation to detrav the 
 expenses of the war, and to indemnify the S'.ate 
 or nation for losses sustained. The ju-^tice of i his 
 rule cannot be questioned where the civil war, in 
 the one case, has been wiihou' any just cause un- 
 law''u"y and wrongfully wngol by rebel citizms, 
 and where the lo'cign war, in the other case, has 
 been unlawfully and wrongfully wag=^d by the na- 
 tion whose property is thus seized. I submit that 
 it is a rule > niversill. recognised amongcivilized 
 nations; and I should like to see the gentlem-n 
 who talk so loud against it brifg some authority 
 to show the contrary, not shirk the question by 
 talking about indicting a whole people. The 
 rebels in this case indict themselves; they con- 
 fess in oncn court 
 
 Let me repeat: 1 assert that it is the accepted 
 law at this hour among civiTzed nations, that 
 when in a j ist war the c>)nqueror acquires prop- 
 erty, by capture or l>y conquest, he holds that 
 property, if he so wIUh and has the force, until 
 the peace, and continues to hold it afterwards, 
 unless he voluntarily surrenders it. I hold that 
 
 to be a principle recognised by our own court 
 in the case of a harbor in Maine possessed by 
 Great Britain in the late war. They would have 
 held it until this day if they had been strong 
 enough and had not voluntarily surrendered it. 
 There was nothing in the law of na'ions to oblige 
 them to suriender it. When gentlemen talk about 
 the difference between a foreign and civil war, 
 1 want to know it the Government of the United 
 States should not be indemnified for the cost of 
 suppres:iing this unjust and bloody treason out 
 of the property of the rebels in arms ? There 
 is but one answer; that is, t lat it is the right of 
 the Government to take the indemnity, if she has 
 the force to do it. Much is said about private 
 property being respected in war, save enemy 
 property at sea; that the usage is only to take 
 public property on land I admit the usage in 
 general, in international war; because, by such 
 a rule, the means for just indemnity by seizing 
 all property of the sovereignty, and of all its 
 subjects at sea, and taking the public property 
 on Lind, is sufficient; and for the further reason 
 that the subject must obey his sovereign, and is 
 therefore not .\ our enemy of choice. These rebels 
 have no sovereignty ; they are simply organized 
 conspirators, waging civil war against the people 
 and the peop e's sovereignty. They have no pub- 
 lic stores, and can have none ; all the property 
 they hold is enemy property, belonging only to 
 them as rebels and enemies in arms It is the 
 nght and duty of the G vernment to take their 
 property tor indemnity by capture and condem- 
 nation, and to liberate their slaves to weaken 
 them; and for the further reason that the Got- 
 ernment has the right to the service for defence 
 of all its citizens, and espscially of all who de- 
 sire to aid the Government. I scout the alleged 
 sovereignty of these rebels; they are simply an 
 orgnnized mob, nor more, nor less. 
 
 The gentleman says he is fir the Constitution. 
 So am I. The gentleman says he respects his 
 oath to support the Constitution of the United 
 States. So do I. I do not doubt his sincerity. 
 I do not stajd in my pla -e to te'l the gentleman 
 that he violates either his oath or the Constitu- 
 tion when he lefuses his assent to su h legisla- 
 ti )n as he canno. approve, and I respectfully deny 
 his right to say th it I am not acting in conform- 
 ity to my oa^h to support the Constitution 
 
 Mr. WADSW RTH. I did not. 
 
 Mr. BINGHAM. Then I misunderstood the 
 gentleman. 
 
 Mr. WADSWORTH. I certainly would not 
 treat the gentleman olhersvise than with cour- 
 t -sy, and I c mnot imagine in what sentence of my 
 rt marks the Kenrleman drew such an inference. 
 
 Mr. BINGHAM. I am vc-y glad to know the 
 gentleman did not. I must have misapprehended 
 bis rem -irks in that respect. 
 
 Now, sir, it is the duly and right of this Gov- 
 eramt nt to use whatevi r force is necessary to 
 c ush out this treason and to crush out every- 
 ihing that stau'ls in the way of our arm^ ; to use 
 wh itever just means will tend to strengthen the 
 Govprnment, aud whatever will tend to weaken 
 tue enemy. Does not every gentleman know — 
 I pity the intell gence of the man w^o does not 
 know--that here are fjur millions of enslaved 
 men, who dig the trenches and build the fortifi- 
 cations of the enemy, who cultivate their fields, j 
 gather their crops, and furnish them the bread 
 
on "which they live. I would like to see the man 
 rise here in his place and say that it would not 
 weaken the enemy to take from them these four 
 millions of men who thus furnish their support. 
 I would like to see the man who would express 
 it as his conviction that it would not weaken the 
 enemy to take from them one-third their popu- 
 lation, and that portion of their population whose 
 labor provides solely and exclusively, almost, to 
 them the means of subsistence. They might al- 
 most as well undertake to live without the bright 
 heaven above them, filled with the life-giving 
 breath of the Almighty. 
 
 I now come to the other pont, and I desire to 
 be very brief upon it. Genllemetftalk about the 
 rights of the btates. I heard something upon 
 that subject yesterday, and it was brought up 
 again to day. Now, sir, 1 wish to say that not 
 one of the eleven rebel States is to-day a State 
 in the Union. The territory is in the Union, the 
 citizens of the original State are in the Union, 
 and still owe allegiance to the Constitution of the 
 United States. They cannot get the territory 
 out of the Union. They cannot run away with 
 it. It is anchored and fixed there : it is a part 
 of the common heritage of the whole people of 
 the Republic. 1 know Floyd would steal it if he 
 couli, [laughter,] but it is beyond the reach of 
 a thief. The territory is there, and there it will 
 abide forever ; the people are there, but there is 
 no constitutional State — no State in the Union 
 or of the Union there ; that maddened multitude, 
 the majority of each of the original States in that 
 rebel district, have voluntarily destroyed their 
 respective constitutional Sta,te governments. I 
 rather think the gentleman from Kentucky knows 
 that as well a.s I do, or as any man in this House. 
 Mr. Chairman, as every gentleman is for the 
 Constitution, and especially as the gentleman 
 from Kentucky claims to keep special watch and 
 ward over it, I desire to r?ad a single sentence 
 to prove t' e truth of what I say, that these rebel 
 States are not States in the. Union, but only rebels 
 in arms within the territory of the Union, and 
 without a constitutional State government. An 
 illegal State constitution is simply void as to the 
 United States Government. The Constitution of 
 the Uniied States declares — 
 
 " The Senators and R.jpresentatives aforesaid " — 
 
 that is, ot the United States — 
 
 " and the members of the several State Lfgislatnrcs, and 
 all execiUive and judicial offlcers, both of the United States 
 AND OF TiiK fiEVEUAL STATES, shall bo buuud by oath or 
 atlirmalimi Ui s-upiiorttbis Constitution." — Consliltilimi of the 
 UniCedi^ta'fx, Art. 6. 
 
 The Legislature of every State in the Union, 
 and all the juUcial and executive offii:ers thereof, 
 must be bound hj oath or affirmation to sup- 
 port this Constitution. Without this obligatioa 
 taken ani accepted they cannot in law exist as 
 the offi -ers of the departments of a State gov- 
 ernment iu ihp Union. There can be no State 
 in the f^/wn without these several departments. 
 That wunldbe a curious Republican State without 
 alegislativ aittdan executive and ajudic'al de- 
 partment. Ifthprebe no such State departments so 
 bound to snip .rtthe Constitution of the United 
 States in that rebelree;ion, asl know th're are not, 
 then I care not what forms and shams of govern- 
 ment they m ty have ; they are but organized con- 
 spirator 1 and traitors. They have no State rights 
 and can have none without constitutional State 
 
 governments. Is there a Legislature in South Caro- 
 lina to-day bound by oath to support that Con- 
 stitution ? They are sworn by an oath to over- 
 turn it. Is there a judiciary in South Carolina 
 to-day bound by oath to support this Constitu- 
 tion ? They are sworn by an oath to trample it 
 under foot. Is there to-day in South Carolina 
 an executive bound by oath to support this Con- 
 stitution ? He is sworn by an oath to destroy it. 
 
 These rebels have destroyed their respective 
 State constitutions. State constitutions ctn only 
 originate by the act of the people in the several 
 States, and by them they may be destroyed. 
 They have broken down their State govern- 
 ments; they have no Legislature which, to-day, 
 under the Constitution of the United States, can 
 rightfully impose a tax upon any man's property, 
 within their limits. They have no right to legis- 
 late at all. They are simply traitors, wearing 
 the robes of office. There is no State govern- 
 ment in South Carolina, nor in Florid-i, nor in 
 Texas, nor in Louisiana, nor in Mississippi, nor 
 in Arkansas, nor in North Carolina, nor in Ala- 
 bama, nor in Georgia, nor in Tennessee, nor in 
 Virginia, known to the Constitution, or entitled 
 to a moment's consideration. I would like to see 
 the man, if there be such a State-rights man, 
 rise here and say that the Legislature of South 
 Carolina, with the oath of treason fresh upon 
 their lips not to support the Constitution, but to 
 overthrow it, have the right to elect a United 
 Spates Senator, or to enact a law aflfeciing the 
 life, liberty, or property of any citizen ot the 
 United States. The powers of the Federal Gov- 
 ernment in the territory of South Carolina are, 
 in the absence of a constitutional State govern- 
 ment, as exclusive and general as they are in 
 the District of Columbia. Why so? Because 
 throughout the limits of the Republic the United 
 Stales Government has exclusive legislative 
 power, save where there is a constitutional State 
 government. Otherwise tire Co stitution and 
 Government could not be maintained, and the 
 great end of the Constitution carried out. 
 
 Wh.it is the end of the Constitution ? As I said 
 to the gentleman the other day in debate upon the 
 President's emancipation message, its first and 
 chief purpose is to protect the loyal citizens of the 
 United States everywhere in their lives, liberty, 
 and property. The citizens of every State now 
 in the Union, and all who were citizens in the 
 original States now dissolved by rebellion and 
 treason, are citizens of the United States. Is the 
 Constitution of the United States so weak an in- 
 vention that, in the absence of a State govern- 
 ment, it cannot establish courts of justice in any 
 district or Territory within its limits for the pur- 
 pose of protecting the property of every loyal cit- 
 izen, and his liberty and life as well ? I would be 
 ashamed to go to your tribune to take the oath to 
 support the Constitution if I felt in my heart that 
 it was so weak an invention that it did not pro- 
 vide for even this first duty of a government. I 
 assert the proposition here to-day, and I chal- 
 lenge contradiction, that the Government of the 
 United Staes has full and ample powers tor all of 
 these purposes within the original limits of the 
 revolted States ; and we ought to exercise them if 
 we have any respect for the oaths we have taken. 
 We must exercise these powers until the people 
 of the rebel districts, now reduced to the condi- 
 tion of Territories by their own act, shall return 
 
8 
 
 to their allegiance, and re-establish State govern- 
 ments under the Constitution, and bind the sev- 
 eral departments thereof by an oath to support 
 the Constitution of the United ytates. 
 
 I ivill never consent, sir, that South Carolina, 
 or any revolted State, shall send a Representative 
 upon this iloor until every officer of every depart- 
 ment of that State shall have become bound by an 
 oath to support the Constitution of my country. 
 We have no right to consent to that ; they have no 
 right to demand it until thej- so reconstruct; their 
 State government. We have the right, and it is 
 our duty, to provide by law for the administra- 
 tion of justice in that Territory. We have the 
 right to send our tribunals to South Carolina in 
 order that justice may be done to our loyal citi- 
 zens. Has the patriot Pettigru, in that rebel city 
 of Charleston, faithful found among the faithless. 
 Standing fast lor the integrity of the Union and 
 Constitution amid the wild howl of treason, no 
 claim to the protection of this Government, and 
 to be protected there in his home? That good 
 old white-haired man, what true citizen would 
 not run out in a storm to meet him and to help 
 him? He is an honor to human nature. Un- 
 awed, unseduccd, and unsubdued, he clung to 
 the Constitution amid the fulling pillars of the 
 temple, and alone amid the conspirators he is for 
 the Constitution still, and cherishes the hope of 
 its restoration as he cherishes the ho|eof a bet- 
 ter life in the land of uprightness. 
 
 Why, sir, amid the thunders of the infernal 
 enginery of treason, battering down the walls of 
 your doomed and burning fort, he denounced the 
 treason, refused to strike hands with the traitors, 
 and stood by the old liag. I ask you, has that 
 brave, good man no right to claim the protection 
 of your laws in Charleston? Such fidelity, such 
 loyalty, may justly demand the protection of the 
 Government. If you would administer justice 
 between man and mm in South Carolina, you 
 must estrtblish a caurt of justice there that will 
 take the oath to support the Constitution of the 
 United States, without which no court can right- 
 fully sit anywhere in the United States. And if 
 the worst comes to the worst — if these traitors 
 imbrue their hands in the blood of loyal citizens — 
 how can you refuse to provide the tribunal to 
 make them pay the penalty of their atrocious 
 crime upon the gallows? 
 
 Mr. Chairman, I trust that I have as much 
 charity as other gentlemen ; but, sir, I beg leave 
 to say that the Representaiive who will stand up 
 in his place and deny the right of the Govern- 
 ment to provide speedily and effectively for the 
 administration of justice in the revolted States, 
 commits a crime which would require a charity 
 broader thau the charity of the Gospel to cover. 
 He is in a condition to strike hands with the 
 rebels themselves. Is nothing to be done beside 
 sending conquering- armies to Imrn and destroy 
 as they go? That is a needful thing; but I 
 would also send the white-robed ministers of 
 justice. I would put them into the deserted 
 temples of justice, and place in their hands the 
 sacred scales, and bind them by an oath to do 
 equal and exact justice to the poor and the rich, 
 the stranger and the citizen. 
 
 I would let it go out that those who submit 
 to the law shall have their protection under the 
 law, and that those who revolt against the law 
 should not only find the armed soldiers of the 
 Union pursuing them unto death, but they should 
 
 find as well the swift hand of justice^^,lllng 
 upon them, and the majesty of the law declar- 
 ing, "you are my prisoner, a prisoner against 
 offended justice, because you have invaded the 
 rights of citizens of the United States who 
 were entitled to protection under the law of the 
 land.'' Let these rebels know that by confed- 
 erating as conspirators for the overthrow of the 
 on'y form of State government which could exist 
 under the Coustitution, they irust submit to the 
 administration of justice i^roposedunUl they can 
 get another State organization under the Constitu- 
 tion. The only limitation that is imposed upon 
 the power of this Government in the premises 
 is, that whenev^ any of these Territories presents 
 a State government organiz d in subordination 
 to^ the Federal Constituiion, and recognised as 
 such by the Federal Government, the State 
 authority will be again established. That, sir, 
 is my argument in reply to the suggestion about 
 State rights. 
 
 Those who would assert State rights must or- 
 ganize a judiciary under solemn oath to support 
 the Federal Constitution ; they must orsranize a 
 Legislature on solemn oath to support the Federal 
 Consiitution ; they must organize an executive 
 department upon a solemn o,tth to supjicrt the 
 Federal Constitution ; and until thev do that they 
 cannot exercise State rights. Thus their treason- 
 able civil organization, while it is void as against 
 the Federal Government, operates an absolute 
 forfeiture of all their powers and rijihts as States. 
 
 It is perfectly clear to my mind that no State 
 which once existed in this Union can destroy itg 
 constitutional State government without the per- 
 jury of its Legislature, who must, by providiag 
 for secession, break the oath by which they were 
 bound to support the Constitution of the United 
 >'tates. The executive, legislative, and judicial 
 officers in those rebel States who aided this de^ 
 struction of their constitutional State — and nearly 
 all of them did so — only accomplished it through 
 their broken oaths. They stand this day clothed 
 with perjury as with a garment before their God 
 and their country. Yet, after such black infamy 
 as this, we hear all this clamor about their State 
 rights and their private rights and the sacrednesa 
 of their divine institution — that great civilizer. 
 The gentleman spoke of Kentucky going away 
 from the Union. 
 
 The gentleman says now that she is not 
 going. I am glad he has changed his mind, 
 and is willing to let her stay. But he stated 
 before, that if Congress interfered with the civ- 
 ilizer she would not stay. I would like him 
 to tell us how Kentucky would go out of the 
 Union if she should be mad enough to try it? It 
 depends upon circumstances whether she will 
 remain in the Union or not. I hope circumstances 
 will constrain her to stay. We beli -ve that the 
 initiation of emancipation, of full and complete 
 emancipation, will put an end to this civil war. 
 
 After slavery is abolished, or put in process of 
 ultimate but certain extinction, there will be 
 nothing left for traitors to fight for. It is the 
 sole cause of this great treason, and it is time 
 that the world knew and comprehended the fact. 
 This great war is a conflict for freedom and free 
 institutions on the part of the armies of the 
 Union, against armed traitors, who seek to 
 build and perpetuate upon the ruins of repre- 
 sentative government the most unlimited and 
 atrocious despotism the world ever saw. 
 
i^