E 458 
 .4 
 
 .P89 
 Copy 1 
 
Class X^LB. 
 
 ■■' 
 
I 
 
MILITARY INTERFERENCE WITH ELECTIONS. 
 
 SPEECH 
 
 Off 
 
 ION. L. W. POWELL, 
 
 OF KENTUCKY, 
 
 ELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, 
 MARCH 3 AND 4, 1864. 
 
 •OS 
 
 HE BILL TO PREVENT OFFICERS OF THE ARMY AND NAVY, AND 
 OTHER PERSONS ENGAGED IN THE MILITARY AND NAVAL 
 SERVICE OF THE UNITED STATES, FROM INTERFERING IN 
 ELECTIONS IN THE STATES. 
 
 WASHINGTON, D. C. : 
 
 PRINTED AT CONSTITUTIONAL UNION OFFICE. 
 1$G4. 
 

 West. Kes. Hlrt. Soc. 
 
SPEECH 
 
 The Senate, as is Committee of the Whole, proceeded to 
 consider the bill (S. No. 37) to prevent officers of the army 
 and navy, and other persons engaged in the military and 
 naval sei-vice of the United Statls, from interfering in elec- 
 tions in the States. 
 
 The bill was read by the Secretary. The first 
 section provides that it shall not be lawful for 
 any military or naval officer of the United 
 States, or other person engaged in the civil, 
 military, or naval service of the United States, 
 to order, bring, keep, or have under his author- 
 ity or control, any troops or armed men within 
 one mile of the place where any general or 
 special election is held in any State of the 
 United States of America, and that it shall not 
 be lawful for any officer of the army or navy of 
 the United States to prescribe or fix, or attempt 
 to prescribe or fix, by proclamation, order, or 
 otherwise, the qualifications of voters in any 
 State, or in any manner to interfere with the 
 freedom of any election, or with the exercise of 
 the free right of suffrage in any State. Any 
 officer of the army or navy, or other person 
 engaged in the civil, military, or naval service 
 of the United States who violates this section 
 is for every such offense to be liable to indict- 
 ment as for a misdemeanor, .in any court of the 
 United States having jurisdiction to hear, try, 
 and determine cases of misdemeanor, and on 
 conviction to pay a fine of not less than $200, 
 and not exceeding $20,000, and' suffer impris- 
 enment in the penitentiary not less than two 
 nor more than twenty years, at the discretion 
 of the court; and any person so convicted is 
 moreover to be disqualified from holding any 
 office of honor, profit, or trust, under the Gov- 
 ernment of the United States. The bill is not, 
 however, to be so construed as to prevent any 
 officer, soldier, sailor, or marine, from exercising 
 the right of suffrage in any election district to 
 which he may belong, if otherwise qualified, 
 according to the laws of the State in which he 
 shall offer to vote. 
 
 By the second section any officer or person in 
 the military or naval service of the United 
 States, who shall order or advise, or who shall 
 
 directly or indirectly, by force, threat, menace, 
 intimidation or otherwise, prevent or attempt 
 to prevent any qualified voter of any State 
 from freely exercising the right of suffrage at 
 any general or special election, or who shall in 
 like manner compel or attempt to compel, any 
 officer of an election in any State to receive a 
 vote from a person not legally qualified to vote, 
 or who shall impose or attempt to impose any 
 rules or regulations for conducting such elec- 
 tion different from those prescribed by law, or 
 interfere in any manner with any officer of the 
 election in the discharge of his duties, is for 
 any such offense to be liable, to indictment as 
 for misdemeanor, in any court of the United 
 States having jurisdiction to hear, try, and de- 
 termine cases of misdemeanor, and on convic- 
 tion to pay a fine not exceeding $20,000, and 
 suffer imprisonment in the penitentiary, not 
 exceeding five years, at the discretion of the 
 court, and any person so convicted is moreover to 
 be disqualified from holding any office of honor, 
 profit, or trust, under the Government of the 
 United States. 
 
 Mr. POWELL said : 
 
 Mr. President : The object of the bill is to 
 prevent officers of the army and navy, and 
 other persons engaged in the military and 
 naval service of the United States,, from inter- 
 ing with elections in the States. The bill pro- 
 vides that the persons named, if they interfere 
 with elections in the States, shall be punished, 
 upon trial and conviction in the courts, by fine 
 and imprisonment, and shall be forever after 
 disqualified from holding any office of honor, 
 trust or profit, under the Government of the 
 United States. The importance of the bill at 
 the present crisis in our affairs cannot be over- 
 estimated. In times of profound peace and 
 quiet, when no abuses of the character proposed 
 to be remedied by this bill existed, it would, be 
 evidently wise and proper to enact such a law. 
 Wise lawgivers so shape their legislation as to 
 prevent as far as possible all abuses that are 
 calculated to sap the foundations of the politi- 
 
cal system, to impair or destroy the fundamen- 
 tal law, or to endanger or overthrow the rights 
 or liberties of the people. 
 
 It cannot be doubted that upon the keeping 
 of the elective franchise absolutely free depends 
 the very existence of our form of Government 
 and our republican institutions. Free States 
 in all ages have regarded the purity of the 
 elective franchise as of the greatest and most 
 vital importance, and have enacted severe penal 
 laws for the punishment of those who inter- 
 fered by force or fraud to prevent free elections. 
 I believe there is no Government on the face of 
 the earth in which elections have been carried 
 on for the purpose of appointing any of the 
 officers of the Government, save and except 
 the United States of America, that has 
 not had laws to punish, and severely punish 
 those who should interfere with the freedom of 
 the elective franchise. All the republics of 
 antiquity had the severest laws punishing those 
 who interfered with the freedom of their elec- 
 tions. In the second volume of Blackstone's 
 Commentaries, by Mr. Tucker, on page 170, I 
 find this : 
 
 " For in a democracy there can be no exercise of sover- 
 eignty but by suffrage, which is the declaration of the peo- 
 ple's will. In all democracies, thorefore, it is of the utmost 
 importance to regulate by whom, and in what manner, the 
 suffrages are to be given. And the Athenians wero so justly 
 jealous of this prerogative, that a stranger who interfered 
 in the assemblies of the people was punished by their laws 
 with death ; because such a man was esteemed guilty of 
 high treason by usurping those rights of sovereignty to 
 which he had no title. In England, where the people do 
 not debate in a collective body but by representation, the 
 exercise of this sovereignty consists in the choice of repre- 
 sentatives. The laws have therefore been strictly guarded 
 against usurpation or abuse of this power by many salutary 
 provisions, which may be reduced to these three points : 
 1. The qualifications of the electors. 2. The qualifications 
 of the elected. 3. The proceedings at elections." 
 
 By the laws of Great Britain persons convicted 
 of bribery, force, or fraud at elections are pun- 
 ished severely. At the common law, bribery 
 and kindred offenses were crimes, and the 
 British statutes punished persons guilty of such 
 offenses on conviction with fines of £500, and 
 deprived them of the privilege ever after of 
 voting or holding any office of trust or honor 
 under that government. One section of this 
 bill provides that the soldiers of the army of 
 the United States shall not be permitted to be 
 kept with;n one mile of any poll where an 
 election is' going on, on the day of election. I 
 find similar provisions in the English law, 
 which I will read from page 179 of the same 
 book: 
 
 «< As soon, therefore, as the time and place of election, 
 either in counties or boroughs, are fixed, all soldiers quar- 
 tered in the place are to remove, at leas t one day before 
 the election, to the distance of two miles or more, and not 
 to return till ono day after the poll is ended. Kiots, like- 
 wise, have been frequently determined to make an election 
 yoid." 
 
 By a statute passed in the reign of George II, 
 lo which I alluded in a running debate that 
 arose upon the reference of this bill to a com- 
 mittee, and which statute is quoted at length in 
 the report made by the Committee on Military 
 Affairs, rt is provided that ^Secretary of War, 
 
 or the party who for the time being is acting as 
 Secretary of War, shall issue his orders to 
 remove all soldiers from places of voting in the 
 manner prescribed in the law I have just read. 
 It further provides that if the Secretary of War 
 or the person acting as such shall not issue the 
 order as required by the statute, he shall upon 
 conviction in the courts be dismissed from 
 office, and be ever after disqualified from hold- 
 ing any office of honor, profit, or trust, under the 
 British Government. 
 
 That is the manner in which our English an- 
 cestors, from whom we have derived most of 
 our maxims of civil and constitutional liberty, 
 regarded this subject. Mr. Tucker, in his notes 
 to Blackstone's Commentaries, in reference to 
 the law I have read requiring soldiers to be re- 
 moved from the place of voting, says, "A sim- 
 ilar regulation in the election of Representa- 
 tives to Congress seems highly proper and 
 necessary." It is strange to me that we have 
 never had such a Jaw on our statute-book. I 
 venture the assertion that we are the only, peo- 
 ple on earth who have had any regard for free 
 government that have not had some such law. 
 I suppose the only reason for the absence of 
 such a law is that our elections have been reg- 
 ulated heretofore by officers appointed by the 
 States, and it is only very recently that the armies 
 of the United States have attempted to interfere 
 in our elections. 
 
 By the spirit of the Constitution of the United 
 States, and by the constitution of every State 
 in the Union, the military is to be kept in strict 
 subordination to the civil power; and I suppose 
 that those who went before us never thought we 
 should have rulers so wicked and corrupt as to 
 use the machinery of the Federal Government 
 for the purpose of prostrating the freedom of 
 elections in the States: otherwise, I am sure 
 that such laws as the one before us would have 
 been enacted long before this. I find upon ex- 
 amination that seven of the States of the Union 
 have enacted statutes to prevent soldiers making 
 their appearance on election day at the places 
 where the elections are held. I shall not trouble 
 the Senate by reading all these statutes ; but 
 as the State of Maryland — unfortunately for the 
 honor and dignity of that State — figures a good 
 deal in this matter, I will take the liberty of 
 reading the statutes of Maryland from her Code, 
 volume I, page 262 : 
 
 " Article 35 — Elections. 
 
 " Sec. 24. No commissioned or non-commissioned officer 
 having the command of any soldier or soldiers quartered 
 or posted in any district of any county in this State shall 
 muster or embody any of the said troops, or march any 
 recruiting party within the view of any place of election 
 during tho time of holding said election, under the penalty 
 of $100. This section not to apply to the city of Balti- 
 more." 
 
 I have similar provisions here from the stat- 
 utes of the State of Mississippi, New Jersey, 
 New York, Pennsylvania, Maine, and Massa- 
 chusetts. The constitution of the State of 
 Maryland provides that upon conviction for the 
 offense of giving or receiving bribes or influen- 
 cing any man to give an illegal vote, not only 
 
the man giving the bribe bnt the man giving 
 the illegal vote shall forever after be disqualified 
 from voting and from holding any office of trust, 
 honor, or profit under the State government. 
 Every State in the Union has severe penal laws, 
 providing for the punishment of all who in any 
 way interfere to prevent free elections. 
 
 With us, Mr. President, sovereignty resides 
 in the people, and the people by the exercise of 
 free suffrage declare their will and appoint their 
 agencies to carry on the Government. He who 
 attempts to interfere with this most inestimable 
 right, whether he be President, major-general, 
 or citizen, is an enemy to the Republic and de- 
 serves the harshest punishment. In order to 
 have free elections, there must be free speech 
 and a free press ; the sovereign people must 
 have an opportunity of forming an enlightened 
 public opinion upon the questions at issue, which 
 can only be done after full and free discussion. 
 Free speech and a a free press in a Government 
 like ours are the soul of republican institutions ; 
 free suffrage is the very heart-strings of civil 
 liberty. To be free, the elections must be con- 
 ducted in accordance with laws so framed as to 
 prevent fraud, force, intimidation, corruption, 
 and venality, superintended by election judges 
 and officers independent of the Executive or 
 any other power of the Government ; the mili- 
 tary must not interfere, but be kept in strict 
 subordination to the law which should be so 
 framed as to prevent absolutely such interfer- 
 ence. The only duty of the Executive is to see 
 that the law is faithfully executed. 'The Execu- 
 tive must not use the power intrusted to him to 
 prevent free elections. Mr. Locke, in his 
 excellent treatise on Government, page 379, 
 speaking of the executive power, says : 
 
 " What I have said here concerning the legislative in gen- 
 eral, holds true also concerning the supremo executor, who 
 having a double trust put in him, both to have a part in 
 th-2 legislative and the supreme execution of the law, acts 
 against both when he goes about to set up his own arbitrary 
 will as the law of society. He. acts also contrary to his 
 trust when he either employs the force, treasure, and offices 
 of the society to corrupt the representatives and gain them 
 to his purpose, or openly pre-engage the electors and pre- 
 scribes to their choice such whom he has by solicitations, 
 threats, promises, or otherwise won to his designs, and em- 
 ploys them to bring in such who have promised beforehand 
 what to vote and what to enact. Thus to regulate candidates 
 and electors and new-model the ways of election, what is it 
 but to cut up the Government by the roots and poison the 
 very fountain of public security ? for tho people have re- 
 served to themselves the choice of their representatives, 
 as the fence of their properties, could do it for no other end 
 but that they might always be freely chosen, and, so chosen 
 freely act and advise as the necessity of the Commonwealth 
 and the public good should upon examination and mature 
 debate be judged to require. This, those who give their 
 votes before they hear the debate and have weighed the 
 reasons on all sides are not capable of doing. To prepare 
 such au assembly as this, and endeavor to set up the de- 
 clared abettors of his own will for the true representatives 
 of the people and the law-makers of the society, is cer- 
 tainly as great a breach of trust and as perfect a declaration 
 of a "design to subvert the Government as is possible to be 
 met with." 
 
 Nothing can be truer than the sentiment ut- 
 tered by Mr. Locke in the extract I have just 
 read. It is certainly a subversion of the very 
 foundation of the Government for the Executive 
 to use the force and the power that the Govern- 
 ment has placed in his hands for defensive 
 
 purposes, to overthrow the free suffrages of the 
 people and to appoint those to power who wjjl . 
 be his truckling menials, his subservient agents 
 to carry out his will, to aid him it may be to 
 overthrow the liberties of the people whom 
 they should represent, betray the Constitution 
 that they should preserve and protect, destroy 
 everything that makes the Government desira- 
 ble and worthy of the support o£ an honest and 
 free people. Yet, sir, such things have been 
 done, and I regret to say that there are those in 
 the Senate Chamber who not. only do not de- 
 nounce but who approve these usurpations, these 
 plain, palpable violations of the Constitution of 
 their country. • 
 
 Mr. President, let us for a moment see what 
 are the powers of the President of the United 
 States. From whence does he derive this power 
 to regulate elections and to appoint repre- 
 sentatives of the people? for when stripped of 
 its verbiage that is really what has been done 
 in many parts of the States of Maryland, Mis- 
 souri, Kentucky, and Delaware. Where, I ask, 
 does the Executive of the United States derive 
 such power ? He certainly does not derive it 
 from the Constitution. The second and third 
 section of the second article of the Constitution 
 prescribes the duties of the President. Let U3 
 read those clauses of the Constitution and see 
 what powers are conferred upon the Chief Mag- 
 istrate. I hold that the President' can exercise 
 no power but' what is conferred upon him by 
 the Constitution. He is the agent of thepeople 
 appointed for specifio purposes to administer 
 their Government as its Executive, within pre- 
 scribed aud limited powers. The Constitution 
 provides, in article two : 
 
 " Sec. 2. The President shall be Commander-in-Chief of the 
 Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia «f 
 the several States, when called into the actual service of the 
 United States ; he may require the opinion in writing of 
 the principal officer in each of the Executive Departments 
 upon any subject relating to tho duties of their respective 
 offices, and he shall have power to grant reprieves aud par- 
 dona for offenses against the United Statea, except in cases 
 of impeachment. 
 
 " lie shall have power, by and with the advice and con- 
 sent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two-thirds of 
 the Senators present concur ; and ho shall nominate, and, 
 by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall 
 appoint embassadors, other public ministers and consuls, 
 judges of the Supreme Court, and all otherofficers of the 
 United States whose appointments are not herein otherwise 
 provided for, and which shall he established bylaw; bnt 
 the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such in- 
 ferior officers as they think proper in the President alone, 
 in the courts of law, or in the lieads of Departments. 
 
 "The President 6hall have power to fill up all vacancies 
 that may happen during the recess of the Senate by grant- 
 ing commissions which shall expire at the end of their next 
 session. 
 
 " Sec. 3. He shall from timo to time give to the Congress 
 information of the state of the Union, and recommend to 
 their consideration such measures as ho shall judge neces- 
 sary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary occasions, 
 convene both Houses, or either of them; and incase of dis- 
 agreement between them with respect to the time of ad- 
 journment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall 
 think proper ; ho shall receive embassadors and other pub- 
 lic ministers ; he shall take care that the laws be faithfully 
 executed, and shall commission all the officers of the United 
 States." 
 
 There, sir, are the powers of the President of 
 the United States. He is Commander-in-Chief 
 of the armies of the United States, and <inde& 
 
■ that clause I suppose those who oppose the bill 
 claim that the President can rightfully exercise 
 the power that he has exercised in overthrow- 
 ing the freedom of elections in" Maryland and 
 other States. They claim it under the war 
 power, which I will notice in another part of 
 my remarks. The President i3 to " take care 
 that the laws be faithfully executed." What 
 laws are they* that the President shall see 
 faithfully executed ? The Constitution declares 
 that— ' 
 
 "This Constitution and tho laws of the United States 
 vrhirh shall lie made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties 
 made or which shall bo made under the authority of the 
 United States, shall be the supreme law of the land." 
 
 These are the Jaws that the President is to 
 see faithfully executed. Whenever he goes 
 beyond that he is a usurper. The President, 
 under the Constitution, can exercise no implied 
 power. All the implied powers that can be 
 exercised under our Government must be exer- 
 cised by another and a different body of magis- 
 tracy, to wit, the legislative ; and that is the 
 express language of the Constitution. _ The 
 eighteenth paragraph of the eighth section of 
 the first article of the Constitution declares that 
 Congress is clothed with the power to make all 
 laws which shall be necessary and proper for 
 carrying into effect all the powers vested by the 
 Constitution in the Government of the United 
 States, or in any Department or officer thereof ; 
 consequently the President can exercise no im- 
 plied powers. He can exercise no power except 
 that with which he is clothed by the Constitu- 
 tion and the laws made in pursuance thereof. 
 
 In the States to which I have alluded, the 
 President, or those acting under his orders, 
 have prescribed the qualifications of voters and 
 tfee qualifications of candidates for office, and 
 that, too, in direct violation of the Constitution 
 of the United States. This is a grave charge, 
 but it is one that I will make good by testimony 
 that none can doubt. Let us see who it is that 
 has the right to prescribe the qualifications of 
 voters. I suppose that no Senator will deny 
 that as to all State offices the States have the 
 power to prescribe the qualifications of the offi- 
 cer as well as of the voter. That power not 
 having been delegated by the Constitution to 
 the General Government, the States necessarily 
 retain it. But there is an express provision of 
 the Constitution— the tenth amendment — which 
 declares, "The powers not delegated to the 
 United States by the Constitution, nor prohib- 
 ited by it to the States, are reserved to the 
 States' respectively or to the people," and the 
 Constitution very clearly indicates who are 
 qualified voters for members of Congress. The 
 second section of the first article of the Consti- 
 tution is in these words : 
 
 "The House of Representatives shall becomposed of mem- 
 bers chosen every second year by the people of the several 
 States and the electors in each State shall have the qualifi- 
 cations requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of 
 the State legislature." 
 
 The Constitution of the United States, in the 
 clause just read, declares who shall be qualified 
 eleo>ors for members of Congress. It fixes the 
 
 qualification as the one ordained by the State 
 government for the members of the most numer- 
 ous branch of their Legislature. That is the 
 fundamental law of the land; but in violation 
 of that provision of the Constitution the military 
 have seen fit, by military orders, to fix the qual- 
 ifications of voters in the States. They have 
 gone further, and fixed the qualifications for 
 office. Not only the military have done this, 
 but the President of the United States himself 
 has done it. I am not going to waste all my 
 time upon those who do the Chief Magistrate's 
 bidding, but it is my purpose to-day to expose 
 his atrocious violations of the Constitution. I 
 trust that I shall speak of the President in a 
 manner that is courteous, but I certainly shall 
 do it in very plain language. The charges that 
 I have to make I trust will not be misunderstood 
 by any one. I will not deal in inuendo, insinu- 
 ation, or hint, but I will make the charge di- 
 rectly, and I have the proof to sustain it. 
 
 The second section of the first article of the 
 Constitution fixes the qualifications of a Repre- 
 sentative in Congress : 
 
 " No person shall bo a Representative who shall not have 
 attained to the age of twenty-five years, and been seven 
 years, a citizen of the United States, and who shall not, 
 when elected, be an inhabitant of that State in which he 
 shall bo chosen." 
 
 The Committee on Military Affairs, who made 
 a very elaborate report, which I have before me, 
 and which I shall presently review, justify the 
 military in all they have done in controlling 
 elections. . The sole object and design of the 
 committee in their report seems to be the justi- 
 fication and vindication of the military authori- 
 ties for their atrocious assault on the rights of 
 the States and the liberties of the people and 
 their wicked and illegal interference in elec- 
 tions; and they assault every person who says 
 or does anything tending to prove that the 
 military have usurped powers that belong to 
 the civil officers of the States and to the people. 
 The committee justify the President and the 
 military authorities for this inteiference in 
 elections upon the ground that it was right and 
 proper that the military arm should have been 
 so used to protect the voters, " the loyal 
 voters," as they are called in the report. The 
 Constitution prescribes the duty of the Chief 
 Magistrate on this subject. I will read the 
 clause from article four : 
 
 " Sec. 4. The United States shall guaranty to every State 
 in this Union a republican form of government, and shall 
 protect each of them against invasion, and, on application 
 of the Legislature, or of the Executive, (when the Legisla- 
 ture cannot be convened,) against domestic violence." 
 
 The President of the United States has no 
 authority or power to send his military into 
 one of the adhering States for the purpose of 
 preventing domestic violence at the polls unless 
 he had been invited to do so by the State au- 
 thorities, for the Constitution plainly and dis- 
 tinctly provides that he shall do it on applica- 
 tion of the Legislature, if in session, and if that 
 cannot be, then on the application of the Ex- 
 ecutive; and that is one of the wisest provis- 
 ions in that sacred instrument. It is a provis- 
 
ion intended to prevent a despotic President 
 from interfering by armed force with the rights 
 of the States and the liberties of the people. 
 Mr. Justice Story, in his Commentaries on the 
 Constitution, second volume, section eighteen 
 hundred and twenty-five, pago 633, speaking of 
 this clause of the Constitution, says: 
 
 " It may not be amiss further to observe (in the lan- 
 guage of auother commentator) that every pretext for in- 
 termeddling with the domestic concerns of any State under 
 color of protecting it against domestic violence is taken 
 away by that part of the provision which renders an appli- 
 cation from the Legislature or executive authority of tho 
 State endangered necessary to be made to tho General Gov- 
 ernment before its interference can be at all rr P er - On 
 the other hand, this article becomes an immense acquisi- 
 tion of strength and additional force to the aid of any State 
 government in case of an internal rebellion or insurrection 
 against lawful authority." 
 
 This learned commentator takes the very 
 view of this clause of the Constitution that I 
 have heretofore indicated. But for this pro- 
 vision of the Constitution a corrupt, venal, or 
 ambitious President could by means of the 
 military force, under some imaginary plea of 
 domestic violence, invade any State in the 
 Union on the eve of an election, and dictate the 
 persons who should be returned as members of 
 the other House of Congress, who should be 
 returned as members of the Legislature, who 
 should be returned as Governors of the States. 
 In a word, if you allow him to use the army in 
 this way without the invitation of the State 
 authorities, a wicked and corrupt man would 
 have it in his power to prostrate every State 
 government in the Union, and to elect officers 
 who would do his bidding, and thus overthrow 
 the liberties of the people, and establish a con- 
 solidated despotism of which he would be the 
 master. 
 
 Mr. President, after the few preliminary re- 
 marks which I have made, I will now proceed 
 to the elimination of the report made by the 
 Committee on Military Affairs upon this bill. 
 
 RErORT OF COMMITTEE ON MILITARY AFFAIRS. 
 
 Mr. President, this bill, which was referred 
 to the Committee on Military Affairs, came 
 back to the Senate accompanied by a very volu- 
 minous adverse report. I have read the report 
 with a great deal of care, and if I had not 
 known that it was made by a committee com- 
 posed of honorable Senators of this body, I 
 never should have dreamed that such a docu- 
 ment could emanate from a committee of the 
 Senate of the United States. So for from meet- 
 ing the case and discussing the bill fully, fairly, 
 candidly, and impartially, the committee made 
 a report of some fifty-two closely printed pages, 
 almost every line of which is a labored defense 
 of the President and the military authorities 
 who had command in Kentucky, Maryland, and 
 Delaware ; and in order to make the defense of 
 the military commanders and of the President 
 complete, the report indulges in the harshest 
 assaults upon every person whose name appears 
 in the documents before the committee that at 
 all complains or censures the military for their 
 
 unlawful and outrageous interference in the 
 elections in those States. 
 
 The committee even travel out of the record 
 to find objects for assault. The honorable Sen- 
 ator from Maryland [Mr. Johnson] took occa- 
 sion some weeks since, in a debate that sprung 
 up in this body, to make some remarks upon 
 the election that had occurred in his State last 
 fall. The committee in the report notice that, 
 and I will read what they say of it : 
 
 " The recent Maryland election is a fruitful topic of com- 
 plaint. The Governor and one of her Senators unite in 
 denouncing it. The former, in his message, informs the 
 Legislature that ' a part of the army which a generous peo- 
 ple supplied for a very different purpose was on that day 
 employed in stifling the freedom of election in a faithful 
 State, intimidating its sworn officers, violating the consti- 
 tutional rights of its loyal citizens, and obstructing the 
 usual channels of communication betwoen them and their 
 Executive. And a Senator from Maryland has indulged hi 
 expressions which nothing but the most flagrant invasions 
 of the elective franchise can excuse. 
 
 " But the weight of these imputations is seriously dimin- 
 ished by two considerations: both gentlemen owe their 
 positions to an election conducted under tho same auspices* 
 both gentlemen are now on the losing sido of the election 
 which they impeach; and tho country has not forgotten 
 that it is the bad habit of the defeated partisans of tho 
 slavery interests to blacken tho opponents whom they fail 
 to defeat." 
 
 Mr. President, why step out of the way to 
 
 make this assault upon the honorable Senator 
 from' Maryland ? Nothing that the honorable 
 Senator said was before the committee. They 
 had beforcthem the message and accompanying 
 documents of the Governor of the State of Ma- 
 ryland, and upon that they could legitimately 
 comment. They not only step out of the way 
 to assault the Senator, but they impute to him 
 most unworthy motives. Complaint is now 
 made of the Maryland election, the committee 
 say, because the Senator and the Governor are 
 on the losing side. I, however, will not enter 
 into any defense of the patriotic, able, and dis- 
 tinguished Senator from Maryland. He is in 
 the Senate Chamber, and he is fully able to 
 make his defense against all assaults and all 
 assailants, whether they como from the Mili- 
 tary Committee or from others in this Hall, or 
 elsewhere. I will leave that matter to the 
 honorable Senator himself. But 1 will simply 
 say that I regard the assault as unjust, unwar- 
 rantable, and unworthy of a committee of this 
 body. This is the first time I have ever seen in 
 a report of a committee of this body an instance 
 where they stepped out of the way to assail a 
 Senator, and to attribute unworthy motives to 
 him in order to strengthen and to build up the 
 waning reputations of military commanders, 
 whose conduct has been such that they must, 
 in all after time, receive the condemnation of 
 all honest, of all law-abiding and liberty-loving 
 men. 
 
 Mr. President, allow me to read one or two 
 extracts from this report. The committee, in 
 the outset of the report, on the first page an- 
 nounce a proposition that is correct, and which 
 I heartily approve. I will read it : 
 
 "The bill is founded upon the supposition that the mili- 
 tary have in some instances interfered in an illegal or im- 
 proper way with popular elections in the States, and seefeg 
 to prevent that evil for the future by tho infliction 01 severe 
 paies and penalties. 
 
8 
 
 " That elections should be free from all violence and 
 intimidation is an axiom of free government accepted by- 
 all, and so evident that it need not be discussed. Violence 
 and threats of violence, and all disturbance, actual or 
 threatened, calculated to keep the legal voter from the 
 polls, or to constrain his free will and choice in exercising 
 his right, are plainly incompatible with the principles on 
 which our governments, whether State or Federal, rest.'' 
 
 I suppose the extract from the report which 
 I have just read will receive the approval of 
 every man who lives under a republican govern- 
 ment or appreciates civil liberty. 
 
 I will undertake to show, and that too from 
 the evidence that was before the committee, 
 that the very infractions of right which they 
 notice in the extract from the report had oc- 
 curred, that the evidence was ample, full, and 
 complete before them when they made the re- 
 port recommending that the bill should not pass, 
 l'es, sir, the Committee on Military Affairs had 
 evidence, abundant evidence, in their posses- 
 sion, documents that they review in this very 
 report, proving that the military had interfered 
 in the most striking and unmistakable manner 
 in the elections in the States of Kentucky and 
 Maryland. 
 
 If the committee will adhere to the principle 
 laid down in the extract which I have just read 
 from their report, and will say that it is the 
 duty of Congress by legislation to prevent the 
 evil, then on the evidence I propose to present 
 I shall have a right to demand their votes for 
 this bill, or some bill to carry out the same 
 views and objects. 
 
 The committee notice the statute of George 
 II, passed in 1735, and they append a copy of 
 it to the report. 
 
 I referred to that statute in the debate when 
 this bill was up for reference ; and the com- 
 mittee, in speaking of it, say : 
 
 "It cannot escape notice that the leading object of this 
 ancieut statute, as sufficiently evidenced by the preamble, 
 was ' the preservation of the rights and liberties of the 
 kingdom, ' not their destruction. And the history of the 
 time shows that the prohibition to keep military forces near 
 places where there was an election of members of Parlia- 
 ment, arose from outrages practiced upon the electors by 
 the ministers in posting troops so as to overawe them, and 
 coerce them into the returning of candidates friendly to the 
 ministerial party, and the supporters of prerogative against 
 popular rights. And we are told, that, so far did this party 
 push their schemes, that in 1734, the year bofore the act 
 was pissed, the miuisters, before the election took place, 
 made out a list of the sixteen Scottish peers who were to 
 be elected, which was approved by the Crown ; and that, 
 among other foul means rosorted to for securing their elec- 
 tion, a battalion of the king's troops were drawn up in the 
 court of Ediuburg, contrary to custom, and without any 
 apparent cause but that of overawing the electors. This 
 outrage appears to have been the immediate occasion of 
 the passage of the act. It was passed in the interest of 
 liberty, and in resistance of the tyrannical schemes of the 
 Crown ana its flatterers to check its growth by stifling the 
 voice of free election." 
 
 That is the comment the committee make 
 upon that wise statute, and a most excellent 
 commentary it is, and it is the very object re- 
 cited in that statute which is to be effected by 
 the passage of the bill under consideration. 
 We desire to prevent the President and his offi- 
 cers from interfering in elections. We desire 
 to preserve the ancient liberties of the people, 
 and we know that that cannot be done unless 
 elections are absolutely free. We desire that 
 
 the President shall not augment his power and 
 overthrow the rights and liberties of the people 
 by returning to the Congress of the United 
 States or to the Legislature of the States men 
 elected at the point of ihe bayonet, who are 
 willing tools, ready to do his bidding. It is for 
 that very purpose that we propose this bill. 
 Conduct far more outrageous against the right 
 of suffrage has occurred in these United States 
 within the last two years than is represented 
 by the committee in their comment upon' this 
 statute of George II, to have occurred in Great 
 Britain. 
 
 INTERFERENCE IN KENTUCKY ELECTIONS. 
 
 The committee had before them an address 
 and certain documents concerning elections in 
 the State of Kentucky, upon which they com- 
 ment at some length. So far as the military 
 interference in the State of Kentucky is con- 
 cerned, I will state the facts very briefly, and 
 I will notice the report of the committee on 
 that subject. The first palpable act of the in- 
 terference of the military in regard to elections 
 in that State occurred in the winter of 1863. 
 During that winter there was a meeting of the 
 Democratic party assembled at the capital of 
 Kentucky for the purpose of nominating candi- 
 dates for Governor and the other State offices. 
 
 That convention was dispersed by a Colonel 
 Gilbert, commanding a regiment of United 
 States troops. I offered in this Chamber a re- 
 solution asking for a committee to investigate 
 the conduct of that military officer in that in- 
 terference with the right of the people to meet 
 peaceably and to nominate candidates for office. 
 The majority of the Senate declined to give me 
 thj^ committee. Afterwards, candidates nomi- 
 nated by one of the political organizations in 
 Kentucky took the field. There were other 
 persons, composed somewhat of both these par- 
 ties, who determined, notwithstanding tSe in- 
 terference at Frankfort, to organize the Demo- 
 cratic party. They did so by addressing a 
 letter, which was signed by a large number of 
 respectable gentlemen in the State, to Hon. 
 Charles A. Wickliffe, requesting him to become 
 a candidate for Governor. He did become a 
 candidate for Governor, and other gentlemen 
 became candidates for other State offices, and 
 the State ticket was filled and regularly put on 
 the track for the election to be held on the 
 first Monday of August last. 
 
 Then it was that the military interfered in 
 many parts of the State. In some parts of the 
 State, I am happy to say, there was no inter- 
 ference or very little, except intimidation in 
 consequence of military orders that had been 
 issued. There was no direct and immediate 
 interference by force, except in certain locali- 
 ties in the State. A committee of gentlemen 
 who represented the organization that supported 
 the Wickliffe ticket wrote an address to the 
 people and to Congress in which they recited 
 some of the acts of interference by the military 
 authorities, which was presented to the Senate 
 and referred to the Military Committee that had 
 this bill in charge. 
 
The committee in their report make very 
 harsh and unjust remarks on the gentlemen who 
 signed this address, and they do what is com- 
 mon with gentlemen on the other side of the 
 Chamber. Whenever they want to break the 
 force of an argument, or refute a fact, when- 
 ever they desire to defeat an object that they 
 think is calculated to injure the party in power, 
 they accuse those who make the charge of dis- 
 loyalty, and they vainly think that is an answer 
 to every argument and a refutation of every 
 charge. The gentlemen who compose the com- 
 mittee that framed this address are charged as 
 disloyal in the report of the committee, and the 
 Military Committee embody in their report the 
 j. letter of the gentlemen who invited Mr. Wick- 
 liffe to become a candidate. They harshly crit- 
 icise that letter, and they pretend to regard the 
 letter as disloyal. In order that these gentle- 
 men may have a full vindication, as far as it is 
 possible for me to make it, I will append their 
 letter entire to my speech, and send it to the 
 people ; the letter will fully vindicate them 
 from the unjust eharges of the committee. I 
 am ready and willing to maintain against all 
 opposition the sentiments and principles set 
 forth in that letter. To be sure, the writers of 
 the letter very justly censure the Administra- 
 tion for unconstitutional acts. Among other 
 things, it says ; 
 
 t "We hold this rebellion utterly unjustifiable in its in- 
 ception, and the dissolution of the Union the greatest of 
 calamities. 
 
 " We would use all just and constitutional means adapted 
 to the suppression of the one and the restoration of the 
 , other." 
 
 h * 
 
 That is the kind of language used by these 
 gentlemen ; and yet because they have had the 
 patriotism, manhood, and courage to set forth 
 the facts, and to prove beyond doubt the most 
 unjustifiable and outrageous interference of the 
 military in the elections in Kentucky, the Com- 
 mittee on Military Affairs, to get clear of and 
 weaken the force of the facts and arguments 
 set forth in the address, being wholly unable to 
 meet them in fair and manly argument, or re- 
 fute the facts, denounce the authors of the ad- 
 dress as disloyal. Sir, I make bold to* say, that 
 so far as I know the gentlemen who signed that 
 letter, and I know the most of them, there is 
 not one of them who is or ever was disloyal. 
 They are, each and every one of them, Union 
 men. Their Unionism has been tested ; they 
 have been tried and not found wanting in 
 
 -* fidelity to the constitutional Union of our 
 fathers. 
 
 The committee are very much mistaken in 
 some matters stated as fact in their report. On 
 the 10th page they say : 
 
 u The writers, though pretending to hold the rebellion 
 'utterly unjustifiable in its inception,' leave a strong impli- 
 cation that it had become not unjustifiable, and seem to re- 
 gard the employment of negro troops to ' make war upon 
 tie whites' in the rebel States as changing its original char- 
 acter from unjustifiable to the contrary. And such they, 
 md their candidate undoubtedly regarded it, and had in 
 contemplation to take measures of violence to resist it. At 
 khis time the recruiting of black troops, under the act of 
 1862, was in active progress in Kentucky, Tennessee, and 
 Jther slaveholding districts." 
 
 Now, sir, at that time the enlisting of black 
 troops was not actively going on in Kentucky. 
 Every citizen of Kentucky knows that the com- 
 mittee are mistaken when they make that asser- 
 tion. It has only been very recently that there 
 has been any recruiting of negroes in Kentucky, 
 and that, I believe, has been confined to the 
 southern border of the State. And yet, sir, in 
 order to make out a case against these gentle- 
 men and against the Democratic candidate for 
 Governor, Mr. Wickliffe, the committee assert 
 as a fact what is not true. The committee, I 
 have no doubt, were mistaken. I will not charge 
 that they would intentionally misrepresent. • 
 
 The committee base that assault upon the 
 Democratic ticket and the gentlemen who signed 
 that letter upon this clause in the letter : 
 
 " It is now obvious that the fixed purpose of the Admin- 
 istration is to arm the negroes of the South to make war 
 upon the whites, and we hold it to be the duty of the people 
 of Kentucky to euter against such a policy a solemn and 
 most emphatic protest." 
 
 The committee construe that to mean the 
 taking of violent measures against the Govern- 
 ment! Every Union Legislature that has con- 
 vened in Kentucky since this rebellion broke 
 out has passed resolves protesting against the 
 enlistment of that description 0/ the population 
 in the army. The people of Kentucky have 
 uniformly protested against it ; and yet, because 
 the gentlemen who signed that letter also pro- 
 test against it, the committee think that is high- 
 ly revolutionary. Let me ask the Committee 
 on Military Affairs if the people of any State 
 in this Union have not the right to make their 
 protest against any policy of the General Gov- 
 ernment? Most undoubtedly they have. If 
 not they are the veriest slaves. Why, sir, it is 
 done on some measure or another in almost 
 every State in the Union every month during the 
 session of Congress. It is the mode' in which 
 a free people make known their will, and arrest 
 the attention of those who administer their 
 Government affairs for the time being; and yet 
 the Committee on Military Affairs think there 
 is something criminal even in that! 
 
 The committee say that Mr. Wickliffe and the 
 gentlemen who invited him to become a candi- 
 date desired rebels to vote. I will read ttflt 
 part of the report : 
 
 " The authors of the address, with commendable truth- 
 fulness, 6ay: 'It is very frankly admitted that we hcped 
 and expected to obtain the support of the great mass of the 
 Southern rights men of the State. They were, for the most 
 part, Democrats of long standing. Though classed by the 
 adherents of the Administration as "disloyal," the great 
 majority of them were not secessionists, and were entirely 
 free from all complicity in the rebellion. So far from es- 
 teeming it a fault of which we should be ashamed, wc re- 
 garded the effort to conciliate them, if it could be done 
 without a sacrifice of principle on either side, as highly 
 meritorious; and we now gratefully acknowledge the cor- 
 dial support which that portion of our fellow-citizens were 
 ready and anxious to yield to our platform and candidate 
 whenever permitted to do so.' " 
 
 Upon that the committee remark: 
 
 " This is an express avowal of the purpose of the writers 
 and of Mr. Wickliffe, their candidate, to obtain the votes, 
 not only of loyal Democrats, but of persona who were open-, 
 rebels, however numerous they might be. No one can deny 
 this, and no one can deny that such a purpose was directly 
 in the teeth not only of General Burnside's proclamation 
 
10 
 
 establishing martial law, but of the statute of Kentucky of 
 March 11. It invited open enemies, whose hands were red 
 with the blood of the defenders of the Government, and who 
 were loaded with the spoils of plunAred loyalists, to come 
 to the polls and participate in the election of the officers of 
 a loyal State ! There is but one step, and that a short one, 
 between this invitation and openly embracing the rebel 
 cause." 
 
 The committee say that they invited those 
 whose hands were red with the blood of Union- 
 ists, and who were loaded with the spoils of the 
 plundered friends of the Union, to come to the 
 polls. Why, sir, never were a committee more 
 mistaken. Those gentlemen did no such thing. 
 They desired no rebel to vote. They asked the 
 vote of no rebel. They desired that the con- 
 stitution and election laws of Kentucky should 
 be carried out, and faithfully administered by 
 the officers appointed by the State for that pur- 
 pose. I have read the extract from the address 
 that called forth that comment. It says that 
 they expected the support of the southern rights 
 men of the State. The honorable Committee on 
 Military Affairs must be most profoundly igno- 
 rant of the principles and feelings of those who 
 at one time were called southern rights men — 
 in Kentucky. That address tells you that the 
 great majority of those southern rights men 
 were not secessionists, and were entirely free 
 from all complicity in the rebellion ; and yet 
 the Committee on Military Affairs say that the 
 authors of this address invited those whose 
 hands were red with the blood of Union men, 
 and who were loaded with spoils taken from 
 plundered loyalists, to come to the polls. The 
 committee were drawing upon their fancy for 
 their facts in making such a statement, and a 
 most distempered fancy it must have been. 
 They could not have been deluded by the words 
 "southern rights," because this address states 
 distinctly that the southern rights men were not 
 secessionists, and were not implicated in the 
 rebellion. 
 ■ Allow me to say to the Senate at this point 
 that the southern rights men in Kentucky never 
 really amounted to a political organization. At 
 the beginning of this rebellion, in the election 
 of delegates to a border State convention, one 
 portion of the candidates were called "Southern 
 yn Rights" and the other "Union." The "South- 
 ern Rights" ticket, however, was withdrawn, 
 and the "Union" ticket was elected without 
 opposition. There might have been in some lo- 
 calities immediately after that some little party 
 designation of that kind ; but let me tell the 
 Senate the southern rights men of Kentucky 
 were, with a few exceptions, Peace Democrats. 
 Many men who belonged to other political or- 
 ganizations heretofore now agree with them in 
 sentiment. They were for the Constitution and 
 the Union, were opposed to secession, were op- 
 posed to a dissolution of the Union, and they 
 thought the only way in which that could be 
 prevented was by peaceable means, by negoti- 
 ation, compromise, .and concession between the 
 North and the South. They thought that war 
 would result in a dissolution of the Union. It 
 was because of their fervid devotion to the con- 
 stitutional Union that they opposed the war. 
 
 ■ ;c 
 
 They believed that war could cause the loss of 
 hundreds of thousands of valuable lives ; that 
 the country would be laid waste, towns and 
 cities destroyed ; that untold millions of prop- 
 erty would be destroyed ; that it would result 
 in the demoralization of our people ; in a na- 
 tional debt of thousands of millions ; in heavy 
 and ruinous taxes upon the labor of the people 
 that would consume and exhaust their sub- 
 stance ; in an overthrow of the Constitution- 
 in the destruction of the rights of the States' 
 in a dissolution of the Union ; in the loss of the 
 liberty of the people ; and in the prostration 
 and ruin of both the North and the South. 
 
 The organization that put Mr. Wickliffe for- 
 ward as the candinatewas the Democratic party 
 under its old name and under its old flag. 
 
 In this report the committee impugn the loy- 
 alty of Mr. Wickliffe; and upon what ground? 
 Mr. Wickliffe was one of the first and stanehest 
 Union men in the State of Kentucky. In the 
 other end of this Capitol he voted men and 
 money to carry on the war ; and he never failed 
 to do so until the last session, when he voted 
 against an appropriation bill because the House 
 would not insert a clause in it that the money 
 should not be used for the purpose of freeing 
 negroes and reducing States to provinces. It 
 is well known that Mr. Wickliffe was a strong 
 and warm friend of the war up to that time° 
 sntil he thought the radical policy of the Pres- 
 ident was such as would destroy every hope of 
 the restoration of the Union. He has never in- 
 dicated an opposition to the war. He did vote 
 against one appropriation bill, and assigned 
 the reason I have stated: which, in my judg- 
 ment, was a good and valid reason. Up to that 
 time, however, I believe he voted all the men 
 and all the money the Administration desired. 
 When I say " all," I mean he generally voted 
 in that way. 
 
 Well, sir, that sterling old patriot became 
 the candidate of a party that were prevented 
 from exercising the right of suffrage in Ken- 
 tucky; and in order to justify that outrage and 
 the striking of his name from the polls by the 
 ruth^ss. hand of the military, this committee 
 say he is disloyal. I have no doubt if an angel 
 of the Lord had appeared to the Committee on 
 Militai-y Affairs and told them there had been 
 military inteference in the elections in Mary- 
 land and Kentucky, that it was seen and known 
 by all who were present at the polls, the writer 
 of the report of the committee would have as- 
 serted that the angel was disloyal. Every man 
 —I do not care how elevated his position or 
 upright his standing in society, or how devoted 
 he may have been in the past or the present to 
 the Union — who asserts that there was inter- 
 ference in the elections, the committee say is 
 disloyal, or they impute some unworthy motive 
 to him. 
 
 In the letter addressed to Governor Wick- 
 liffe, requesting him to become a candidate, oc- 
 curs this sentence : 
 
 " The Government has no more right to disregard the 
 constitutions and laws of the States thaa the Stafes have 
 
11 
 
 to disregard the Constitution and laws of the United 
 States." 
 
 This proposition I did not suppose any con- 
 stitutional lawyer would doubt. That both 
 the States and the Federal Government are 
 sovereign in their sphere, has been uniformly 
 held by constitutional lawyers and the courts. 
 It certainly follows that the General Govern- 
 ment has no right to encroach upon the re- 
 served rights of the States, and the States have 
 no right to exercise the powers delegated to the 
 General Government. The erudite writer of 
 the report from the Committee on Military Af- 
 fairs says this is " the precise doctrine of the 
 nullifiers of 1832, and the very essence of se- 
 cession." It is neither nullification nor seces- 
 sion, but a sound and constitutional principle. 
 The committee ask, who are to judge between 
 them ? I answer, the courts. 
 
 The committee, in their report, most shame- 
 fully misrepresent the statements made in the 
 address concerning the elections in Kentucky. 
 The writer of the report claims to have care- 
 fully read the address. In speaking of the ad- 
 dress the committee say : 
 
 "It narrates with an air of sorrow the fact that in Au- 
 gust. 1862, Governor Magoffin, of Kentucky, resigned his 
 executive trust for the purpose of relieving the people, and 
 especially that portion of them known as southern rights 
 men, who had been thepeculiar objects of persecution." 
 
 It is not true that the address narrates the 
 fact of the resignation with an air of sorrow. 
 The address states the reasons which rendered 
 the resignation of Governor Magoffin and the 
 appointment of Governor Robinson desirable, 
 and adds : 
 
 '• These events gave rise to the most pleasing anticipa- 
 tions, which were strengthened by the first acts of the new 
 regime." 
 
 Now, sir, in the report, W. A. Dudley, J. H. 
 Harney, the editor of the Louisville Democrat, 
 Judge W. F. Bullock, Judge J. F. Bullitt, Nat. 
 Wolfe, R. R. White, and Dr. R. C. Palmer, 
 strong Union men, who signed the address to 
 the people and the Congress of the United 
 States, are denounced as disloyal merely be- 
 cause they do not concur with the Committee 
 on Military Affairs on this subject of the inter- 
 ference of the military in the elections in Ken- 
 tucky. They knew that the military did inter- 
 fere ; they had the proof of that interference : 
 many of them saw it; and as honest and brave 
 men they dared to say it. They dared to ar- 
 raign in proper language the usurpation of the 
 military for their atrocious conduct in over- 
 throwing the right of free speech and free suf- 
 frage; and to break the force of their declara- 
 tions, the committee have nothing in reply but 
 to impeach their loyalty. Why, sir, two or 
 three of the gentlemen who signed that address 
 were members of the Legislature for the last 
 two years, and one of them at least cast his 
 vote for the expatriation law of Kentucky to 
 prevent rebels from voting. The signers of 
 the address, upon which the committee make 
 such an unfair, unjust, and unwarrantable as- 
 sault, are the peers in every respect, socially, 
 morally, and intellectually, of the Military 
 
 Committee of the Senate ; no a#ault' coming 
 from that committee can injure them or tarnish 
 their reputation for patriotism, truth, honor, or 
 veracity in any community where the parties 
 are known. 
 
 The gentlemen whose names are signed to 
 the address are all denounced, or at least it is 
 intimated that they are disloyal and unworthy 
 of confidence and trust. Sir, among those 
 names are the names of the most unflinching 
 Union men in America. They are for the old 
 Union as it was with the Constitution as it is. 
 They are not like some of the members of the 
 committee who make this report, for the Union 
 only upon the condition that slavery shall not 
 exist in it. 
 
 Mr. President, let us look a little further. 
 The committee in this report say that the evils 
 complained of in the address of the gentlemen 
 whom I have named in Kentucky are merely 
 imaginary. I will read that part of the report : 
 
 "So far as the committee have been able to sscertain.the 
 evil which the bill is intended to remedy is almost wholly 
 imaginary -, and the fact that there is so little real ground 
 for complaint against the military, considering the scenes 
 of excitement and disorder in which they have been com- 
 pelled tointerpose, speaks loudly in praUe of their justice 
 and forbearance, and is high evidence of the impropriety of 
 passing the bill." 
 
 Sir, let me say that honorable committee 
 were never more mistaken in their lives than 
 when they promulged the sentence just quoted. 
 In the documents that were before the com- 
 mittee, the proof is abundant that the military 
 did interfere and that gross violations of law 
 took place in the Kentucky and Maryland elec- 
 tions, as I shall presently show. 
 
 I will call the attention of the Senate for a 
 few moments to the military orders in Ken- 
 tucky. The orders that prevented a free elec- 
 tion in Kentucky were issued by various post 
 commanders and commanders of districts in 
 different parts of the State. General Boyle, 
 commanding in western Kentucky, on the 25th 
 of July, 1863, issued an order concerning 
 seizing and impressing private property for 
 military purposes, in which he instructed his 
 officers that when it became necessary to take 
 private property for the use of the army, those 
 who were regarded as rebel sympathizers and 
 who were opposed to a vigorous prosecution of 
 the war, and furnishing men and money for 
 that purpose, should be first taken, and vouch- 
 ers should be given to them marked " loyal" or 
 "disloyal." General HartsufF issued a similar 
 order in eastern Kentucky. It was said through- 
 out the State by the party opposed to the Wick- 
 liffe ticket that their votes at the polls would 
 be regarded as evidence as to whether they 
 sympathized with the rebels or not. The fact 
 of such orders being issued, and the general 
 impression being spread in the community that 
 those who voted the Wickliffe ticket would be 
 regarded rebel sympathizers and their property 
 taken for military purposes, prevented hundreds 
 of men from voting. 
 
 Mr. HOWARD. Does the Senator refer to 
 military orders ? 
 
12 
 
 Mr. POWELL. Yes, sir; to the military 
 orders of General Boyle and General Hartsuff, 
 the one commanding in eastern and the other 
 in western Kentucky, which are made a part of 
 this address. 
 
 } Mr. HOWARD. Will the Senator produce 
 such an order ? 
 
 Mr. POWELL. Yes, sir; I intend to pro- 
 duoe it, and I intend to make it and all the 
 military orders to which I refer a part of my 
 Speech. I shall produce every order to which 
 I refer. Fortunately I hare all that I desire to 
 refer to in my possession. I will state further- 
 more that the committee had these orders to 
 which I shall allude, in their possession when 
 they made their report. 
 
 It was stated generally throughout the State, 
 as every man in Kentucky at all acquainted 
 with affairs there at that time knows, that these 
 orders ■ 
 
 Mr. HOWARD. I hope the Senator will 
 allow me one word, as it is necessary to a clear 
 understanding of the facts that he states. I 
 understand the Senator to say that some mili- 
 tary man in Kentucky issued an order to this 
 effect, that the way in which the elector voted 
 would be the proper mode of determining 
 whether he was a loyal or a disloyal man. It 
 was that order which I asked him to produce, 
 if he has such a one. 
 
 Mr. POWELL. The Senator is mistaken. 
 
 Perhaps I misunderstood 
 
 I did not say such an order 
 
 Mr. HOWARD 
 
 the Senator. 
 
 Mr. POWELL, 
 had been issued. 
 
 Mr. HOWARD. I understood the Senator to 
 say such an order was issued. 
 
 Mr. POWELL. My statement is that such 
 orders were issued as I have referred to. 
 
 Mr. HOWARD. The Senator will excuse 
 me. I deny that there was any such order 
 issued ; and I put the Senator from Kentucky 
 upon, that issue to produce the evidence of the 
 fact which he asserts. 
 
 Mr. POWELL. The Senator is denying some- 
 thing I did not assert. I have stated to the 
 Senator that I did not say the order went to the 
 extent that he understood. My statement was 
 that orders were issued in the eastern and 
 western departments of Kentucky saying that 
 when necessary to take private property for the 
 army, it should be taken from those who were 
 denominated " sympathizers with the rebellion," 
 and that those were classed as rebel sympathi- 
 zers who were opposed to the war, and to fur- 
 nishing men and money to carry it on. I said, 
 in addition to that, that it was said throughout 
 the State that the poll-books would indicate 
 who were rebel sympathizers ; that all who 
 voted for Wickliffe would be classed as rebel 
 sympathizers. That is what I said. 
 
 General Burnside, on the 3lst of July, issued 
 an order placing Kentucky under martial law 
 and among other things declaring : 
 
 " As it is not the intention of the commanding general 
 to interfere -with tho proper expression of public opinion, 
 all discretion in the conduct of tho election will be, as uaual, 
 in the hands of the legally appointed judges at the polls, 
 
 who will be held strictly responsible that no disloyal per- 
 son bo allowed to vote, and to this end the military power 
 is ordered to give them its utmost support. 
 
 "The civil authority, civil courts, and business will not 
 be suspended by this order. It is for the purpose only of 
 protecting, if necessary, the rights of loyal citizens and 
 tho freedom of election." 
 
 General Burnside issued that order, as he 
 states in a preamble to it, to prevent the rebel 
 troops interfering in the election. There was 
 nojiecessity for that order. At the time it was 
 issued there were not in Kentucky more than 
 about a thousand rebel soldiers, and they were 
 calvary in one portion of the State in rapid re- 
 treat ; and on the day of election there were no 
 confederate soldiers in the State. General 
 Burnside, at that time had under his command, 
 it is said, fifty thousand men in Kentucky : so 
 that when he issued that order there was no 
 necessity whatever for it. The phraseology 
 of the order itself, except that clause of it which 
 says that he will hold the judges responsible, 
 is in about as mild language as it could be un- 
 der the circumstances. 
 
 But the committee go on to say that General 
 Burnside had the authority and the power, and 
 it was necessary to make that order placing 
 Kentucky under martial law. That I deny. I 
 will not now discuss the question as to whether 
 General Burnside had the power to declare 
 martial law. It is well known to the Senate 
 that I hold there is no power in the Govern- 
 ment, in the President, or any of his com- 
 manders, to declare martial law ; but if it did 
 exist it should be confined to besieged cities 
 and localities occupied by the army. But cer- 
 tainly there is no power to declare martial law 
 in the adhering States, when they are not occu- 
 pied by the force of the enemy. 
 
 It will be observed that the orders of General 
 Boyle, General Hartsuff, General Shackleford, 
 Colonel Foster, Lieutenant Colonel Johnson, 
 General Asboth, and others, were issued before 
 General Burnside's order placing the State un- 
 der martial law ; so the excuse made by the 
 committee in their report that the State was 
 under martial law cannot avail those officers. 
 
 General Burnside plainly and palpably vio- 
 lated the Constitution of his country when he 
 issued that order interfering with elections. 
 He says the purpose was to prevent the rebels 
 interfering in elections in that State. Let me 
 ask, did the Governor of Kentucky invite Gen- 
 eral Burnside to bring his forces there to pro- 
 tect the election ? No, sir. The Legislature 
 did not do it ; the Governor, in the language of 
 the day a loyal man, never invited him to do it. 
 Governor Robinson had no apprehension about 
 the freedom of election therefrom rebel sources. 
 I will read the preamble to this order of Gene- 
 ral Burnside : 
 
 "Whereas tho State of Kentucky is invaded by a rebel 
 force with the avowed intention of overaweing the judges 
 of elections, of intimidating tho loyal voters, keeping them 
 from tho polls, and forcing tho election of disloyal candi- 
 dates at tho election on the 3d of August ; and whereas the 
 military power of the Government is the only force that 
 can defeat this attempt, the Stato of Kentucky is hereby 
 declared under martial law, and all military officers are 
 | commanded to aid the constituted authorities of tho State 
 
13 
 
 in support of the laws and of the purity of suffrage as de- 
 fined in the late proclamation of his Excellency Governor 
 fiobinson." 
 
 I intend to show, and that too from the proof 
 that was before the Committee on Military Affairs, 
 that the proclamation of General Burnside was 
 not carried out as he made it ; and his sub- 
 ordinates violated his proclamation and the 
 proclamation of Governor Robinson which he 
 made a part of it ; and General Burnside, not- 
 withstanding the fact was published throughout 
 the whole State that his subordinates had vio- 
 lated his proclamation and the proclamation of 
 the Governor, never censured or punished one 
 of them for it, so far as I am advised. 
 
 Governor Robinson issued a proclamation on 
 the 10th of July concerning the elections and 
 he attached to it a statute law of the State of 
 Kentucky entitled " An act to amend chapter 
 fifteen of the Revised Statutes, entitled ' Citi- 
 eens, expatriation, and aliens.' " That act of 
 the Legislature declared all persons who had 
 been or were engaged in the rebel armies or who 
 had held office under the provisional governmont 
 of Kentucky, or had given the rebels aid, expa- 
 triated, and that they were not entitled to any 
 privileges of a citizen of the State after the act 
 took effect. It took effect on the 11th of April, 
 1862. It was passed on the llth of March, 1862, 
 to take effect thirty days after its passage. That 
 is the law of Kentucky. There could be no ex- 
 cuse then that there was no law of Kentucky to 
 prevent rebels from voting. 
 
 But, sir, was the proclamation of the Gover- 
 nor of the State, inviting the attention of the 
 judges of the election to that law, and directing 
 them to enforce all the laws of the State, en- 
 forced by the military authority ? I answer 
 that it was not. The Committee on Military 
 Affairs say that it was. There is a plain issue 
 of facts ; and I invite the Senate to the con- 
 sideration of the proof. I will read the 
 statement in the very language of the Commit- 
 tee on Military Affairs, and then no injustice 
 can be done them. The committee, on the 12th 
 page of their report, say : 
 
 " It is enough to say that, notwithstanding the manifest 
 party exaggerations and distortion of fact of this pamphlet 
 it does not allege that any loyal man who offered to vote for 
 a loyal candidate was excluded or in any way molested by 
 the military authorities. The orders of the subordinate 
 commander were, so far as they are embodied in the pamph- 
 let, and so far as we have been able to ascertain, in strict 
 accordance with General Burnside's order and the statute 
 of the State, which we have cited ; and the pamphlet ad- 
 mits that these orders ' were carried out with rare fidelity 
 by those to whom their execution was intrusted.' " 
 
 The address signed by the gentlemen from 
 Kentucky alluded to does not admit that the 
 order of General Burnside was carried out with 
 strict fidelity. .The committee are mistaken in 
 that. The quotation from the address refers, 
 not to the order of General Burnside, but to 
 the orders issued by his subordinates, as a ref- 
 erence to the address itself will clearly show. 
 In the address they say : 
 
 " General Burnside enforced the proclamation for the pur- 
 pose of preserving the purity of elections, and (while 
 himself threatening the judges of election should they per- 
 mit a disloyal vote to be cast) directs that the soldiers shall 
 
 Interfere no further than may be necessary to enable the 
 judges to discharge their duties under the laws of Kentucky. 
 His subordinates threatened the judges and voters with con- 
 fiscation, arrest, and imprisonment, and actually publish 
 their orders and carry out their threats without punishment 
 from the general or remonstrance from the Governor." 
 
 That is the charge in the address. Further 
 on they say : 
 
 " The military orders before referred to were carried out 
 with rare fidelity by those to whom their execution was 
 intrusted." 
 
 What military orders ? The orders of those 
 subordinates. It clearly refers to them, and it 
 says that they were carried out with rare fidel- 
 ity. Many of these orders were in conflict with 
 the order of Geueral Burnside. .The order 
 of General Burnside cites the proclamation 
 of the Governor, and says- that the election 
 must be carried on in obedience to the law 
 as promulgated by the Governor. The Gov- 
 ernor desired the election carried on under and 
 by virtue of the laws of Kentucky, and in no 
 other'way whatever. What are the qualifica- 
 tions attached to voters by the law of Kentucky ? 
 Under the constitution of Kentucky, all white 
 male persons twenty-one years old, who have 
 had the necessary residence in their districts, 
 and who have not been convicted of certain 
 crimes, are qualified to vote. The law of ex- 
 patriation declares that persons who do, or 
 have done, certain things enumerated in it, shall 
 be expatriated, be no longer citizens, and shall 
 not enjoy any of the rights or privileges of citi- 
 zens ; and whenever any such pei'son attempts to 
 exercise any of the privileges of a citizen he 
 may be required to negative on oath the expa- 
 triation provided in the act, and upon his failure 
 or refusal to do so shall not be permitted to ex- 
 ercise any such right. What, then, is a voter to 
 do under the law of Kentucky when he presents 
 himself and demands to vote, if he should be 
 challenged? He must swear that he has not 
 been guilty of the offenses prescribed in the 
 statute of March 11, 1862 ; that is, that he had 
 not been engaged in the service of the provis- 
 ional government of Kentucky ; that he had 
 not been in the rebel army ; that he had not 
 given them aid or assistance since the llth day 
 of April, 1862, the day on which the expatria- 
 tion law went into effect. While on the subject 
 of the date of the passage of the expatriation 
 act, I will remark that the committee are in er- 
 ror when they say that the proclamation of 
 Governor Robinson " was plainly necessary in 
 order to call the immediate and earnest atten- 
 tion of the judges of election as well as the 
 people to its important provisions which had 
 been in force but three months." The date of 
 the passage of the act is correctly given in the 
 address as March 11, 1862, and it went into 
 effect thirty days after its passage. The act 
 had, therefore, been in force over fifteen months 
 before Governor Robinson issued his proclama- 
 tion on the 10th of July, 1863, and not but three 
 months as stated by the committee. It is cor- 
 rectly stated in the report of the committee 
 that Governor Magoffin resigned in August, 
 1862, and that this law was passed over his veto. 
 
14 
 
 I cite this as a specimen of the reckless misrep- 
 resentation of facts of the writer of this report, 
 in his effort to strike down the character of 
 honorable gentlemen, in order to sustain those 
 in power for a most unlawful and unjustifiable 
 assault upon free suffrage. 
 
 The proposition, then, is very clear as to who 
 were legal voters under the law of Kentucky. 
 General Burnside said that the law must be 
 carried out, as proclaimed by the Governor. 
 What did his subordinates do ? What were the 
 orders issued by his subordinates ? Here is an 
 extract from one of them, issued by Lieutenant 
 Colonel Thomas Johnson, at Smithland, Ken- 
 tucky, July 16, 1863: 
 
 " Judges and clerks so appointed are hereby directed not 
 to place the name of any person on the poll-books to be 
 voted for at said election who is not a Union man, or who 
 may be opposed to furnishing mon and money for a vigor- 
 ous prosecution of the war." 
 
 There is appended to that order an oath which 
 varies from the oath prescribed by the law of 
 Kentucky. The constitution and laws of Ken- 
 tucky do not require that a man shall be in fa- 
 vor of furnishing men and money for a vigorous 
 prosecution of the war to qualify him to hold 
 office. In that particular the order is in conflict 
 with the law of Kentucky and of the proclama- 
 tion of General Burnside and Governor Robin- 
 eon. 
 
 Here is also the order issued by General As- 
 both and others, west of the Tennessee river, in 
 which they carry it still further. General As- 
 both in his order declares that both candidates 
 and voters shall swear that they are willing to 
 furnish men and money for a vigorous prosecu- 
 tion of the war before they are allowed to vote 
 or stand for office. 
 
 Mr. HOWARD. Will the Senator inform me 
 what pamphlet he is reading from ? Is it the 
 report of the committee? 
 
 Mr. POWELL. I am reading from the address 
 on the Kentucky elections, which the committee 
 had before them ; for I do not intend in this 
 connection to use any other evidence than that 
 which was before the committee. I have other 
 testimony, but I am now dealing with the re- 
 port of the committee upon the evidence they 
 had before them. 
 
 I have here the order of General Shackleford, 
 issued at Russellville, Kentucky, and the order 
 of Colonel Foster, issued at Henderson. I have 
 also the orders issued by Generals Asboth and 
 Hurlbut, west of the Tennessee river. On the 
 back of the order of General Asboth is a state- 
 ment signed by James S. Martin, colonel com- 
 manding' post of Paducah, that he had the or- 
 der executed in the counties of McCracken, 
 Graves, Callaway, and Marshall. 
 
 From the evidence I have presented, is it not 
 clear that the committee were mistaken when 
 they said it was asserted in this address that 
 the order of General Burnside had been faith- 
 fully carried out ? They say the very converse, 
 and they give the evidence and establish it be- 
 yond the possibility of a doubt by the official 
 orders of the parties who made them and exe- 
 cuted them. 
 
 It is apparent from the facts set forth in this 
 address, notwithstanding the committee say 
 that no loyal man was prevented from voting 
 for a loyal candidate, that such was not the 
 case. I suppose^they will try to avoid this pal- 
 pable misrepresentation by saying in rep y that 
 Mr. Wickliffe and the. other candidates on his 
 ticket were not loyal. No such false and slan- 
 derous charge against Mr. Wickliffe and other 
 Democratic candidates will relieve the commit- 
 tee from this reckless misrepresentation. The 
 proof is abundant in this address that in many 
 of the counties the name of the whole Demo- 
 cratic ticket was stricken from the poll-book by 
 the military authorities. In many voting places 
 and in entire counties of Kentucky no man was 
 allowed to vote for that ticket. In the county 
 in which I live the names on the Democratic 
 ticket were stricken from or not allowed to go 
 on the poll books in three or four of the voting 
 precincts. That fact is stated in the address. 
 It is asserted that in one precinct of that county 
 sixteen votes were cast, all for the Wickliffe 
 ticket. The military then came there, took the 
 poll-books from the judges and clerk, returned 
 them to headquarters, and stopped the election ; 
 and yet the committee says no loyal man was 
 prevented from voting for a loyal candidate ! 
 They establish to their own satisfaction, I sup- 
 pose, that Governor Wickliffe and the men on 
 the Democratic ticket were not loyal. They sit 
 in judgment upon the loyalty of those men, and, 
 for the unworthy purpose of sustaining, justify- 
 ing, and excusing the President and the mili- 
 tary authorities in the most flagrant, unconsti- 
 tutional, unjustifiable, and atrocious assault 
 upon the freedom of elections, they indulge in 
 false and slanderous imputations and charges 
 against the candidates of the Democratic party. 
 
 Sir, there is abundant evidence of the facts 
 that I have indicated. Since the beginning of 
 time there never was a more atrocious assault 
 on free elections than' took place in many of the 
 counties in Kentucky. In many places the 
 candidates were arrested. In the first congres- 
 sional district Judge Trimble, the candidate for 
 Congress, as loyal a man and as true to the 
 Constitution and Union of his fathers as lives 
 in the Union, was arrested by military author- 
 ity. He was brought to the city of Henderson, 
 a town just without his district, and there he 
 was kept in military confinement near a month, 
 until after the election was over. They told him 
 that if he would decline being a candidate for 
 Congress they would release him. He would 
 not so degrade his manhood as to decline the 
 canvass at the bidding of military tyrants and 
 usurpers, and he was kept in prison. They 
 found that he would be elected by a large ma- 
 jority notwithstanding his imprisonment, and 
 then they sent the'military over his district and 
 had his name stricken from the polls in almost 
 every voting precinct in the district. The gen- 
 tleman who beat him got some four thousand 
 votes in a district that polls about twenty thou- 
 sand. 
 
 That is the way that a Union man was treated 
 
15 
 
 Yes, air, Judge Trimble, who has borne the name 
 of a Union man all the time — who in the earliest 
 conflicts in Kentucky was a Union man — was 
 arrested, imprisoned for near a month, and 
 turned out on the day after the election. With 
 these facts before them, a committee of this 
 Senate say that no loyal man was prevented 
 voting for a loyal candidate ! 
 
 Mr. Anderson, who now occupies the seat in 
 Congress from the first district in Kentucky, 
 frankly acknowledges that he was elected by the 
 bayonets. 
 
 There was also arrested in that first congres- 
 sional district of Kentucky Mr. Martin, a mem- 
 ber of our last Legislature, and a Union man. 
 He was a candidate for re-election in the coun- 
 ties of Lyon and Livingston. He was arrested 
 and brought to the same city of Henderson, 
 without the congressional district in which he 
 lived, and he too was confined by the military 
 until after the election ; and then he and Judge 
 Trimble were both released without any inves- 
 tigation whatever. The military told them 
 that they would release them at any time if 
 they would decline being candidates. Mr. 
 Martin was beaten because the military would 
 not allow him to be voted for. I suppose the 
 committee regard Mr. Martin as disloyal. Mr. 
 Martin, by occupation, was a steamboat pilot. 
 He piloted the first gunboat bearing the flag of 
 the United States that went up the Cumberland 
 river during this rebellion. That is the way he 
 exhibited his Unionism. He was elected aa a 
 Union'man to our Legislature. He never was 
 anything else ; but like Judge Trimble, he did 
 not agree in the abolition notions of President 
 Lincoln ; and for that offense they were stricken 
 down and arrested by military authority, and 
 their names stricken by the military from the 
 poll-books. And yet the committee say that 
 no loyal man was prevented from voting for a 
 loyal candidate ! 
 
 Mr. Blount Hodge, a true Union man, was a 
 candidate for the State Senate. He resides in 
 Livingston county. The military issued orders 
 preventing his name going on the poll-books. 
 These facts were before the committee when 
 their report was made. 
 
 Mr. President, I will not indulge in any fur- 
 ther vindication of the honorable gentlemen of 
 Kentucky who are assailed by the committee. 
 At home they need no defense ; but I will say 
 here in a single sentence that every charge, 
 every aspertion, every insinuation against the 
 loyalty, and patriotism, and the Unionism of 
 those citizens is untrue, and that the committee 
 are utterly mistaken when they make such 
 charges. Such was the' terrorism that pre- 
 vailed throughout the State in consequence of 
 military orders that many persons were deterred 
 from voting, fearing if they voted the Demo- 
 cratic ticket their property would be taken by 
 the military authorities for the use of th» army. 
 The military not only struck the names of can- 
 didntos from the poll-books, but in many local- 
 ities swore the voters themselves. Yes, sir, 
 officers of the army and those in command of 
 
 the soldiers at the polls, administered oaths to 
 the voters. That evidently was in violation of 
 General Burnside's orders. If the committee 
 had examined the address they would see fur- 
 ther that it is charged that persons who voted 
 that ticket were pursued, arrested, and impris- 
 oned. Such was the terrorism and interfer- 
 ence by t".e military that Mr. Wickliffe, the 
 Democrr '. c candidate for Governor, in some six 
 or seven of the strongest Democratic counties 
 in the State, did not get a single vote, and in 
 many other strong Democratic counties he re- 
 ceived very few votes. 
 
 So much, sir, for the evidence contained in 
 the address which was before the Committee on 
 Military Affairs when they' made this report. 
 I have shown beyond the possibility of doubt 
 from the evidence before the committee that 
 they are utterly, wholly, and entirely mis- 
 taken in many of the matters stated as facts in 
 their report. From the facts as we have them 
 here in this address, if the committee adhere to 
 the principle laid down in the beginning of 
 their report which I have read they will vote 
 for this bill. 
 
 But, Mr. President, fortunately for me and 
 fortunately for the country, I have here the 
 proof taken in a contested election in the second 
 congressional district of Kentucky now pending 
 before a committee of the House of Represen- 
 tatives, in which Colonel John H. McHenry 
 contests the seat of Hon. George H. Yeaman 
 on the very ground that the election was not 
 fair, but was interfered with by the military au- 
 thority. The evidence in that case I know was not 
 before the Committee on Military Affairs ; but I 
 will say that the evidence as given by witnesses 
 of the highest respectability shows that inter- 
 ferences as great and greater than is set forth 
 in the address which was before the Committee 
 took place. It is proven that men, whom the 
 witnesses testify were Union men and had 
 always been Union men, were not permitted to 
 vote for Colonel McHenry, who was a candidate 
 for Congress. 
 
 Does anybody doubt the loyalty of Colonel 
 McHenry ? Sir, he has tested his loyalty on 
 well-stricken fields. At Fort Donelson and at 
 Shiloh he led his regiment into the thickest of 
 the fight and bore aloft the banner of the Union. 
 He received 'the commendations of all his supe- 
 rior officers. There was no colonel on that field 
 of Shiloh that displayed more gallantry, bravery, 
 or skill in the management of his regiment 
 than Colonel McHenry. And yet, sir, Union 
 men were prevented by the military from cast- 
 ing their votes for him ; and I have the evidence 
 before me taken in the contested election to 
 which I have alluded. 
 
 I repeat, sir, the proof is here, and if any 
 Senator now or hereafter shall doubt the truth 
 of what I have said about these elections, I will 
 read the testimony to the Senate. 
 
 INTERFERENCE IN MARYLAND ELECTION. 
 
 Mr. President, let us look into this report so 
 far as it concerns Maryland. Two thirds of 
 
16 
 
 the report of the committee is devoted to the 
 election in Maryland. I wish briefly to review 
 the report bo far as the Maryland election is 
 concerned. 
 
 The committee have labored in their report 
 to make a vindication of the President of the 
 United States. General Schenck, and others for 
 their interference in the election in Maryland, 
 and in order to do that they assault the Gov- 
 ernor of that State. The Governor of Mary- 
 land in his late message to the Legislature re- 
 cites the interference with the election in that 
 State, and in an appendix to his message he 
 produces a great deal of proof, all of which 
 was before the committee. I will read a few 
 extracts from the message of Governor Brad- 
 ford. I am happy to say that several members 
 of the committee told me they never saw the 
 report, and did not know what was in it. I 
 wish I could say that much for all of them. ■ 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Maybe you can. 
 
 Mr. POWELL. I do not know whether I can 
 or not. I should like to say that much for all 
 of them. It is a report of which the commit- 
 tee and all honorable men should be heartily 
 ashamed. The Governor says : 
 
 " A few days before that election a military order was 
 issued from the army headquarters at Baltimore which in 
 effect placed the polls under the surveillence and at the 
 command of the military authority. 
 
 * I was the less prepared for any such order, from the 
 fact that, though in frequent personal communication with 
 the military authorities of the department, I had received 
 no intimation whatever of such a proceeding or of any 
 supposed necessity for it. In that part of the State against 
 which the movement was to bo more particularly directed 
 (the Eastern Shore) there would seem to have been less 
 necessity, as there certainly was less semblance of author- 
 ity, than olsewhere ; for while martial law had been pro- 
 claimed upon the Western Shore of the State in Juno last, 
 and had not been repealed up to the day of election, upon 
 the Eastorn Shore it had never been proclaimed at all." 
 
 In the case of Kentucky, the committee jus- 
 tify the interference in the elections on the 
 ground that General Burnside had declared 
 martial law in that State. Martial law seems 
 to have been declared by General Burnside for 
 the purpose of giving his subordinates and their 
 justifiers an excuse for their unlawful and out- 
 rageous conduct. As I have before shown, the 
 orders of his subordinates were issued before 
 he placed the State under martial law. On the 
 Eastorn shore of Maryland, Governor Bradford 
 tells you, there was no martial law declared. 
 Therefore General Schenck, and those acting 
 under his authority, for their doings on the 
 Eastern Shore of Maryland cannot be shielded 
 and protected by the panoply of martial law. 
 The Governor goes on to say, after speaking of 
 the President modifying the order: 
 
 " Prominent among the provost marshals to whom the 
 execution of this order was in part committed were several 
 who were themselves candidates for important offlcos. 
 
 " These marshals, appointed for the purpose of the mili- 
 tia enrollment and dralt, wore placod by the law creating 
 them under the control of the Provost Marshal General, 
 but, to insure the right to employ them about this election 
 order, special authority was obtained from Washington to 
 place them for the time being under the orders of the mili- 
 tary authorities." 
 
 Here we find that these provost* marshals, 
 many of whom were candidates for office, were 
 
 among the actors in this scene of interfering 
 with the elections in Maryland. 
 
 " I, therefore, on the Monday ovening preceding the elec- 
 tion, issued a proclamation giving them this assurance, a 
 copy of which is herewith submitted." 
 
 Saying that they must carry out the election 
 in accordance with the law. 
 
 " Before the following morning military orders were sent 
 to the Eastern Shore directing its circulation to be sup- 
 pressed, the public papers were forbidden to publish it, 
 and an embargo laid on'all the steamers in port trading 
 with that part of the State, lest they might carry it." 
 
 Here we find General Schenck suppressing 
 as far as he could the circulation of the procla- 
 mation of the Governor to the people of the 
 State. We find him laying an embargo on boats 
 and the regular business of the State, for fear 
 they might carry this proclamation to the peo- 
 ple for whom it was intended. What was the 
 reason for this interference? Governor Brad- 
 ford in hia message and in his proclamation 
 says there was no necessity whatever for it. I 
 do not suppose the loyalty of Governor Bradford 
 was ever doubted until in an evil hour he fell 
 into the hands of the Committee of the Senate 
 on Military Affairs ; and then, in order to shield 
 the guilty culprits who had overthrown the 
 constitution and laws of Maryland in one of 
 the most vital parts, they attempt to strike down 
 and blast the reputation of a loyal Governor of 
 an adhering State. To what base uses will 
 not the adherents of power lend themselves ! 
 There stands the message saying that these 
 interferences have taken place, and in order to 
 shield the guilty culprits the reputation of Gov- 
 ernor Bradford has to be destroyed. He is 
 charged with usurpation ; his loyalty is ques- 
 tioned, his patriotism doubted; and he is gently 
 admonished that he ought to be an imate of a 
 prison. The committee say, " the Governor 
 bitterly complains of the suppression of his 
 proclamation, instead of gratefully' acknowl- 
 edging the moderation which arrested its cir- 
 culation instead of its author." Why these 
 charges of usurpation? Why these threats of 
 imprisonment? Is it to seal the lips of those 
 who dare speak of the usurpations and crimes 
 of the party in power? A faithful Governor 
 of an adhering State makes an effort to see that 
 the laws of his State are faithfully executed, 
 and he is denounced as a usurper, and gently 
 reminded of imprisonment. 
 Did Governor Bradford invite General Schenck, 
 or the President of the United States, or any 
 other military authority, to bring soldiers there 
 for the pitrpose of preventing domestic violence 
 in Maryland ? No, sir ; he says he did not. 
 The clause of the Constitution that I have here- 
 tofore read and commented on declares that the 
 United States authorities shall only interfere 
 when the Legislature or the Executive of the 
 State demand it, to prevent invasion or domes- 
 tic violence. Were there any rebel troops in 
 Maryland? The imbecile Burnside, the jailer 
 of Vallandigham, had the excuse of about one 
 thousand rebel soldiers, who were rapidly run- 
 ning out of Kentucky, while he had about fifty 
 thousand men under his control to fight them. 
 
17 
 
 Ho had that impotent and lame excuse for pla- 
 cing Kentucky under martial law. But, sir, I 
 have not yet heard that there were any rebel 
 soldiers in Maryland ; and yet, in violation of 
 the Constitution of the United States, we find 
 that soldiers were sent to the polls to interfere 
 ia the elections in that State ; and they did in- 
 terfere, notwithstanding the Committee on Mili- 
 tary Affairs cannot find it out, although they 
 had all the testimony before them that is ap- 
 pended to the message of Governor Bradford. 
 The Governor goes on to say: 
 
 " How far it accomplished the purpose claimed for it, or 
 hfc\» for my anticipations of the consequences of the order 
 and the abuses to which it would lend wero realized, will 
 appear by a brief reference to some of the transactions con- 
 nected with its excoutiou. These abuses commenced oven 
 before the opening of the polls. On the day preceding the 
 election, the officer in command of the regiment Which had 
 been distributed among the counties of the Eastern Shore, 
 and who had himself landed in Kent county, commenced 
 his operations by arresting and sending across the bay some 
 ton or more of the most estimable and distinguished of its 
 citizens, including several of the most steadfast and un- 
 compromising loyalists of the shore. The jail of the county 
 was entered, tho jailer seized, imprisoned, and afterwards 
 aent to Baltimore, and prisoners confined therein under 
 indictment were set at liberty. The commanding officer 
 referred to gave the first clue to the character of the dis- 
 loyalty against which he considered himself as particularly 
 commissioned, by printing and publishing a proclamation 
 in which, referring to the election to take place nest flay, 
 ho invited all tho truly loyal to avail themselves of that 
 •pportunily and establish their loyalty ' by giving a full 
 and ardent support to the whole Government t cket upon 
 tho platform adopted by the Union League convention,' de- 
 claring that ' none other is recognized by the Federal au- 
 thorities as loyal or worthy of the support of any one who 
 desires the peace and restoration of the Union.' " 
 
 There you see this lieutenant colonel issues 
 his proclamation in which he invites the people 
 to come up and establish their loyalty by giv- 
 ing a full and ardent support to the whole 
 Government ticket, upon the platform adopted 
 by the Union League convention, declaring that 
 none other is recognized by the Federal author- 
 ities a3 loyal or worthy the support of any one ; 
 and yet the Committee on Military Affairs as- 
 sert that there wa3 no interference ! The Gov- 
 ernor further says : 
 
 "Major General Dix, when in command of this Depart; 
 nventjUt the time of tho. election inlS61,and when, too, 
 rebellion was backed by its organized supporters in our 
 very midst, took tho true and statesmanlike view of liie 
 policy proper for such an occasion when, in directing his 
 provost marshal, ho said that while there was no difficulty 
 «i controlling Maryland by force, that this was not what 
 was wanted, but that he wished to control it by the power 
 •f opinion, and that to satisfy tho country that the people 
 wore on our side, wo must leave them to an unbiased ex- 
 pression of their wishes. They wero left to that unbiased 
 expression, aud such was its character that I had supposed 
 no one would still require evidence of their loyalty. 
 
 " General Dix was even appealed to by some of tho judges 
 «f election to authorize an oath to voters of doubtful loyal- 
 ly, and although itappwars from the tenor of his reply that 
 the oath suggested was nothing more than an oath to sup- 
 port the Constitution of the United States, he refused to or- 
 der it, saying to them, among other things, ' The constitu- 
 tion and laws of Maryland provido for the exorcise of tho 
 elective franchise by regulations with which I have no 
 right to interfere.' " 
 
 General Dix spoke wisely. President Lincoln, 
 however, theCommander-iu-Chief of the Army, 
 did not so regard it. lie did interfere with this 
 very matter, and without being requested by 
 Governor Bradford to do so. So far ftom re- 
 
 questing the President, as the Constitution 
 authorized him to do when he desired the force 
 of the United States to protect the State against 
 invasion or domestic violence, he complained 
 of the military being sent there. The Presi- 
 dent did not have the sanction of Governor 
 Bradford, but did it against his protest, for lis 
 asked the President to repeal the order, and he 
 did modify the order of General Schenck in one 
 or two particulars, but really made it very little 
 better than it was, and his modifications were 
 disregarded in many localities in the State. 
 
 Sir, we find the President himself meddling 
 in this matter of elections. He, as well as hi» 
 chosen instrument, General Schenck, and all 
 the other instrumentalities in the military ser- 
 vice throughout that State, was in the exercise 
 of the harshest usurpations against the loyal 
 people of that State. Governor Bradford, in 
 his message and proclamation, tells you that 
 there were no candidates on the Eastern Shore 
 but Union men, so far as he was advised; that 
 throughout all Maryland there were not rebel* 
 cjr rebel sympathizers enough to affect the elec- 
 tions, except, perhaps, in one district, and that 
 was not the district of which complaint was 
 made. Why, sir, John W. Crisfield, known to 
 many Senators here, an able and honored mem- 
 ber of the last House of Representatives, was 
 a candidate for re-election, known always as i> 
 Union man. He it was whom the soldiers of 
 the Army of the United States, with the direct 
 knowledge of the President of the United States, 
 prevented receiving a re-election. I do not 
 think there is a doubt about the re-election of 
 Mr. Crisfield in the district on the Eastern 
 Shore, had the military not interfered. 
 
 In this Maryland case you eannot throw off 
 the responsibility upon Schenck, nor upon Col- 
 onel Tevis, or other subordinates. You have 
 the President most directly implicated. Here 
 he is upon the record, violating the Constitution 
 of his country by interfering with elections in 
 States in order to return menials and miserable 
 creatures to Congress who would do his bid- 
 ding ; and I arraign him for this offense before 
 the Senate of tho United States and the Ameri- 
 can people. I brush away the trash and come 
 right to the Commander-in-Chief himself, and 
 chritge him, upon the most indubitable testi- 
 mony, with trampling under foot the most ines- 
 timable right of free suffrage and free election, 
 and, in order to effect his object, committing a 
 palpable violation of the Constitution of the 
 United States, which he was sworn to support. 
 
 There, sir, these documents place the Presi- 
 dent, and there is no power that can ever rescue 
 him from that position. I regret that it is so. 
 I regret that I have to state in my place as a 
 Senator that the Executive, whom a greatful 
 people have elevated to power and charged to 
 take care that the laws are faithfully executed, 
 has exhibited such infidelity to his oath and 
 mado such vital stabs on the Constitution of his 
 country and on the free suffrage of the people ; 
 but truth compels me to make the charge. Here 
 are the proofs ample to sustain it. Here are 
 
18 
 
 the President's own letters and orders. Out of 
 liis own mouth we condemn him. He cannot 
 plead as an excuse that the Governor of Mary- 
 land desired it, for the Governor protested 
 against it and appealed to him to relieve the 
 State from that disgrace. He refused to do it. 
 He cannot get off on the ground that Governor 
 Iiradford is disloyal. Oh, no ; not at all. The 
 Governor's truth, patriotism, and loyalty are 
 above suspicion in the minds of all patriotic 
 and honest men, notwithstanding the assault of 
 the writer of^the report of the Committee on 
 Military Affairs. 
 
 But the learned Committee on Military Affairs 
 try to weaken the force of the statements of Gov- 
 ernor Bradford and of the honorable Senator 
 from Maryland, by saying that they were elected 
 under similar circumstances. Suppose they 
 were, sir ; it only shows the greater necessity 
 for the passage of tho bill that I propose. If 
 forty Governors were elected under similar cir- 
 cumstances, that fact would afford forty addi- 
 tional reasons why this bill should pass. If 
 military force was used to elect Governor Brad- 
 ford arid to place the honorable Senator from 
 Maryland in his seat here, that is no reason 
 why others should be elected by such unlawful 
 and outrageous influences. Two wrongs never 
 made a right. 
 
 The report goes on to say : 
 
 " It is not true that ' tho military, aided by tho provost 
 rearshals, were to arrest voters whom they might consider 
 uisioyal approaching or haDgiug about the polls.' " 
 
 That was certainly in General Schenck's ori- 
 ginal order. The President, however, modified 
 that part of it. The modification, as I have be- 
 fore stated, was disregarded. 
 
 " It is not true that ' a 1 prescribed form of oath was fur- 
 I'jshed, without taking which no ono, if challenge-:!, could 
 vote.'" 
 
 Now I think anybody who will read the order 
 «f General Schenck, and read that oath, must 
 think the committee mistaken in making the 
 assertion. General Schenck, after his first or- 
 der and the proclamation of Governor Bradford 
 were issued, plainly indicated in an address to 
 the loyal people of Maryland, dated November 
 •1 18G3, that those who were challenged could 
 not vote except by taking the oath. The indi- 
 cation is clear that they could not do it other- 
 wise; and the military were sent, they say, to 
 enforce that order, to compel the oath and to 
 protect the judges ! Is that what they did ? I 
 will show you presently that it is not. Speak- 
 ing of the Governor's proclamation, the report 
 tatys : 
 
 '' That proclamation was much more liable to tho charge 
 of illegality than the order of which it complained. " 
 
 The committee charge that the proclamation 
 «f Governor Bradford was illegal, more so than 
 General Schenck's order. There can be no 
 doubt about the illegality of General Schenck's 
 order. The committee are even divested, so far 
 ft-* the Eastorn Shore is concerned, of the ex- 
 cuse that there was mcrrtial law there. They 
 are divested of another excuse that they might 
 
 have, that Governor Bradford asked the inter- 
 position of the Federal Army to protect the 
 State against invasion or domestic violence, for 
 he not only did not ask it, as the Constitution 
 required, (the Legislature not being in session,) 
 before it could be lawfully furnished, but ho 
 protested against it. The Governor had the 
 right to issue his proclamation. The learned 
 and erudite committee say : 
 
 " The law of Maryland charges tho Governor with n» 
 authority over elections, and ve3ts him with no right to 
 instruct the judges of election in the law of their duty." 
 
 It was left to the Military Committee of this 
 honorable Senate, a learned committee, to be 
 sure, to make the discovery that the Governor 
 of Maryland had no constitutional authority 
 to issue a proclamation concerning elections 1 
 They say the laws do not charge him with it* 
 Why, sir, I see in the Constitution of Maryland, 
 which I havo before me, that it is written in tho 
 tenth section of the second article that the Gov- 
 ernor "shall take care that the laws be faith- 
 fully executed." And yet, because he advised 
 the judges to execute the law — for that is all the 
 Governor did — the honorable Committee on 
 Military Affairs call him a usurper. They say 
 he hod no lawful right to do it. 
 
 Consistency is said to be something of a vir- 
 tue, and the Senate will be astonished when I 
 tell them that this committee commend Gover- 
 nor Robinson for issuing his proclamation in 
 Kentucky, and setting forth the law of expatri- 
 ation from Kentucky, and urging upon tho 
 judges of election the strict observance of all 
 the laws of the State regulating elections, and 
 they censure soundly the gentlemen in Kentucky 
 who issued the address from which I have read, 
 because they took some exception to Governor 
 Robinson's proclamation. The committee think 
 the proclamation of Governor Robinson ut that 
 time was highly commendable and proper, and 
 then they say that Governor Bradford had no 
 lawful authority to issue his proclamation ! To 
 what miserable quibbles and inconsistencies 
 those who defend tyrants and usurpers are 
 driven ! 
 
 Tho gentlemen who signed the address that 
 was before the committee cenaured the Gover- 
 nor of Kentucky because he had not cited and 
 published all the laws of Kentucky concerning 
 elections but only published one. But the Gov- 
 ernor of Maryland in his proclamation does tell 
 the judges to execute all the laws, and the com- 
 mittee thiuk that is a usurpation. When the 
 committee think they can make an assault on 
 the gentlemen who wrote this address, they 
 eulogize Governor Robinson and censure the 
 gentlemen who signed the Kentucky address ; 
 but when they come to Maryland, in order to 
 destroy a witness against Abraham Lincoln, 
 Schenck and others, they charge Governor Brad- 
 ford with doing things without any warrant of 
 law. I suppose there is not a Senator hero 
 who does not know that every Governor ia 
 charged to see that the laws of the Common- 
 wealth over which he presides arc faithfully 
 executed. The election laws are a part of the 
 
19 
 
 laws of the State. Cut that is not all. The 
 committee say of Governor Bradford : 
 
 " Tills proclamation was, therefore, a palpable usurpa- 
 tion. " 
 
 Sir, the Military Committee of the Senate 
 pronounces a proclamation of the Governor 
 calling the attention of the judges of eleciion 
 to the laws of that State and urging th«m to 
 see the laws executed, and to see that the elec- 
 tions were absolutely free, a usurpation. Gov- 
 ernor Bradford did it in obedience to the con- 
 stitution of his State, and if he had not done it 
 under the circumstances he would have been 
 delinquent and fallen far short of the discharge 
 1 of his duties as a wise, virtuous, and patriotic 
 Governor. If that is a usurpation, allow me to 
 ask the honorable Committee on Military Af- 
 fairs what would they call the act of President 
 Lincoln and General Schenck and his subordi- 
 nates ? They issued orders concerning elec- 
 tions in Maryland. They were not authorized 
 by any constitution or any law to do it. They 
 did it in palpable, direct violation of the Con- 
 stitution of the United States, because the Gov- 
 ernor of Maryland had not invited their inter- 
 position. They prescribed oaths to to be taken 
 unknown to the constitution and the laws of 
 Maryland, thus prescribing the qualifications of 
 voters to the extent at least of excluding all 
 who would not take an oath unknown to their 
 laws. And then, sir, we find this sentence in 
 this most learned report : 
 
 " The execution of the order was as fair and upright as 
 the order itself was legal and its purpose honest." 
 
 I understand the committee to assert that the 
 order was constitutional and legal, and that its 
 execution was fair and upright. A more pal- 
 pable usurpation never existed than the is- 
 suing of the order. I have shown, and shown 
 it, too, from the Constitution of the United 
 States, that it was a violation of that sacred iu- 
 strument. They had no plea of martial law. 
 From the message of the Governor of Maryland 
 we learn there was no plea of necessity, that 
 plea which tyrants always urge. But they say 
 the execution of the order was fair and upright. 
 Now, Mr. President, the Committee on Military 
 Affairs had before them the message of the Gov- 
 ernor of Maryland, with the documents ap- 
 pended. They comment on them, they quote 
 them, they refer to them ; so, then, they cannot 
 say that the evidence was not before them. 
 About one third of the report is devoted to com- 
 batting this message and the evidence accom- 
 panying it. Now let us see what the evidence 
 is they had before them. I have given you the 
 statement of the Governor. He says the provost 
 marshals were many of them candidates, and 
 that men were prevented from voting by the 
 military. Now look at the evidence, and see 
 Low far the committee are correct in their 
 statement that the order was carried out in a 
 fair aud upright manner. I will read to the 
 Senate the order referred to by his Excellency 
 Governor Bradford, made by one of the military 
 officers on the Eastern Shore : 
 
 Headquarters Third Martland Cavaxry, 
 
 Che^tlrtown, November 3, 18C3. 
 Whereas the President of the United States, in reply t-i 
 a letter addressed to him by Hon. Thomas Swann, of Bal- 
 timore city, lias stated that all loyal qualified voters should 
 have a right to vote, it therefore becomes every truly loyal 
 citizon to avail himself of the present opportunity offered 
 to place himself honorably upon the record or poll-book sit 
 the approaching election, by giving a full and ardent sup- 
 port to the whole Government ticknt, upon the platform 
 adopted by the Union League convention. None other i-, 
 recognized by the Federal authorities as loyal or worthy o* 
 the support of | any one who desires the peace and restora 
 tion of this Union. 
 
 CHARLES CARROLL TEVIS, 
 
 Litultnant Colonel Commanding. 
 
 What must be thought of an officer who is- 
 sues an order declaring in substance that none 
 would be regarded as true and loyal Union men 
 unless they voted the ticket placed upon the 
 platform of the Loyal League? I do not know 
 precisely what these Loyal Leagues are, but 1 
 understand they are some kind of secret, oath- 
 bound political society. That, then, is the 
 platform that this officer tells you is the only 
 one that the Government recognizes. That of 
 itself would be enough to prevent a fair and 
 upright election. There is abundant proof ac- 
 companying the Governor's message that loyal 
 men were prevented from voting by the soldiers. 
 The proof is that men offered to vote the Cris- 
 field ticket, and that they were prevented and 
 driven off by force by the soldiers, and thai 
 afterwards the yellow or Creswell ticket, the 
 ticket of the loyal leaguers, was placed in their 
 hands, and they were forced to vote it. I will 
 read a sentence or two from the Governor's 
 message and documents. It says : 
 
 " Mr. Davis came to vote, and Henderson said, * You 
 cant't vote.' Ho asked Davis ' Will you tako the oath?' He 
 said 'Yes;' and as we were about to administer the oath 
 prescribed in General Scheuck's order No. 53, which had 
 been a test for Crisfield voters, Mr. Henderson ordered Ser- 
 geant Tonitt to arrest Davis and take him in custody, and 
 thus Davis le!t the poll without voting. Another man 
 came up with a Crisfiuld ticket in his hand and offered t« 
 vote, and Henderson said to us, ' If you tako that man's 
 ticket I will tako the ballot-box from you ;' and thus he did 
 not voto. A man named John Pruthcamo to vote, but was 
 challenged by some one and refused to take the oath, wax 
 turned down, but after a timo came with a Creswell ticket, 
 and Henderson ordered us to take his ticket. 
 
 That is the statement of one of the election 
 judges. 
 
 At this point the honorable Senator gave way 
 to a motion to adjourn. 
 
 Friday, March 4, 1864. 
 Mr. POWELL. Mr. President, when the Sen- 
 ate adjourned yesterday evening I was com- 
 menting upon this clause in the report of th« 
 committee : 
 
 " The execution of the order was as fair and upright as 
 the order itself was legal and its purpose honest." 
 
 I was endeavoring to show by the testimony 
 before the committee that they were mistaken 
 in thinking the order was fairly executed. I 
 will read from the report of the committee as- 
 other enunciation on this subject, and then I 
 shall proceed to show that they were entirely 
 mistaken in their assertions. On the 28th page 
 of the report I find the following, referring tu 
 
20 
 
 the election in the first congressional district of 
 Maryland : 
 
 " There does not appear to your committee the least rea- 
 son to believe that a Eingle person was himleml from vot- 
 ing by the military in the first congressional district who 
 had not been engaged in the rebel service or iu aiding and 
 abetting them, nor that the judges excluded any voter who 
 proved his citizenship by confessing its obligations under 
 oath." 
 
 The Committee on Military Affairs had before 
 them the message of the Governor of Maryland 
 and the documents appended to it concerning 
 the election iu that State; and from those docu- 
 ments, from the proofs before the committee, I 
 will establish beyond doubt that the committee 
 are in error in both the statements in the report 
 that I have read. I have here a statement 
 signed by ten gentlemen, who I am informe'd 
 are gentlemen of the highest respectability, 
 living on the Eastern Shore of Maryland, ad- 
 dressed to Governor Bradford, from which I 
 will read an extract: 
 
 " Throughout the day special pains were taken to put 
 obstacles in the way of those voting tho conservative Union 
 ticket, such as challenging them, making them tako tho 
 oath, and this even in the case of old gray-headed Union 
 men, while notorious sympathizers with tho rebellion were 
 pormitted to vote unchallenged, provided they voted tho 
 emancipation ticket. Ono case which created somo excite- 
 ment at the time deserves particular notice. A man who 
 haa been always regarded as a sympathiser with tho South 
 went up to vote with an unconditional Union ticket in his 
 hand, and was challenged by a Union man. The person 
 desiring to vote then declared that he would not tako the 
 oath, aud that if ho had to tako tho oath he would not vote. 
 And yet, with the military order in full force, whenever 
 the independent Union ticket was nresented, this man was 
 permitted to vote! And more thairthis, tTio Union citizen 
 who challenged tho above party was threatened with arrest 
 by a candidate on .tho emancipation ticket for merely car- 
 rying out tho military order^vhich this candidate and his 
 friends were strenuously upholding. One of tho judges of 
 election declared that tho fact of a voter having an uncon- 
 ditional Union ticket in his hand was an evidence of his loy- 
 alty; and in the case above cited, as your Excellency will 
 notice, this decision was fully carried out. Theso are but 
 a- part, a small part, of the events of tho day. Iu other dis- 
 tricts not only were persons refused permission to take tho 
 oath and vote, but tho part of tho order which was modi- 
 fied by the President was fully carried out as it was pro- 
 mulgated. Voters were driven away and told if they 
 returned they would bo arrested. A part of the cavalry 
 regiment, in" 6ome districts, were permitted to vote, 
 although not residents cf tho couuty on tho shore, because 
 they were soldiers P' 
 
 That evidence was before the committee when 
 they made the report. In the memorial of the 
 defeated candidates in Kent county, on the 69th 
 page of the message and accompanying docu- 
 ments, I find the following: 
 
 ■ "In one other of the districts tho polls were not opened 
 until nearly twelve o'clock, iu direct violation of tho laws 
 of the State, when many of tho voters of tho district had 
 returned to their homes. At tho polls of four of tho dis- 
 tricts of the county a military officer was stationed near 
 tho judges of election, and challenged and rejected voters 
 in many instances without referring to the judges, whoso 
 right and duty it was to dccido upon tho legality of such 
 votes. The result of such unprecedented proceedings was 
 that the voters of the county were impressod with the con- 
 viction that the election was entirely under the control of 
 tho military power of tl>a United States, and that they 
 would not be permitted to vote unless the caprice of the 
 officers In command should sanction it, or they would 
 vote for tho candidates indicated by the order of Colonel 
 Tevis,"' 
 
 On the 09th page of the message and accom- 
 panying documents I find the following state- 
 
 ment by Thomas Sudler. one of the judges 
 election in Somerset county : 
 
 " I was one of tho first at tho voting place ; I found Che 
 judges of election and certain soldiers ; tho polls woro not 
 then open. I saw tho judges reading a paper, which I 
 ascertained was the 'Order No. 03' issued by General 
 Schenck. I thou displayed tho proclamation of tho Gov- 
 ernor of Maryland, which had reached me by express tho 
 night previous. The officers in charge of the soldiers asked 
 me to read it, which I did. Tho sergeant — tho officer men- 
 tioned above — then said : " I have orders to onforco Gen- 
 eral fc'chenck'8 ordor No. 6'3." I inquired further of the 
 sorgrant concerning his order. The sergeant repliod that 
 belore ho left tho camp at Princess Anne, aud before the 
 proclamation had been received by the captain of tho whole 
 body of trocps in tho camp, ho received orders to enforce 
 the Order No. 53'' — 
 
 That was General Schenck's order — 
 "to challengo every voter, to examine all tickets offered, 
 to administer the oath contained in Order No. 53, and to 
 dccliuo to allow any ticket but tho yellow or Creswcll 
 ticketto.be polled." * * » ♦ • 
 
 " Thcro were very few votors at the polls. Tho mass ef 
 the people woro deterred from coming out by fear of the 
 soldiers, who wero reported to have received orders *» 
 arrest all who voted for Mr. Crisfield." 
 
 I will now read from the statement of Cyrus 
 L. Jones, on the 72d page; 
 
 "In response to a question I asked him, tho sergeant 
 pulled out of his pocket a yellow or Creswcll ticket, and 
 said, 'This is the only ticket that shall bo voted to-day.' 
 I then mentioned that I had received the proclamation Of 
 Governor Bradford, which had that very morning reached 
 mo by express, and called his attention to it. The sergeant 
 said ho ' had nothing to do with tho Governor's proclama- 
 tion,' that his orders ' woro above that;' and added that 
 the orders of tho provost marshal had to be obeyed that 
 day. I saiJ, if tho oath is to bo administered to all who 
 come, you will havo to do it. Our orders are to allow every 
 ono twenty-one years old to vote. I called tho attention of 
 my brother judges, saying, ' There will be a hereafter to 
 this.' Tho sergeant Sheu guarded tho window through 
 which the ballots were handed in to bo put in the ballot- 
 box with soldiers, took his place at tho window, aud re- 
 jected all who would not vote tho yellow or Creswcll ticket. 
 Ho did not permit a single ticket of any other description to 
 bo polled, although I saw two men make soveral attempts, 
 at different times during the day, to voto a ticket with Mr. 
 Crisfield's namo on it, and many other men wero intimi- 
 dated from offering to voto." 
 
 I will now read an extract from the statement 
 of Mr. J. H. Tarr, dated Salisbury, November 
 12, 1803: 
 
 " When I approaehed tho window to deposit my ballot, 
 it being on white paper, and also knowing I was favorablo 
 to tho election of Hon. J. W. Crisfield for Congress, L. D. 
 Collier, deputy provost marshal, challenged my vote. I 
 inquired upon what ground. He answered that I was a 
 copperhead, and no damned copperhead should vote that 
 day. Ho referred to General Schenck's order. I pro- 
 duced your able and ever to be respected proclamation, 
 aud read it aloud to tho judges, ono of whom was a candi- 
 datefor judge of the orphans' court. His reply was, 'Damn 
 the'proclamation.' I then requested him to defiuo loyalty, 
 stating at the sumo time I would affirm to the condition of 
 tho oath as prescribed. This was refused, and I was or- 
 dered aWay from the polls. I left without voting." 
 
 Mr. Tarr goes on further to state: 
 
 " From the first outbreak to tho present moment I h»T<s 
 
 been for tho Union, and am still for tho Union. I voted, for 
 
 you, aud have never regretted it." 
 
 This is addressed to Governor Bradford: 
 
 "I stand where I havo always stood, for 'Union, the 
 Constitution, aud the enforcement of the laws,' with no 
 sympathy for tho rebellion." 
 
 That man, although he affirmed ho was will- 
 ing to take the oath, and says that he is a Union 
 man with no sympathy for the rebellion, was 
 refused his voto under tho orders of this deputy 
 provost marshal. 
 
21 
 
 ' Mr. HOWARD. I rise to inquire of the Sen- 
 ator from Kentucky what book he is reading 
 from? 
 
 Mr. POAVELL. I am reading from a pamphlet 
 entitled <l Message of Governor Bradford to the 
 General Assembly of Maryland, with docu- 
 ments, &c." The extracts I am now reading 
 are from the documents accompanying the mes- 
 sage. Here is an extract from a letter by Charles 
 Cole to Governor Bradford, inclosing a certifi- 
 cate from Lewis F. Wachter : 
 
 " Inclosed is a certificate from Lewis F. Wachter, a highly 
 respectable farmer of Frederick election district, showing 
 how he was treated on election day, and compelled to vote 
 against his sentiments. I saw that man pushed from the 
 j voting place and kicked at aa he was descending the steps 
 leading into the court-house, where the polls were held, and 
 after he had retired a short distanco I saw tho same soldier 
 who kicked at him seize him by tho arm, thrust an ' Un- 
 aonditional ticket' into his hand, and, with the assistance 
 ©f another soldier, compel him to return and vote the ticket 
 which had been placed in his hand." 
 
 And yet, with all these facts before them, the 
 honorable Committee on Military Affairs in their 
 report say that the election was fair, and that 
 no Union man who would take the oath was 
 prevented from voting. This Mr. Wachter in 
 his certificate says: 
 
 " I hereby certify that I offered to vote the conservative 
 Union ticket at the north polls, in tho city of Frederick, on 
 Wednesday, the 4th day of November, 1863, and that a sol- 
 dier objected to my voting on the ground of disloyalty ; 
 that my ticket was taken from my hand at the same time 
 by a soldier, and that I left the polls and had not proceeded 
 further than thirty or forty feet before a soldier, whoso 
 name I am informed is Marcellus Shaffuer, camo up to mo 
 and said, ' Here, you will be entitled to avole; now come and 
 vote ; ' at the samo time putting an Unconditional ticket 
 into my hand, and seizing me by one of my arms, and an- 
 other soldier by the other, I was forced again back to the 
 polls through fear of personal violence, and compelled to 
 vote against my sentiments." 
 
 Mr. President, how the committee could have 
 put the statements I have heretofore read in 
 their report with this evidence before them, is 
 a matter most astonishing to me. The writer 
 of the report reviews the message of Governor 
 Bradford and the evidence accompanying it, 
 reviews it elaborately, and after that review 
 makes the statements. I have quoted from the 
 report. The motive that actuated the writer 
 of the report to make the statements alluded 
 to I leave the Senate to determine. 
 
 Mr. President, it i3 clear from the statements 
 I have read that there was a most unwarranta- 
 ble and unjustifiable interference with the elec- 
 tion in the State of Maryland. The judges were 
 prevented from executing the laws. In many 
 cases they were imprisoned. Loyal men were 
 forced from the polls when they attempted to 
 vote the Crisheld ticket, and afterwards forced 
 back to the polls and compelled to vote the 
 Creswell ticket. In some places the Crisfield 
 ticket was not allowed to be voted. Disloyal 
 men, or men whose loyalty at least was sus- 
 pected, were allowed to vote the yellow or Cres- 
 well ticket. Even when they were challenged, 
 the soldiers would not permit them to be sworn ; 
 and in one case they threatened to take the 
 ballot-box if the vote was not taken. Upon 
 what ground the committee can base the asser- 
 tion in their report that this election was con- 
 
 ducted fairly, and that no person who was a 
 loyal citizen and would take the oath was pre- 
 vented from voting, I am wholly unable to com- 
 prehend. 
 
 Sir, we might well inquire why it was that 
 at that particular juncture of Maryland affairs 
 the military should be scattered all over that 
 region of country ? Were there any rebel sol- 
 diers there? Was the State of Maryland in- 
 vaded? No, sir j they had no such excuse as 
 General Burnside claimed for declaring martial 
 law in Kentucky. Why was it done ? The ob- 
 ject is clear and manifest. Those soldiers were 
 sent there for the purpose of carrying the elec- 
 tions in favor of the Administration. I read 
 some time ago, and I regret that I have not got 
 it before me now, an extract taken from the 
 Boston Commonwealth, a leading Administra- 
 tion party paper, in which it complained some- 
 what of the conduct of the soldiery in the 
 border State elections, and called them "irreg- 
 ularities," butsaid the Administration hid been 
 so negligent in allowing the Democrats to elect 
 so many members of Congress in the previous 
 elections that they were compelled to interfere 
 in the border States in order to maintain a ma- 
 jority in the other end of this Capitol ; and upon 
 that ground they excused it. That was the 
 reason the iron hand of the military was laid 
 upon the people of the border States; to com- 
 pel them to send members of Congress to this 
 Capitol who were opposed to the sentiments of 
 the people. It was done by the Administration 
 for the purpose of having a majority in their 
 favor in the other House. 
 
 But, sir, did anybody then, or does anybody 
 now, pretend to say that the people of Maryland 
 were not loyal ? I will read to you what their 
 Governor says on that subject. The writer of 
 the report, in order to bolster up the President, 
 General Schenck, and others in authority, 
 assails and attempts to destroy the reputation 
 of Governor Bradford and* everybody who tes- 
 tifies in reference to these violations of the law 
 in those States. The destruction of the repu- 
 tations of those who know and have spoken of 
 theso- disgraceful and wicked usurpations is the 
 only means by which they can escape from that 
 damning infamy which must in all time accom- 
 pany them. What does Governor Bradford say 
 in regard to the loyalty of the people of Mary- 
 land ? 
 
 " It is a well-known fact, that with perhaps ono singlo 
 exceptiou, thero is not a congrossional candidate iu thia 
 State whose loyalty is questionable, and in nut a county in 
 the State outside of the samo congressional district is there, 
 I believe, a candidate for tho Legislature or any State oflica 
 whose loyalty is not equally undoubted." 
 
 He says further : 
 
 *' For more than two years past thero never has been a 
 time when, if every traitor and cvory treasonable sympa- 
 thizer in the State had voted, they could have controlled 
 whoever might have been their candidates, in a single de-' 
 partmeut ut the ^tate, or jeoparded the success of the Gen- 
 eral Government. No State in tho Union has been or is now- 
 actuated by more heartfelt and unwavering loyalty than 
 Maryland— a loyalty intensified and purified bv tho ordeal 
 through which it has passed." 
 
 That is what, the Governor says in his procla- 
 mation. General Schenck, in a paper that he- 
 
22 
 
 issued in reply to this proclamation of the Gov- 
 ernor's, indorses the loyalty of the people of 
 Maryland, in this languge : 
 
 " Governor Bradford himself cannot appreciate more 
 M&niy tttan I do, the sterling loyaily of tlie great majority 
 ot tile people of Maryland." 
 
 General Schenck himself says that a great ma- 
 jority of the people of Maryland are loyal. 
 Where, then, was the necessity for this military 
 foray upon them upon the day of election ? It 
 can only be accounted for by the reason that I 
 have stated : the Administration did it for the 
 purpose of preventing a free election in Mary- 
 land, and in order to send to the other end of 
 this Capitol and elect as officers of that State 
 government, men who were willing to do the 
 bidding of the Executive. It was for that, and 
 for nothing else, that it was done. There never 
 was a greater outrage on any people on earth 
 than was committed on the loyal people of Mary- 
 laud in their last election. 
 
 I read yesterday the law of the free common- 
 wealth of Athens on this subject. The Athe- 
 nians were so watchful and so jealous of the 
 right of free suffrage that a stranger who inter- 
 fered in the assemblies of the people was re- 
 garded as a traitor, and was punished by their 
 laws with death. Had President Lincoln and 
 General Shcnck lived in the time of the free 
 commonwealth of Athens, and interfered with 
 the assemblies of the people as they did with 
 the right of free suffrage in Maryland, they 
 would have been executed as traitors and felons, 
 and would have justly deserved their fate. Yes, 
 sir, in that free commonwealth, under their 
 laws, had such an interference taken place as 
 has been proved incontestably by the evidence 
 I have read to have taken place in Maryland, 
 he who did it would have been punished with 
 death as a traitor : and yet we find the Senate, 
 through one of its committees, reporting against 
 the passage of a bill visiting a much milder 
 punishment than death upon those who inter- 
 fere to prevent free elections, and that, too, 
 upon the ground, as they state in their report, 
 that the. elections, have been fair ! They say 
 there is no ground for the complaint that any- 
 body' entitled to vote was prevented from voting, 
 or that there was any interference in the elec- 
 tion, when the facts stand out so prominently 
 that none can deny or dispute but that the in- 
 terference was most atrocious, flagrant, and 
 outrageous. 
 
 General Schenck commenced his operations 
 to crush out freedom of elections, and to pre- 
 vent political organization against the Admin- 
 istration before he issued his order, No. 53, 
 dated October 23, 1863. From the public jour- 
 nals I see that early in the fall of 1863, the 
 Democrats of Talbot county, on the Eastern 
 Shore, held a convention and nominated candi- 
 dates for local offices of their "county, clerk, 
 sheriff, ,'L'c. The officers of the convention, and 
 some of thfi parties named as candidates, gen- 
 tlemen of the highest character and respecta- 
 bility, were arrested and rcpiim! to report at 
 headquarters in Baltimore, whoro tJeneral 
 
 Schenck required them to take the following 
 oath, which is cut from the Easton Gazette, 
 Maryland. 
 
 " Released from Awiest. — The Easton (Maryland) Ga- 
 zette Ntatea that tho partioi recently arrested ill that town 
 while attending a political convention have been released 
 after subscribing to the following : 
 
 "•We, the subscribers, do hereby pledge ourselves and 
 obligate by this written agreement that we will not , during 
 the present rebellion against the Government ami authori- 
 ty ot the United States, organize or assist in (lie organiza- 
 tion of any party inimical or apposed to the Administration 
 of said Government; that we will not nominate, assist in 
 the nomination, nor Tote for any candidate or candidates 
 foroflico of district, count3 r , State, or General Government 
 who are in sympathy with the so-called confederate States 
 government, or "pp:srd to the vigorous pros-cuiioii <■/ the war 
 nolo waged for tho complete suppression of the existing re- 
 bellion. All this we promise and pledge without any men- 
 tal reservation whatever, with a full purpobS to keep and 
 observe the same.' " 
 
 General Schenck required these gentlemen to 
 swear that they would not during the present 
 rebellion organize or assist in the organization 
 of any party inimical or opposed to the Admin- 
 istration. Was there ever a more outrageous 
 assault upon the rights of the citizen ? General 
 Schenck's object seems to have been to crush 
 out all political opposition to his chief, Abra- 
 ham Lincoln. 
 
 I honor the profession of arms; it is a noble 
 profession. The brave soldier who fights the 
 battles of his country, who draws his sword in 
 in defense of the honor, constitution, and laws 
 of his country, and in defense of the liberties 
 of the people, is justly entitled to and will re- 
 ceive our confidence, admiration, and warmest 
 gratitude — all honor to such noble warriors ! 
 But he who holds position in the army of his 
 country and uses his power to overthrow the 
 constitution and laws of his country, to strike 
 down the liberties of the people, to prevent free 
 ballot, and to build up the fortunes of a politi- 
 cal party, as has been done in Maryland, will 
 receive the scorn and contempt of all good, 
 wise, and patriotic men. 
 
 INTERFERENCE IN DELAWARE. 
 
 The committee in their report treat briefly of 
 the elections in the State of Delaware. I will 
 not enter at any great length into a discussion 
 as to the mode of conducting the election in 
 Delaware. It have here a report of a committee 
 of the Legislature of that State in which they 
 examine fully into that whole question. The 
 sworn proof is in the volume I now hold in my 
 haud. It is proved incontestably that the elec- 
 tions in Delaware in 1862 were carried to a 
 great degree by the interference of the military. 
 Governor Cannon — the Governor whom tho 
 Committee on Military Affairs laud in their re» 
 port because in a proclamation to the people of 
 that State he enjoins all good citizens and civil 
 officers of that State to obey the military order 
 General Schenck had issued concerning elec- 
 tions in Delaware, and they contrast his conduct 
 with that of the Governor of Maryland. Mr. Can- 
 non, it appears from the report and evidence, was 
 elected Governor of Delaware in consequence 
 of military interference. It is very clearly 
 
23 
 
 shown in the report of the committee'' of the 
 Legislature of Delaware that the military did 
 interfere, and that, they did it at the instance 
 of Mr. Cannon, who was then a candidate for 
 Governor, and other candidates for high posi- 
 tions. It is also proved in the report that at 
 what they call the "little election" in Dela- 
 ware, which occurs about a month before the 
 general election, the Democrats indicated a 
 strength that would carry the State by a large 
 vote, aud the Republican leaders had the mili- 
 tary brought, in to prevent their defeat at the 
 general election. It is proven by some of these 
 provost marshals, and the provost marshals 
 were in chief command, it seems, in Delaware, 
 1 that they did not think that there was any ne- 
 cessity for the military being there to preserve 
 order. A singular fact in connection with 
 these Delaware elections is, that these provost 
 marshals were commissioned by the Secretary 
 of War, Mr. Stanton, on the very eve of the 
 election. The commissions were received the 
 day before the election and were sent to Dela- 
 ware in blank, and were there filled up by the 
 party leaders of the Republican party. 
 
 It is further shown that great interferences 
 took place in the election there. It is further 
 proven that the then Governor of Delaware did 
 aot ask the intervention of the military to pre- 
 vent domestic disorder and violence ; but that 
 he was opposed to their coming. The testimony 
 of the ex- Governor is embodied in the report. 
 It is provtd very clearly by the testimony of 
 cx-Govcrnor Ross, that General Wool, a major 
 general in the army of the United States, came 
 to the State of Delaware with a body of troops 
 on the eve of the election. General Wool, in an 
 interview which Governor Ross had with him, 
 told him the election should be fair. After the 
 polls were opened, discovering that these provost 
 marshals and their adherents were preventing 
 the Democrats fiom casting their votes, and in- 
 terfering with the election. Governor Ross went 
 to General Wool and told liim he promised them 
 a fair election, and the provost marshals were 
 conducting it far oUierwi-e than fairly. Gene- 
 ral Wool told him — and it is in the testimony of 
 Governor Ross, sworn to in this book — that for 
 the time being ho had no control ; that be was 
 really under the command of the provost mar- 
 shals, and declined to interpose in order to pre- 
 yent interference at the polls. 
 
 Thus it will be seen that Mr. Stanton, the 
 Secretary of War, was engaged in this business 
 of interfering in elections. He sent blank com- 
 missions of provost marshals to his party friends 
 to be filled up to suit their purposes. Sir, they 
 must bWvte i>een very menial to>ds of power to 
 consent to act as provost marshals to do this 
 dirty work of preventing hoaei»t aud loyal men 
 from costing their voles It seems it was all 
 trusted to ! he members of the Republican party 
 who were managing for the time;.ud controlling 
 the election. You will find that the President 
 put his own hand to th* wVrk in Mary'rad, 
 aided by General Scbenek : Oc er^l JWns'dc 
 <yf infamous memory fioB.rV-Hi H fii Ken'ooky; 
 
 and Edwin M. 8tanton, the Secretary of War, 
 perpetrates a similar outrage in Delaware. 
 
 I discovered from the reading of the testimony 
 that instructions accompanied the commissions 
 of these provost marshals ; and I introduced a 
 resolution into the Senate askiug the Secretary 
 of War to send us the orders and th9 instruc- 
 tions, if any had been given, to those provost 
 marshals. That has beensome three weeks ago. 
 A few days ago I had a second resolution sent 
 to the Secretary of War on the subject ; and he 
 stands in contempt of the Senate and does not 
 send us those instructions and orders to his pro- 
 vost marshals, or tell us whether he ever sent 
 any or not; and yet one of the provost marshals 
 swears that instructions did accompany his com- 
 mission, and he exhibited his commission from 
 Mr. Stanton as Secretary of War. 
 
 INTERFERENCE IN MISSOURI. 
 
 So far aR the Missouri elections are concerned, 
 it is unnecessary for me to say much. I must 
 do the military commander of Missouri the jus- 
 tice to say that of all the orders that have been 
 issued on the subject in the States, his are by 
 far the best ; and yet there are one or two things 
 in his orders that are very objectionable. I re- 
 peat, however, that it is unnecessary for me to 
 say much in regard to the Missouri elections. 
 I have before me and I have examined the testi- 
 mony taken in three contested seats in the other 
 end of this Capitol from that State, and I can 
 say without fear of contradiction there never 
 were greater outrages committed on the elective 
 franchise than by the military in' Missouri. 
 ! Why, sir, they arrested and imprisoned men for 
 I attempting to vote, they tore up the poll- books, 
 j they drove legal voters from the election poll, 
 1 and almost every outrage you could imagine, 
 I they committed. Upon that subject we havo 
 i sworn testimony, nnd that testimony is under- 
 going investigation in the other end of this Cap- 
 j itol ; and I find by the journals of yesterday 
 | morning that the Committee of Elections in the 
 i House have determined to send back all those 
 i cases to the people upon the sole ground that 
 I the military interfered with the freedom, of the 
 elections. It is a pregnant fact, and one tjsat I 
 ; hope the Senate will consider on the passage of 
 this bill. When we find such evidence and such 
 action upon the evidence as has taken puce iu 
 the other House, I do not think the Senate ought 
 for a moment to hesitate to pass this bill, on the 
 ground that there has been no interference with 
 elections. 
 
 MILITARY USURPATIONS AMNESTY PROCLAMA- 
 TION, &C. 
 
 But, Mr. President, had there been no such 
 
 interference, it would still be wise and proper 
 I to pass this bill. We should not wait for crime 
 | to be committed before we pass laws denouncing' 
 
 penalties against it; but as wise lawgivers we 
 ] should make the law to prevent as well as punish 
 i crime. The factth.it the In w was on the M-tnte- 
 
 book would det«r tho^e who contemplated such 
 : oftenses. If suleti offenses should be nommiifed 
 
 us are set forth in ibis I. ill, none will say that 
 
24 
 
 the offenders ought not to be severely punished. 
 The evidence is full and abundant that there has 
 been the most outrageous interference by the 
 military in four of t the States of this Union in 
 the elections. 
 
 The writer of the report from the Military 
 Committee claims power to do all these things 
 trader the law of necessity, military necessity, 
 and it is under that plea that these persons are 
 justified. I have heard that plea, Mr. President, 
 ever since these encroachments upon the Con- 
 stitution and the laws of the country have been 
 going on. They speak of the nation struggling 
 for its life. Well, sir, I confess, and I do it re- 
 grettingly, too, that the nation is struggling for 
 its life. I regard the Constitution and the laws 
 made in pursuance thereof as the life of the 
 country, and that is seriously endangered, for 
 we find the President and those he controls, 
 who should protect and defend the Constitution, 
 invading it at almost every point. I do not think 
 that the life of the nation ia in any more danger 
 from the rebels — though God knows that danger 
 is great enough — than it is from domestic traitors 
 at home, who are charged with the preservation 
 of the Constitution and yet are killing it. 
 
 The writer of the repprt 6eems to assume that 
 the Executive has a right to govern every other 
 department of the Government, and control the 
 institutions of all the States, and that he is to 
 be appealed to for the protection of the people. 
 Is it not most humiliating, sir, that the people 
 in a country governed by constitutions and laws 
 should be driven to appeal to any man ft r pro- 
 tection? Montesquieu, in- his book upon the 
 Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire, makes a 
 remark on this subject which I will read to the 
 Senate. Speaking of the Senate's entreating 
 Pompey to undertake the defense of the repub- 
 lic, he says : 
 
 " If that name might be properly given to a government 
 which implored protection from one of its citizens." 
 
 The doctrine of those gentlemen who desire to 
 clothe the Executive with this supreme power, 
 with this absolute power, with this more than 
 dictatorial power, places this great Republic in 
 that humiliating attitude. I do not think that 
 a citizen in a country governed by law was ever 
 driven to the necessity of appealing to one man 
 for protection. Sir, the citizen who for the time 
 being fills the Chief Executive office is bound to 
 see that the laws arc faith fully executed; that 
 is his duty. There is no liberty save in the su- 
 premacy of the law. In all free governments 
 the citizen appeals to the law for protection. 
 
 Mr. President, all usurpers and all tyrants 
 that have gone before us, those who have over- 
 thrown the liberties of every people who have 
 lost their liberties, claim their, powers under 
 this plea of necessity. Caesar, when he led h ; s 
 army from Gaul, crossed the Rubicon, and over- 
 threw the liberties of his count y, did it upon 
 the p'ea of necessity, and tyrants the world over 
 have done the same thing. The President seems 
 to me to follow in the footsteps of Caesar, Pom- 
 pey, and Cromwell. The Chief Magistrate, I 
 regret to say, seems to copy all the faults, while 
 
 he has exhibited none of the virtues of those 
 distinguished men. 
 
 Now, sir, allow me to read to you what tire 
 same writer says about the action of these two 
 distinguished men in Rome — how it was they 
 sapped the foundations of the liberties of the 
 people. Speaking of Pompey, Montesquieu 
 says: 
 
 '■ Ho emp'oyed the vilest of the populace to incommode 
 the magistrates in the exerciso of their functions, in hopes 
 that wise people, growing weary of living in a state of an- 
 archy, would bo urged by despair to create him dictator." 
 
 Do we not find the same thing going on here? 
 Is not the President and his military officers in- 
 terfering with the civil magistrates? There caa 
 be no doubt about it. 
 
 Speaking of Caesar, the same author says : 
 
 "He raised troubles in the city by his emissaries; he 
 made himself master of all elections; and consuls, praetors, 
 and tribunes purchased their promotions at their own 
 price." 
 
 " He made himself master of all elections." 
 That is what is being done here. How was it 
 with Oliver Cromwell? The Protector appoint- 
 ed twelve major generals to take charge of the 
 twelve districts into which he divided the British 
 empire, and they went forth armed wiih all 
 power; they decimated the people; they taxed 
 them at their discretion, and exacted enormous 
 tribute from them, and in that way the people 
 were held in subservience to the military au- 
 thority. The Protector dissolved one Parlia- 
 ment, and carried on his government by a Coun- 
 cil of State. After a while, believing that such 
 had been the glory of his administration in its ' 
 foreign wars, and such was the subserviency of 
 the people created by the action of his twelve 
 major generals, that he could have a Parliament 
 elected that would be bubservient to his will, he 
 ordered an election. The election was held, and 
 how was it conducted ? I will read an extract 
 from Hume on that subject: 
 
 " Cromwell began to hope that, by his administration 
 attended with :>o much luster and success abroad, so much 
 order and tranquillity at home, he had now acquired such 
 authority as would enable him to meet the representatives 
 of the nation, and would as»suro him of their dutiful com- 
 pliance with his government. Ho summoned a Parlia- 
 ment; but not trusting altogether to tho good-will of tbo 
 people, he used every art which his new model of repre- 
 sentation allowed him to employ, in order to influence tbo 
 elections and fill tbo House with his own creatures. Ire- 
 land, being entirely in tho hands of tho army, chose few 
 but such officers as were most acceptable to him. Scotland 
 showed a liko c«mpliance ; and as the nobility and gentry 
 of that kingdom regarded their attendance on English Par- 
 liaments as au ignominious badgo of Slavery, it was on that 
 account more easy for the officers to prevail in tho elections. 
 Notwithstanding all these precautions, the Protector still 
 found that the majority would not bo lavorablo to him. He 
 set guards, theretore, on tho door, who permitted none to 
 enter hut such as produced a warrant from his Council; and 
 the Council rejected about a hundred, who either refused a 
 recognition of the Protector's government, or were on other 
 accounts obnoxious to him. Theso protested against so 
 egregious a violenie, subversive of all liberty; but every 
 application for rcdrc6S was neglected, both by the Council 
 and the Parliament. 
 
 " The majority of the Parliament, by means of theso arts 
 and violences, was now at least either friendly to the Pro- 
 tector, or resolved, by their compliance, to adjust, it possi- 
 ble, this military government to their laws and liber ties. " 
 
 Mr. President, frim the authorities I have 
 read it seems that we are following in the foot- 
 steps of nations whose liberties have boen over- 
 
25 
 
 thrown and trampl.ed down beneath the iron 
 heel of military despotism. It is said that his- 
 tory but re-enacts itself, and it seems to me, in 
 view of all the lights in the past which we have 
 before us, that this once great and glorious 
 country of ours is about to be destroyed and its 
 liberties overthrown by the same means that 
 have destroyed all free governments that have 
 gone before us. It is a fact that we should well 
 ponder and consider, that it is by military 
 power that free nations, heretofore have lo3t 
 their liberties. It is our duty, if it is possible 
 to do so by wise laws, to see to it that the hopes 
 of the world in regard to the glory, prosperity, 
 and perpetuity of this Republic shall not be 
 wrecked on the same rock. 
 
 I said a moment ago that if we are to have 
 liberty we must be governed by law ; that lib- 
 erty can only exist in the supremacy of the law. 
 On that point Mr. Locke says : 
 
 " Where law ends tyranny begins. If the law be trans- 
 gressed to another's harm, him whomsoever in authority 
 exceeds the power given him by the law, and makes use of 
 the force he has under his command to compass that upon 
 the subject which tho law allows not, ceases in that to bo a 
 magistrate, and acting without authority may be opposed 
 as any other man who invades the rights of another." 
 
 That is a wise maxim laid down by Mr. Locke^ 
 but if I had uttered it a year or two ago my loy- 
 alty, perhaps, would have been very much ques- 
 tioned. The President of the United States, how- 
 ever, utters the same sentiment in his inaugural 
 address, for in that address he declares : 
 
 " If by the mere force of numbers a majority should de- 
 prive a minority of any clearly written constitutional right, 
 it might in a moral point of view justify revolution; cer- 
 tainly would if tho lost right were a vitaI*one." 
 
 The last part of the extract I read from Mr. 
 Locke is in substance the same. He says if the 
 lawful rights of the people are overthrown, by 
 their magistrates, they have a righht to resist. 
 Mr. Lincoln says the violation of the Constitu- 
 tion in a vital point would justify revolution ; 
 and allow me to tell you, Senators, that one 
 reason why the people have submitted so quietly, 
 80 uncomplainingly, to the many usurpations of 
 the Executive is that they hoped in a short time 
 to have the privilege of relieving themselves of 
 the President by means of free suffrage ; but if 
 you allow the military to prevent free elections 
 you not only stab the Republic in its very vitals 
 but you will by that means cause many persons 
 who think that these usurpations of power ought 
 to be resisted only at the ballot-box to look about 
 for other means to redress their grievances. If 
 you do not wish blood to flow in this land, if y ou 
 wish to preserve our institutions, allow the peo- 
 ple the privilege of turning out every four years 
 their President if they desire to do so. Give 
 them free speech, free press, free suffrage. Allow 
 me to tell you that these three things are the 
 greatest conservative elements in this country. 
 The people will bear patiently great wrongs 
 from wicked and corrupt officials, provided free 
 speech, free press, and free suffrage are left 
 them. By these lawful agencies they can in a 
 short time turn unworthy and corrupt officials 
 from their high places. A wise and prudent 
 people prefer the use of these constitutional and 
 
 peaceful agencies to force to rid themselves of 
 uaworthy public servants. In the various phases 
 of political parties that have existed heretofore 
 in this country, the Executive has been some- 
 times denounced for usurpation, and we have 
 had no revolutions ; and why ? Because the 
 people knew that they had the power in their 
 hands, if a majority were of their opinion, in 
 a short time to clothe other magistrates with 
 power. But, sir, for the first time in the history 
 of the Republic we find that the Federal mili- 
 tary have taken charg« of elections. It is a 
 matter that the Senate should gravely consider 
 and prevent, if they possibly can do so, by pla- 
 cing upon the statute-book salutary and wise 
 laws to prevent the recurrence of the evil. Sen- 
 ators, if you allow the President to exercise this 
 power, if that magistrate should be a corruptor 
 an ambitious or a depraved man, do you not know 
 that he will use it for the purpose of perpetua- 
 ting his power, and re-electing himself? There 
 is no Senator in this Chamber but must know 
 that what I say is true. Why not, then, pass 
 the bill without hesitation, and do your duty at 
 least to prevent it ? 
 
 I regret to say that I am very thoroughly sat- 
 isfied that the President is using the military iD 
 this way, and tampering with elections for the 
 purpose of perpetuating his power. Nothing 
 will convince me to the contrary but such action 
 on the part of the Executive as will clearly in- 
 dicate that he is not using the military arm of 
 the Government for that purpose. His amnesty 
 proclamation is a move in that direction ; and 
 at this point I will for a few moments, advert to 
 that proclamation, dated the 8th December last, 
 accompanying the President's last message. I 
 regard the proclamation as unwise, inexpedient, 
 unconstitutional, and revolutionary. I do not 
 know that I have ever seen a more revolutionary 
 document than this proclamation. It i3 revolu- 
 tionary because it overthrows the Constitution, 
 overthrows the laws, and by it the Executive 
 assumes powers that are not conferred upon him 
 by the Constitution. In a word, he sets up his 
 own will as the law ; he becomes forthe time be- 
 ing a despot ; his will governs instead of the Con- 
 stitution and the written laws of the country. 
 The President, in his proclamation, not only pre- 
 scribes the qualifications of voters, but the 
 qualifications of officers. What right has the 
 President of the United States, whence does he 
 derive the power, to say, who shall be a quali- 
 fied elector in the State of Arkansas, or who 
 shall be qualified to hold office in that State ? 
 Take his proclamation and his letter to General 
 Steele, and you will see that the President as- 
 sumes all these powers. He undertakes to 
 prescribe the qualification of voters, and of the 
 persons who shall hold office in that State. I 
 read yesterday and commented upon the clause 
 of the Constitution that declares who are quali- 
 fied electors. I suppose no Senator will contend 
 that the President of the United States, by vir- 
 .tue of his office, has the right to alter or to amend 
 the constitutions of the States of this Union, or 
 the right to say who shall be a qualified voter 
 
26 
 
 for the State officers in any State, or who shall 
 be qualified to hold State offices; and yet the 
 President assumes the power to do all these 
 things in his amnesty proclamation and in his 
 letter to General Steele touching elections in the 
 State of Arkansas. I will read from that letter 
 on this matter: 
 
 " The constitution and laws of the State, as beforo the 
 rebellion, are in full force, except that the constitution is 
 go modified as to declare that there shall beneitherslavery 
 nor involuntary servitude except in the punishment of 
 crime." 
 
 By what authority does the President of the 
 United States assume to amend the constitution 
 of the State of Arkansas ? I had thought that 
 that right was conferred alone upon the sover- 
 eign people of that State. I have always supposed 
 that under our form of Government the people, 
 and the people alone, were clothed with the 
 sovereign power to make constitutions and to 
 alter or amend them. And yet we find that the 
 President of the United States undertakes to 
 exercise that power. It is a power as despotic 
 and as absolute as that exercised by William of 
 Normandy in England after the battle of Hast- 
 ings. Is there a Senator here who will dare rise 
 in his place and say that the President has the 
 power to alter or amend the constitution of any 
 State of the Union ? The President assumes it 
 in his letter to General Steele, and he under- 
 takes in the amnesty proclamation to prescribe 
 the qualifications of voters, for he says that all 
 who choose to come in and take that oath may 
 exercise the right of citizens. In this letter to 
 General Steele he requires that when the officers 
 are elected they shall appear at General Steele's 
 headquarters at Little Rock and take that oath. 
 Of course that is prescribing the qualification 
 of the officers as well as of the electors. 
 
 That is not all, Mr. President, that is being 
 done in this direction. We find that the same 
 thing, to some extent, is being done in Tennes- 
 see ; Governor Johnson's proclamation, although 
 very objectionable, is free from many of the ob- 
 jections that are contained in the others. General 
 Banks is commanding in Louisiana, and he is- 
 sues orders regulating elections, regulating 
 labor, and establishing a kind of semi-peonage 
 among the negroes, and in his order he uses this 
 remarkable language : 
 
 " Opinion is free and candidates aro numerous. Open 
 hostilities cannot be permitted. Indifference will be treated 
 as a crime and faction is treason." 
 
 Was there ever so atrocious a sentiment as 
 that ? Here is a me jor general of the Army of 
 the United States who speaks of candidates be- 
 ing numerous and opinions free, and yet he says, 
 in the very next two lines, that he will treat 
 indifference as a crime ; in plain Saxon, that 
 the man who does not vote will be a criminal 
 and will be punished with an iron hand. What 
 kind of freedom of opinion is that? Yet, sir, 
 we find one of the President's creatures, one of 
 his military subordinates, whom he has put over 
 one of the military departments, uttering that 
 unconstitutional and atrocious sentiment. 
 
 You see, sir, that the military are swallowing 
 up all the other powers of the Government, both 
 State and national ; and it seems that those who 
 
 attempt to pass laws to arrest it meet with very 
 little favor from the Committee on Military Af- 
 fairs. I hope we shall fare better in the Senate 
 The proclamation of the President is unjust to 
 loyal men. That proclamation will not allow 
 any person to exerciso the functions of citizen- 
 ship in one of those States unless he shall take 
 the oath prescribed. Then, and only then, is he 
 a qualified voter. Only then is he qualified to 
 hold office. And who are allowed to avail them- 
 selves of the benefits of this amnesty ? Any 
 person, a citizen of one of those States, can avail 
 himself of it unless he falls within the excepted 
 classes ; and those are, officers in the army of 
 high grade, such as have left the Congress of 
 the United States, &c. It is unnecessary for me 
 to enumerate them all. The exception applies 
 to those who have held civil office and those who 
 have held high military command, &c. All 
 others who come in and take this oath are 
 clothed by the grace of the President's pardon- 
 ing power with the qualifications of suffrage and 
 they are permitted to hold office. 
 
 I say it is unjust to loyal men. There are 
 many staunch, loyal men in those States, men 
 who never have had sympathy with the rebel- 
 lion. The President, in his first message, said 
 that in all those States, except South Carolina, 
 he believed a majority were loyal to the old 
 Union. The President requires all these persons 
 to take this oath. If a man had been in the 
 army of the confederate States, and had slaugh- 
 tered a hundred Union soldiers, he is a qualified 
 elector on coming and taking this oath ; but % 
 man who had ever been a Union man, but who 
 could not conscientiously take the oatb, is ex- 
 cluded. I hold that the oath is of such a char- 
 acter that a conscientious, honest man would 
 not take it ; and moreover I think it very unjust 
 to require of a man who is and has ever been 
 devoted to the institutions of his country, and 
 who has been in nowise engaged in this rebel- 
 lion, to submit to the humiliating condition pre- 
 scribed for those the President regards as par- 
 doned felons. 
 
 The oath requires a man to swear that he will 
 support the Constitution of the United States. 
 I suppose with all Union men there would be no 
 difficulty about that part of the oath, for they 
 have been supporting it all the time. But it 
 further requires them to support the n^gro pol- 
 icy of the President and his proclamation on that 
 subject. I, for one, firmly believe that the Pres- 
 ident's emancipation proclamation is unconsti- 
 tutional. I think he had no power to issue it 
 or to proclaim the freedom of negroes in the 
 States ; and I have no doubt that a large major- 
 ity of the Union men in that country concur 
 with me in opinion. Yet, sir, you see he re- 
 quires them to take that oath, which an honest 
 loyal man cannot take, if he believed his procla- 
 mation to be in violation of the Constitution ; 
 when he swears to support the Constitution, he 
 cannot in the same oath swear to support pro- 
 clamations which deprive him of his property, 
 and which he thinks are in conflict with the 
 Constitution. 
 
27 
 
 The oath requires a man not only to swear to 
 support the proclamations that have#>een issued, 
 but to swear to support those that may be issued 
 in the future. It applies as well to the future 
 as to the past or the present. What honest man 
 would swear that he would support all other 
 proclamations the President might make on the 
 Bubject of negroes or negro slavery, even pro- 
 vided he approved the proclamations already 
 issued ? The President, in the plenitude of his 
 power, might issue a proclamation that only 
 negroes should vote, and that only negroes 
 should hold office ; and yet he would swear a 
 man in advance to support it. I tell you, sir, 
 an honest, conscientious man cannot take this 
 oath. This proclamation and the oath elevates 
 Vhe negro above the white man. I will read one 
 clause of it on that subject. Speaking of those 
 who are excluded from the benefit of the procla- 
 mation, the President says : 
 
 "And all who have engaged in any way in treating colored 
 and white persons in charge of such otherwise than law- 
 fully as prisonersof war, and which persons may have been 
 found in the 'United States service as soldiers, seamen, or 
 in any other, capacity." 
 
 He excludes from this amnesty a soldier in 
 the rebel army, if he has treated a negro soldier, 
 seaman, or white persons in charge of such, 
 otherwise than as a prisoner of war ; but he 
 does not exclude those engaged in the confede- 
 rate-army who have treated white soldiers and 
 white seamen or their commanders otherwise 
 than as prisoners of war. If one of those rebel 
 soldiers lays his hand on a negro, and does not 
 treat him as a prisoner of war, he cannot be 
 .nardoned ; but he may take white soldiers and- 
 seamen prisoners and execute them in cold blood 
 after they have surrendered ; he may treat them 
 with the utmost cruelty and with the most 
 savage barbarity, and that man can come up 
 and avail himself of the amnesty in President 
 Lincoln's proclamation. Ifhetouchesthesaintly 
 person of a negro in that way, there is no chance 
 for him to avail himself of the President's am- 
 nesty. 
 
 I believe that this is a Government of white 
 men. I believe it was made by white men and 
 for the benefit of white men ; and I still believe 
 that a white man is better than a negro. I think 
 every such discrimination in favor of the negro 
 against the people of our own race is most atro- 
 cious, and wholly unjustifiable. 
 
 There is another thing in this amnesty pro- 
 clamation upon which I will say a word : and 
 ! that is the one-tenth principle. When onetenth 
 of the, population, that is one tenth of those who 
 voted at the last presidential election, shall 
 come forward and take the oath, they shall be 
 enough to govern, says the President. That de- 
 stroys every principle of republican Govern- 
 ment. It is a principle that I suppose none will 
 deny in a republican and democratic Govern- 
 ment that majorities shall rule ; but here the 
 President says one tenth may rule. He over- 
 throws the great principle upon which all re- 
 publican and democratic Governments rest, and 
 he says one tenth, and that one tenth may be, 
 and I have no doubt will be, composed of the 
 
 most despicable people of that country ; for it 
 is that kind who are willing to come in, after 
 they have been engaged in the rebel army, if 
 they get a little tired, and sAvetir out of it. I 
 have not much opinion of those men who swear 
 into one army one day and into another the 
 next. They are not the kind of men who should 
 be permitted to govern any people. 
 
 The loyal men there who believe the Presi- 
 dent's negro policy is unconstitutional cannot 
 avail themselves of the amnesty. It is such only 
 as will come up and submit themselves to that 
 humiliating degradation ; brave and upright 
 men are not going to humiliate themselves by 
 taking such a degrading oath. One tenti of 
 that kind of men are to govern. They are to 
 govern the nine tenths. How will they govern 
 them 7 He promises them that protection which 
 is provided for by the Constitution, which de- 
 clares "the United States shall guaranty to 
 every State in the Union a republican form of 
 Government." I suppose the President intends 
 to keep charge of the governments of these 
 States in all time by a standing army to enable 
 this one tenth to govern the nine tenths. Sir, 
 you cannot cause one tenth of any free white 
 people on this continent to govern nine tenths, 
 unless you make the nine tenths absolute slaves. 
 You must stand by with your bayonets fixed 
 and coerce nine tenths into absolute uncondi- 
 tional obedience before one tenth can govern 
 them. The government the President proposes 
 to guaranty to these States is not a republican 
 government within the meaning of the" Consti- 
 tution, and it is a gross ab.use of language to 
 call it so. 
 
 Many honorable Senators on the other side 
 of the Chamber, and the school of politicians 
 to which the President belongs, have made a 
 great deal of clamor about the three-fifths slave 
 representation provided for in the Constitution. 
 Carry out this one-tenth principle in. Arkansas, 
 the one-tenth who will avail themselves of the 
 amnesty of the President, by taking that most 
 humiliating of oaths, will have it in their power 
 to elect all the members of Congress to which 
 Arkansas would be entitled upon the enumera- 
 tion of her population at the last census ; and 
 do you not think that one man down there will 
 have as much power as ten men in Minnesota or 
 Michigan ? Certainly so ; and that is the pol- 
 icy of the President whose party has been 
 clamorous upon the negro representation of 
 three-fifths provided in the Constitution for the 
 slave States. 
 
 Sir, I do not care upon what ground you place 
 the question ; the President is not clothed with 
 the power that he has exercised. There are 
 two theories among the Republicans on this 
 question. Some say these States are dead, out 
 of the Union, have committed suicide ; others 
 say they are still States in the Union. Well, if 
 they are States in the Union, what power has 
 the President of the United States to alter or 
 amend their constitutions, or to fix the qualifi- 
 cation of State officers ? He has none. Nobody 
 will contend that the President of the United 
 
28 
 
 States, by virtue of his office, has any power or 
 any right to alter or amend the constitution of 
 any State in the Union. If Arkansas is a State 
 in the Union the President has no power to alter 
 its constitution, which he has assumed to do. 
 If it is not a State of the Union, but is a terri- 
 tory that has been acquired by conquest, pur- 
 chase, or otherwise, then I ask what authority 
 has the President to admit it as a State into the 
 Union, or to make a constitution for it? Is it 
 net plainly written in the Constitution that 
 Congress may admit new States ? Congress and 
 Congress alone has the power to form govern- 
 ments for the Territories of the United States. 
 If he holds, then, this to be a Territory, he ex- 
 ercises a power conferred by the Constitution on 
 Congress. So take it in any way you please, 
 and the President is excising power absolutely 
 forbidden by the Constitution. 
 
 I regard the amnesty proclamation as a most 
 unfortunate one. I believe it will put off and 
 delay a cessation of hostilities, and perhaps a 
 reconstruction of the Union, for n|Jong time to 
 come. I admit that the President is clothed 
 with the pardoning power ; but when he under- 
 took to issue an amnesty proclamation he should 
 have made that proclamation ample, full, com- 
 plete ; he should have restored these people to 
 all their rights of person and property under 
 the Constitution ; he should have told all those 
 who came back and rallied under the old flag 
 that they should enjoy all the rights and all the 
 protection that the Constitution secures to a 
 citizen of the United States. By such a proc- 
 lamation the President would have weakened 
 the rebel cause. I believe that if such a proc- 
 lamation were now issued Arkansas and many 
 of the border States of the confederacy would 
 soon return to the Union. 
 
 As it is, you place upon them the most hu- 
 miliating conditions, conditions that a brave 
 and honest people who love liberty never, never 
 will submit to. Why, sir, is there a Senator 
 here who would, for the purpose of being per- 
 mitted to exercise the right of citizenship in a 
 democratic and x-epublican Government, take 
 an oath that he would be bound to support all 
 the proclamations that the Executive should 
 issue on any one given subject? No, sir. The 
 whole scheme of the President is impracticable. 
 The object, in my judgment, is not to bring 
 those States back into the Union in good faith, 
 but to establish a kind of rotten-borough sys-' 
 tern, to have votes to help to re-elect him Presi- 
 dent. We may as well speak plainly as we are 
 speaking on the subject. I believe the expedi- 
 tion sent down to Florida was for the purpose 
 of inaugurating the same system there ; and 
 that foolish and disastrous expedition results 
 about this way : a loss of fifteen hundred of the 
 soldiers of the United States in an effort to get 
 three electoral votes. 
 
 I stated a moment ago that the Executive was 
 swallowing up every other department of the 
 Government. I am not going to consume the 
 time of the Senate by reciting at any great 
 length the usurpations of the Administration. 
 
 The President and the party in power have vio- 
 lated the Constitution in almost every vital part. 
 The Constitution confers on Congress the power 
 to raise and support armies, and to provide and 
 to maintain a Navy. The President has added 
 to the regular Army twenty thousand men with- 
 out warrant of law. He has added eighteen 
 thousand seamen to the Navy without the au- 
 thority of law. The Constitution has been 
 violated by taking money from the Treasury 
 without authority of law. 
 
 " The freedom of speech has been violated by 
 the arrest and imprisonment of a number of 
 persons, charged with no crime, and whose only 
 offense was the utterance of sentiments distaste- 
 ful to the men in power. 
 
 " The freedom of the press has been subverted 
 by the suppression of a number of newspapers. 
 
 " The right to security from arrest when no 
 crime is charged has been disregarded in the ar- 
 rest and incarceration of a large number of per- 
 sons, denounced by the parasites of the Admin- 
 istration as 'sympathizers with the rebellion.' 
 
 " The right to security from unlauful searches 
 and seizures has been violated in numerous in- 
 stances, in which domiciles have been visited, 
 and papers, &c, seized without legal authority. 
 
 " The right of a trial by jury has been refused 
 in the cases of citizens arrested and impris- 
 oned, or banished by military orders of courts- 
 martial. 
 
 " The freedom of every citizen has been taken 
 from him by the illegal and unnecessary sus- 
 pension of the right to demand the writ of ha- 
 beas corpus. 
 
 " The right of the property has been abrogated 
 by the emancipation proclamation and the con- 
 fiscation act. 
 
 "The inviolability of contracts has been de- 
 stroyed by the act which makes depreciated 
 Treasury notes a legal tender for all debts. 
 
 " The freedom of religious toorship has been 
 violated on repeated occasions by the interfer- 
 ence of military officers. 
 
 " The right of States to the management of their 
 militia has been taken from them by the con- 
 scription act, which places the whole military 
 power of the country at the disposal of tha 
 President. 
 
 " The formation of the State of West Virginia 
 was a violation of the third section of the fourth 
 article of the Constitutipn. 
 
 " The heretofore undisputed right of the people 
 to elect their legislators and rulers has been taken 
 from them, and the will of majorities disregard- 
 ed, as is abundantly manifested in the maifher 
 in which elections have recently been carried 
 by the grossest corruption, by military orders, 
 in the border States of the South. 
 
 Nearly all the violations of the Constitution 
 that I have enumerated have been by the Execu- 
 tive Department of the Government. It seems 
 to me that the Executive, aided by the military 
 power, has swallowed up the powers of this 
 Government, both State and national, almost 
 as completely as the rod of Aaron swallowed 
 up the rods of the magicians. 
 
29 
 
 We are all subject at any day to arrest and 
 imprisonment without warrant, without trial, 
 without a hearing. We find the President, 
 through his Secretaries and military command- 
 ers, exercising that power. I regard the pres- 
 idential office as a unit, and that all those Sec- 
 retaries act by virtue of his authority. They 
 are but his chief clerks, as Mr. Randolph used 
 to call them, and the present Secretary of State, 
 in one of his dispatches to some Government 
 in Europe, says it is all the action of the Pres- 
 ident, whether done by one of the Departments 
 or another. That is certainly the true theory 
 of the Government. Citizens of the highest 
 position and respectability have been arrested 
 without warrant and thrown into prisoif, where 
 
 j they have languished, some of them, as long as 
 seventeen months without accusation or trial. 
 These officials go on as if they nvould enjoy 
 power forever. This is an exercise of power 
 that would have caused a dictator of Rome to 
 be punished. Cicero, during his consulship, 
 when he was engaged in putting down the con- 
 spiracy of "Catiline, being clothed with dictato- 
 rial power by the Roman Senate, put to death 
 five Roman citizens, and that, too, with the ad- 
 vice and consent of the Senate. For overthrow- 
 ing that conspiracy no man ever was more 
 lauded, and for that he was called parens patrix ; 
 but after that struggle was over, Cicero, who 
 had been so eulogized by all Rome, was in- 
 dicted, tried, convicted, and banished because 
 
 *he had put a Roman citizen to death without 
 trial. Yes, sir, with a written Constitution that 
 absolutely forbids it, when there is no authority 
 fn our Government to confer dictatorial power 
 upon the President, he imprisons at will thou- 
 sands of our citizens without charge, without 
 trial. Sir, the President and his satraps had 
 botter beware. A brave people will not stand 
 these things always. A day of reckoning will 
 come, and an awful day it will be to those 
 guilty men who have overthrown and trodden 
 under foot the Constitution and laws of their 
 country, and unlawfully deprived the people, of 
 their dearest rights. 
 
 It is pleasant when we see that a gleam of 
 light has broken in upon persons from whom 
 we expected little good. I hold in my hands an 
 extract from a speech of the most distinguished 
 radical in America — a man of learning, a man 
 of eloquence, indeed of rare elocution. I had 
 thought that his whole soul was fully absorbed 
 in this negro question, and that he could not 
 talk without bringing it in. I mean Wendell 
 Phillips. But while I think him a fanatic of 
 the deepest dye, he differs from others of his 
 party ;. he sometimes has lucid intervals. Al- 
 low me to read an extract from a speech of that 
 eloquent man on this very point. 
 
 "But let mo remind you of another tendency of the time. 
 You know for instance, that the writ of habeas corpus by 
 which Government is bound to reader a reason to the judi- 
 ciary before it lays its hands upon a citizen, hasbeen called 
 the high-water mark of English liberty. The present Na- 
 poleon, in his treatise on the English Constitution, calls it 
 the germ of English institutions. Lieber says that that, with 
 free meetings like this, and a free press, are the three ele- 
 ments which distinguish liberty from despotism, and all 
 
 that Saxon blood has gained in the battles and toils of two 
 hundred years are those three things. Nov, today, every 
 one of those— habeas corpus, tho right of free' meeting and 
 free press, is annihilated in every square mile of the Repub- 
 lic. We live to-day, every one of us, under martial law or 
 mob law. Tho Secretary of State puts into his bastlle, wtth 
 a warrant as responsible as that of Lewis, any man whom 
 he pleases ; and you know that neithor press nor lips may 
 venture to arraign the Government without being silenced. 
 " We are tending with rapid stides— you say, inevitable • 
 I don t deny it, necessarily ; I don't question it ; we are 
 tending to that strong Government which frighteno'd Jeffer- 
 son ; toward that unlimited debt, that endless army. We 
 have already those alien and sedition laws which, in'l79S 
 wrecked the Federal party and summoned the Democratic 
 into existence. For tho first time on tho continent we haVe 
 passports, which even Louis Bonaparto pronounced useless 
 and odious. For the first time in our history, Government 
 spies frequent our great cities." 
 
 That, sir, is a very graphic and truly elo- 
 quent picture of the times in which we are, and 
 I hope the country will take warning. We seem 
 to have yielded everything to 'the military 
 power, and I regret to say with a tameness and 
 submission which, in my judgment, are unbe- 
 coming members of an American Congress. A 
 military republic we have, and we have a re- 
 public but in name— the animating principle, 
 the security of the citizen in life, liberty, and 
 property, is gone-. Allow me to call attention 
 to an extract on that subject from one of the 
 speeches of the great Webster, who spoke upon 
 that, as he did upon most other subjects, 
 with the most profund wisdom. This is from 
 his speech delivered oh the completion of the 
 Bunker Hill monument : 
 
 " A military republic, a Government founded on mock 
 elections, and supported only by the sword, is a movement 
 indeed, but a retrograde and disastrous movement from the 
 regular and old-fashoned monarchical system. If men 
 would enjoy tho blessings of republican Government they 
 must govern themselves by reason, by mutual counsel, and 
 consultation, by a sense and feeling of generalinterest, and 
 by tho acquiescence of the minority in tho will of the ma- 
 jority, properly expressed • and above all, tho military 
 must bo kept, according to the langago of our Bill of Rights, 
 in strict subordination to the civil authority. Whenever 
 this lesson is not both learned and practiced, there can be no 
 political freedom. Absurd, preposterous is it, a scoff and a 
 satire on free forms of constitutional liberty, for forms of 
 Government to be prescribed by military leaders, and the 
 right of suffrage to be exercised at the point of the sword.'' 
 
 Sir, we are in those very times ; we have seen 
 the right of suffrage exercised at the point of 
 the sword. There never was a time, it does 
 not exist now, and has not existed since this 
 unfortunate civil war commenced, in which it 
 was necessary for the President to overthrow 
 the Constitution and elevate the military above 
 the civil power. There is power enough in the 
 Constitution to furnish the President every 
 dollar every man needed for this war. Congress 
 can give him the sword and the purse. What 
 more can you confer ? Nothing. Where, then, 
 the necesity and the excuse for these wanton 
 violations of the Constitution, this reckless 
 overthrow of the liberties of the people, this 
 setting at naught the laws and the constitutions 
 of the States, the regulating of elections by the 
 sword? None. None. The genius of our Gov- 
 ernment is founded upon the principle that tho 
 military shall bo kept in strict subordination to 
 the civil power. But the friends of the Presi- 
 dent claim it as a matter of necessity to save 
 the life of the nation, when they must see that 
 
30 
 
 the President is trampling under his feet the 
 Constitution, and crushing out the liberties of 
 the people, and destroying every vital principle 
 that, gives value to free Government. 
 
 But, sir, we have had other great chieftains 
 before. There was a man who lived in this Re- 
 public that I suppose was thought by all wise 
 and good men to be almost as great as Abraham 
 Lincoln is thought to be by his cringing, truck- 
 ling, and obsequious followers ; that man was 
 George Washington. He led our armies through 
 a se"ven years' war in most trying times, when 
 the organization of the civil authority was very 
 defective. It had none of the force, none of the 
 power that we have now under our well and ad- 
 mirably adjusted Constitution ; when there was 
 great difficulty in procuring men for the army 
 and money to defray the necessary expenses of 
 the Government. Many of the States failing to 
 furnish their quotas of men and money, there 
 being no central controlling power, Congress 
 had no means of enforcing its decrees upon the 
 States. Surrounded by such embarrassments, 
 Washington for seven years led the armies of 
 the colonies until the war was brought to a suc- 
 cessful and glorious close. Did Washington, 
 during that long and arduous struggle in which 
 the colonies were engaged, ever think it neces- 
 sary to subordinate the civil to the military au- 
 thority ? No, sir ; no. In L"783, when he resign- 
 ed his commission at Annapolis, he was addressed 
 by Thomas Mifflin, President of the Continental 
 Congress, as follows : 
 
 "You have conducted the great military contest with 
 wisdom and fortitude, invariably regarding the rights of 
 the civil power through all disasters and dangers." 
 
 This I regard as the highest and most deserv- 
 ed compliment that was ever bestowed upon 
 mortal man. 
 
 Sir, I would that this vascillating, dissembling, 
 weak, and I fear wicked and corrupt, man in the 
 White House had been infused with the wisdom, 
 virtue, and patriotism that animated the soul 
 and prompted the actions of the great Washing- 
 ton in our revolutionary struggle. Washington 
 and his compatriots were engaged in a struggle 
 for civil liberty ; the sword was used only to 
 resist the encroachment of tyrants, and was 
 subordinated to the civil power. The resistance 
 was successful. They then laid broad, deep, 
 and strong the foundation of civil and religious 
 liberty. They, proclaimed the Constitution as 
 the fundamental law,' and threw it as a strong 
 and impenetrable shield around the rights of 
 the States and the liberties of the people. The 
 Executive is now using the sword which should 
 only be directed against the armed enemies of 
 the Republic for the sacrilegious purpose of sup- 
 pressing free speech, free press, and free suffrage, 
 and the overthrow of the Constitution, the 
 rights of the States, and liberties of the people 
 of the adhering States. 
 
 ATTORNEY GENERAL BATES AROUSED. 
 
 Amid the startling assumptions of the mili- 
 tary power we find that one member of the 
 Cabinet has recently woke up on this subject. 
 
 The polite and venerable Attorney General, Mr. 
 Bates, is seized with dread apprehension because 
 the military power is interfering with the civil 
 authority. I congratulate the country that the 
 first law officer of the Government has at last 
 sounded the alarm on this momentous question. 
 I will read a part of the letter of the honorable 
 Attorney General on this subject; and I do it 
 with profound satisfaction. 
 
 It seems that the military authority arrested 
 a Judge Knapp at Santa Fe, in the territory of 
 New Mexico, and imprisoned him and other- 
 wise interrupted him in the discharge of his 
 duties. He wrote a letter, and a very manly 
 one it was, protesting against the interference 
 of the military to the Attorney General. The 
 Attorney General took the matter under con- 
 sideration and conferred with his Excellency the 
 President ; and* thereupon he wrote this note to 
 Judge Knapp : 
 
 "Your letter of the 4th of August complaining of mili- 
 tary arrests was slow in reaching me, and then such was 
 the urgent and contined occupation of the President in 
 the great affairs of the Government that I ha\^ not been 
 able until now to fix his attention on the particular out- 
 rage on you, as your letter makes me believe it to be. 
 
 " There seems to be a general and a growing disposition 
 of the military wherever stationed, to engross all power, 
 and to treat the civil government with contumely, as if the 
 object were to bring it into contempt. 
 
 " I have delivered my opinion very plainly to the Presi- 
 dent, and I have reason to hope that he, in the main, con- 
 curs with me in believing that those arbitary proceedings 
 ought to be suppressed." 
 
 I am delighted that even the Attorney Gen- 
 eral has been aroused on this subject, and I 
 should have been further delighted if he had 
 announced that the President concurred with 
 him in opinion ; -but instead of that he says he 
 hopes he does in the main concur. 
 
 Now, sir, what have we seen for the last two 
 years? We have seen the military authority 
 overthrowing thG civil rights of citizens in every 
 part of the country. We have seen citizens, 
 neither engaged in the military nor naval ser- 
 vice of the United States, seized and tried before 
 drum-head courts-marflktl and punished, jjand 
 some of them banished from their country. Wo 
 have seen the military arrest judges who were 
 faithful, loyal, and true men ; for instance, 
 Judge Duff, in the State of Illinois, when pre- 
 siding in his court ; Judge Constable, of the 
 same State ; and Judge Carmichael, of Mary- 
 land. Judge Duff was brought here a prisoner 
 and lodged in the Old Capitol, and without any 
 charge being brought against him was released. 
 Judge Carmichael was* subsequently imprisoned 
 in Fort McIIenry. The Attorney General stood 
 by and saw all that, and he complained not. I 
 am glad that the imprisonment of this judge in 
 New Mexico has aroused the Attorney General 
 from his slumbers. I am rather inclined to 
 believe that the reason why the Attorney Gen- 
 eral is waking up now is that the military has 
 laid its mailed hand upon a Republican judge ; 
 for this judge was appointed by Mr. Lincoln. 
 .When Judges Constable, Duff, and Carmichael, 
 who are Democrats, were arrested, we did not 
 hear a word from the Attorney General. How- 
 ever, I congratulate the country that the Attor- 
 
31 
 
 ney General has at last woke up. It is better 
 late than never. I have no doubt, judging from 
 the long time it has taken the Attorney General 
 to come to the conclusion that the military is 
 attempting to overthrow the civil power, that 
 he will wait until the seventh angel spoken of 
 in the Revelation of John shall appear with 
 one foot upon the land and the other upon the 
 sea, trumpet in hand, and with loud and shrill 
 blast summon a guilty world to final judgment, 
 before he will begin to think for a moment 
 that judgment day is near at hand. [Laugh- 
 ter.] 
 
 But, sir, I am delighted to find that the Attor- 
 ney General is seized with dire alarm and dread 
 apprehension in consequence of the encroach- 
 ments of the military upon the civil power. 
 The usurpations on the part of the military 
 must have been very great to have Brought 
 forth the earnest protest of the Attorney Gen- 
 eral, who has not only given an opinion to the 
 President that he had a right to suspend the 
 privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, but has 
 justified the President, as far as I am advised, 
 in all of his subsequent usurpations of power- 
 So astounding have these abuses become that 
 even Mr. Bates has made protest against them. 
 
 I hope soon to hear others who have been 
 liegemen ©f the President making manly protest 
 against his usurpations ; and to hear their ap- 
 peals to their countrymen, rallying them to the 
 rescue of their down-trodden liberties and a 
 violated Constitution. 
 
 STANTON AND BUTLER RUN THE CHURCHES. 
 
 The Secretary of War, by virtue of what au- 
 thority I do not know, has undertaken to admin- 
 ister the churches. Yes, sir, Edwin M. Stan- 
 ton and General Butler are making themselves 
 kind of chief pontiffs, and are " running the 
 churches," the one in the valley of the Missis- 
 sippi and the other in Norfolk and Portsmouth. 
 If the President had decided to appoint persons 
 to regulate and supervise the churches, and to 
 take the religion of the people under his control, 
 I would have supposed he would have selected 
 gentlemen distinguished for their charity, kind- 
 ness, and benevolence ; men o/ high moral tone, 
 meek and gentle in their manners ; men eminent 
 for their piety and theological learning, whose 
 lives were adorned with every Christian virtue, 
 to have discharged this most responsible and 
 de'ieate trust. The two persons who have un- 
 lawfully assumed the control of the churches 
 have none of the qualifications that I have indi- 
 cated. ' If the President- had searched the entire 
 country I do not believe he could have found 
 two persons upon whom to confer this delicate 
 trust more unsavory than Edwin M. Stanton and 
 Benjamin F. Butler. In their manners and in- 
 tercourse they are both heartless ruffians ; they 
 are strangers to kindness, gentleness, benevo- 
 lence, and those elevated manly virtues that 
 gracofully adorn the life of a Christian gentle- 
 man. But, sir, they have usurped the power to 
 control the churches in the localities I have 
 mentioned, in violation of the Constitution and 
 
 the rights of the people who own those houses 
 of public worship. 
 
 There is a little curious history about this 
 subject. I have here the order of the Secretary 
 of War placing under the control of Bishop Ames 
 all the churches of the departments of the Mis- 
 souri, the Tennessee, and the Gulf, belonging 
 to the Methodist Episcopal Church South. This 
 is one of the most startling usurpations of the 
 military power that has fallen under my notice. 
 The Constitution secures religious freedom to 
 the citizen explicitly. Where did the Secretary 
 of War get the power to transfer all these 
 churches to the control of Bishop Ames ? Lis- 
 ten to this order : 
 
 War Department, Adjutant General's Office, 
 Washington, November 30, 1863. 
 
 To tho generals commanding the departments of the Mis* 
 souri, the Tennessee, and the Gulf, and all generals and 
 officers commanding armies, detachments, and corp9, and 
 posts, and all officers in the service of the United States in 
 the above-mentioned departments : 
 
 You are hereby directed to place at the disposal of Rev. 
 Bishop Ames all houses of worship belonging to tho Meth- 
 odist Episcopal Church South in which a loyal minister, 
 who has been appointed by a loyal bishop of said church, 
 does not now officiate. 
 
 It is a matter of great importance to the Government, in 
 its efforts to restore tranquillity to the community and peace 
 to tho nation, that Christian ministers should, by example 
 and precept, support and foster the loyal sentiment of the 
 people. 
 
 Bishop Ames enjoys the entire confidence of this Depart- 
 ment, and no doubt is entertained that all ministers who 
 may be appointed by him will be entirely loyal. You are 
 expected to give him all the aid, countenance, and support 
 practicable in the execution of his important mission. 
 
 You are also authorized and directed to furnish Bishop 
 Ames and his clerk with transportatisn and subsistence 
 when it can be done without prejudice to the service, and 
 will afford them courtesy, assistance, and protection. 
 
 By order of the Secretary of War : 
 
 E. D. TOWNSEND, 
 Amslant Adjutant General. 
 
 Sir, the first article in the Amendments of the 
 Constitution says : 
 
 " Congress shall make no law respecting an establish- 
 ment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." 
 
 The Secretary of War violated that provisien 
 of the Constitution when he assumed jurisdic- 
 tion over these churches. By what authority 
 does he assume to appoint indirectly, through 
 Bishop Ames, ministers to all the churches ia 
 the three departments mentioned belonging to 
 the people called the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church South ? Bishop Ames does not belong 
 to that church himself. He belongs to the 
 MethodistEpiscopal Church North. The Metho- 
 dist Episcopal Church North and the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church South are two separate and 
 distinct institutions. They divided, I believe, 
 in May, 1845. Since then they have been sep- 
 arate and distinct ecclesiastical bodies. Mr. 
 Stanton by this unauthorized and unconstitu- 
 tional order has clothed Bishop Ames with the 
 power to take possession of all those churches. 
 The minister may be loyal, but if he happens 
 to have been appointed by a disloyal bishop he 
 must be kicked out. Thoy did deliver a chapel 
 in Memphis under that order to Bishop Ames. 
 I have the order here, and I will read it: 
 
32 
 
 Headquarters Department or Memphis, 
 December 23, 1863. 
 Rev. Bishop Ames : 
 
 In obedience to the orders of the Secretary of War, dated 
 Washington, November 30, 1803, a copy of -which is here 
 attached, I place at your disposal a " house of worship " 
 known as " Wesley Chapel," in the city of Memphis, State 
 of Tennessee, the said house being claimed as the property 
 of the Methodist Episcopal Church South, and there being 
 no ioyal minister, appointed by a loyal bishop, now officia- 
 ting in said house of worship. 
 I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant, 
 
 JAMES C. YEATCH, 
 
 Brigadier General. 
 
 Mr. Stanton's order is being executed. «I un- 
 derstand that the minister who "was turned out 
 of that church is a most excellent man, a man 
 who preached Christ and Him crucified, and 
 never babbled politics in his pulpit or else- 
 where. He was turned out by the order of 
 Pontiff Stanton, through his instrument and 
 nuncio, Bishop Ames. I desire to cast no re- 
 flection upon Bishop Ames. I am told he is a 
 worthy man. His sense of justice must have 
 been very much blunted when he undertook 
 this ecclesiastical mission. 
 
 While this was going on, on the very day 
 * General Veatch wrote the order to deliver Wes- 
 ley Chapel to Bishop Ames, what do we find? 
 We find a letter dated on that very day, Decem- 
 ber, 23, 1863, written by the President of the 
 United States, concerning a certain minister in 
 St. Louis — Mr. McPheeters — in which the Pres- 
 dent said he knew nothing about these things, 
 and then goes on to say : 
 
 "But I must add that the United States Government 
 must not, as by this order, undertake to run the 
 churches." 
 
 ' 'We must not undertake to run the churches." 
 says the President ; and he goes on to say that 
 the Government has nothing to do with them. 
 The President seems to be profoundly ignorant 
 ©f what his chief of the War Department is 
 doing. I do not know that I can properly solve 
 the contradictions growing out of the Presi- 
 dent's declarations and the acts of his Secre- 
 tary of War and major general. 
 
 Before I pass to that point, however, let 
 me state that General Butler has issued an 
 order that the churches at Portsmouth and 
 Norfolk shall be controlled by the provost mar- 
 • shals, that they shall appoint and displace min- 
 isters in the churches, make assessments, &c, 
 subject to the approval of the commanding 
 general. Yes, sir, Ben. Butler, the Haynau of 
 America, he whose administration in New Or- 
 leans brought disgrace on our country, whose 
 friends in the House of Representatives refused 
 a few days ago to allow a resolution to pass 
 asking for a committee to investigate his. con- 
 duct, is discharging the functions of grand 
 hierarch in those cities. The provost marshal 
 may present the minister to the church, but 
 it must be by the approval of General Butler. 
 
 While all this was going on, the President 
 wrote the letter, an extract from which I have 
 read. He seems to be profoundly ignorant on 
 the subject. He says the Government must not 
 run the churches. I can only solve that by one 
 of two hypotheses, It may be that the Presi- 
 
 dent has got it into his head that he will run 
 the churches, but is not exactly ready to say so, 
 and is using Stanton and Butler as a kind of 
 feelers, as pilot-fish, as some of the friends of 
 General Fremont and General Hunter think 
 they were used in regard to the emancipation 
 proclamation. General Fremont issued an 
 emancipation proclamation. General Hunter 
 issued one, and General Phelps issued another. 
 The President revoked all those proclamations, 
 and presently he issued an emancipation pro- 
 clamation himself. Tbe friends of those par- 
 ties sometimes say that the President permitted 
 those proclamations to see which way the pop- 
 ular current was running, then revoked them ; 
 and when he found the whole radical party, i 
 the whole Republican party, pretty much con- 
 curred in that policy, then he ventured upon it 
 himself. He may be using Stanton as a pilot- 
 fish in this matter, running him ahead; and if 
 he thinks the people will not revolt at it and it 
 will not be exceedingly obnoxious, he may ven- 
 ture upon this measure. " To save the life of 
 the nation he may find it necessary to unite 
 Church and State." In the meantime his letter 
 concerning B,ev. Mr. McPheeters is thrown out 
 as something to fall back on in the event run- 
 ning the churches should appear very unpopu- 
 lar. This may be the proper solution of this 
 matter. I do not, however, think it is. 
 
 My opinion is that Stanton is doing this thing 
 upon his own authority against the wishes and 
 without the knowledge of the President. What, 
 then, is the duty of the President, if that be the 
 case? If Mr. Stanton willfully and knowingly 
 acts contrary to the wishes of the President, or 
 issues orders of the gravest importance, involv- 
 ing rights of the most delicate character, com-- 
 pelling people not to worship at all, or to wor- 
 ship under the ministry of a man whom they do 
 not want — if Mr. Stanton does this without the 
 approval of the Executive, what ought the Ex- 
 ecutive to do ? He ought to dismiss him from 
 office, and do it quickly and promptly. If he 
 does not do it the country will come to the con- 
 clusion that he does not so much object to it 
 after all, notwithstanding his assertion " that 
 the Government must not undertake to run the 
 churches." 
 
 Sir, this is a most shocking usurpation of the 
 military power ; and I think if I have the good 
 fortune to get this bill through about elec- 
 tions, I shall introduce another one punishing 
 Secretaries of War and officers of the Army who 
 attempt to appoint ministers to churches. 
 
 Mr. President, what are we to do when we 
 see such startling usurpations by the military 
 authority ? Does not our duty imperiously 
 drive us to the point of passing the most rigid 
 laws to prevent a repetition of such outrages ? 
 If we maintain our institutions and our liberties 
 at all, we must maintain free press, free speech, 
 and free suffrage, and last, but not least, free- 
 dom of religion. You see that they have all 
 been stricken down by the military power. We 
 shall fall far short of our duty unless we make 
 every law that we think is calculated to restrain 
 
33 
 
 them. The people, if they maintain this Gov- 
 ernment, must do it, as I have said, by main- 
 taining free speech, free press, and free suffrage. 
 They must do another thing. They must keep 
 separate and distinct the various departments of 
 this Government. They must not allow one de- 
 partment to encroach upon another, but each 
 department must be kept within its own sphere. 
 Then one is a check upon the other. We 
 must never allow them to be consolidated. 
 
 We should not allow the executive to encroach 
 upon the judicial or tho legislative department. 
 Neither should we allow tho legislative or the 
 judicial to encroach on each other, or the exe- 
 cutive, department. Our fathers decreed these 
 separate departments for wise purposes ; and 
 you will- have no liberty unless they are kept 
 "ndependent of each other. In a word, you will 
 uavc no liberty except in the supremacy of the 
 laws. Liberty must be regulated by law. No 
 man, beeause he may be clothed with executive, 
 judicial, or legislative power, should be allowed 
 to trample the laws under his feet. The higher 
 the official the more guilty the criminal, if he 
 violates the laws of the land, because of his 
 sworn duty to see them faithfully administered 
 or executed. I would punish a judge of the 
 Supreme Court, or the President of the United 
 States, or a Senator in Congress much more 
 
 harshly for infracting a law than I would an 
 unlettered man in the country, because they 
 know their duty ; they err knowingly, wittingly 
 and maliciously. 
 
 Mr. President, I beg the pardon of the Sen- 
 ate for trespassing upon their time so long. 
 The only excuse I have is in the importance of 
 tho subject. \ know that so important a bill 
 as this, taking, into consideration the circum- 
 stances by which we are surrounded, has not 
 been before this Congress. It was met at the 
 very outset with opposition. On introducing 
 the bill I hoped and believed that every Senator 
 would support it with alacrity and pleasure; 
 but it met with opposition at the threshold, and 
 against my earnest pi'otest it was referred to 
 the Committee on Military Affairs, a committee 
 to which it certainly did not properly belong. 
 After keeping it for a long time, the committee 
 have reported it back adversely, accompanied 
 by a report of fifty-two printed pages. I had to 
 review all the testimony and to examine that re- 
 port at length, and I could not get through with 
 the subject and do it justice in less time than I 
 have occupied. I hope, therefore, for the reason ] 
 have assigned, tkat the Senate will excuse me 
 for the great length of time that I have tres- 
 passed on their patience. 
 
APPENDIX, 
 
 Proclamatun\bjf the Governor. 
 
 Commonwealth of Kentucky, 
 Executive Department. 
 
 For the information and guidance of all officers at the 
 approaching election, I have caused to be herewith pub- 
 lished an act of the Legislature of Kentucky, entitled " An 
 net to amend chapter fifteen of the Revised Statutes, entitled 
 • Citizens, Expatriation, and Aliens.' " 
 
 The strict observance and enforcement of this, and all 
 other laws of this State regulating elections, are earnestly 
 enjoined and required, as being alike duo to a faithful dis- 
 charge of duty, to the purity of elective franchise, and to 
 the sovereign will of the people of Kentucky, expressed 
 through their Legislature. 
 
 Given under my hand as Governor of Kentucky, at Frank- 
 fort, this 10th day of July, 1SG3, and in the seventy-second 
 year of the Commonwealth. 
 
 J. F. ROBINSON. 
 By the Governor : 
 
 D. C. Wickuffk, Secretary of State. 
 
 An act to amend chapter fifteen of the Revised Statutes 
 entitled "Citizens, Expatriation, and Aliens." 
 
 Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the Commonwealth 
 of Kentucky, That any citizen of this State who shall enter 
 into the service of the so-called confederate States, in cither 
 a civil or military capacity, or into the service of the so- 
 called provisional government of Kentucky, in cither a 
 civil or military capacity, or having heretofore entered such 
 service of either the confederate States or provisional gov- 
 ernment, sha'4 continue in such corvico nftor this act tukes 
 effect, or shall take up or continue in arms against the mili- 
 tary forces of the United States or the State of Kentucky, 
 or shall give voluntary aid and assistance to those in arms 
 agaiust said forces, shall be deemed to have expatriated 
 himself, and shall no longer be a citizen of Kentucky, nor 
 shall ho again be a citizen, except by permission of the 
 Legislature by a general or'special statute. 
 
 Sec. 2. That whenever a person attempts or is called on 
 to exercise any of the constitutional or legal rights and 
 privileges belonging only to citizens of Kentucky, ho mny 
 be required to negative on oath tho expatriation provided 
 in the first section of this act ; and upon his failure or re- 
 fusal to do so, shall not bo permitted to exercise any such 
 right or privilege. 
 
 Sec. 3. This actto be of force in thirty days from and 
 after its passage. 
 
 Passed and became a law, the objections of tho Governor 
 to the contrary notwithstanding, March 11, 1S62. 
 
 The following is the affidavit which may be used to neg- 
 ative the expatriation provided in the first section of the 
 above act, upon the failure or refusal to take which no one 
 
 can run for an office or vote for a candidate. It is the duty 
 of all election officers to require it. 
 
 " You, A B, do solemnly swear that since the 11th day 
 of April, 1862, you have not entered into nor been in the 
 servica of the so-called confederate States, nor in the ser- 
 vice of the provisional government of Kentucky, in either 
 a civil or military capacity ; *and you do further solemnly 
 swear that since tho paid 11th day of April, 1862, you have 
 not taken up or been in arms against the military forcesof 
 the United States or the military forces of the State of Ken- 
 tucky; and you do further solemnly swear that since the 
 said 11th day of April, 1862, you have in no way, either 
 directly or indirectly, given any voluntary aid or assistance 
 to any person or persons who were in arms against the mil- 
 itary forces of the State of Kentucky. So help you God." 
 
 [General Orders, No. 120.] 
 
 Headquarters Department of the Ohio, . 
 
 Cincinnati, Onio, July 31, 1803. 
 
 Whereas the State of Kentucky is invaded by a rebel 
 force, with tho avowed intention of overawing the judges 
 of elections, of intimidating the loyal voters, keeping them 
 from tho polls, and forcing tho election of disloyal candi- 
 dates at the election on the 3d of August ; and whereas 
 the military power of tho Government is the only force that 
 can defeat this attempt, the State of Kentucky is hereby 
 declared under martial law, and all military officers are 
 commanded to aid the constituted authorities of the State 
 in tbe-support of the laws and of tho purify of suffrage, as 
 defined in tb* late proclamation of bis Excellency Governor 
 Robinson. As it is not the intention of the commanding 
 general to interfere with the proper expression of public 
 opinion, all discretion in the conduct of the election will be, 
 as usual, in tho hands of the legally appointed judges at 
 the poMs, who will bo held strictly responsible that no dis- 
 loyal person will be allowed to vote, and to this end the 
 military power is ordered to give them its utmost support. 
 The civil authority, civil courts, and business will not be 
 suspended by this order. It is for the purpose only of pro- 
 tecting, if necessary, tho rights of loyal citizens, and the 
 freedom of election. 
 
 By command of Major General Burnside. 
 
 LEWIS RICHMOND, A. A. G. 
 
 General Hartsnff and Rebel SympaUiizert. 
 
 [General Orders, No. 14.] 
 
 No. 4.] Headquarters Twenty-Third Army Corps, 
 
 Lexington, Kentuckt, July 'Z4, 1S63. 
 For the information and guidance of officers in impress- 
 ing property, it is hereby directed that, whenever its im- 
 pressment may become necessary for the troops of the 
 twenty-third ArmyCorps.it will be taken exclusively from 
 rebels and rebel sympathizers ; and so long as the property 
 
35 
 
 needed is to be found belonging or partaining to either of 
 the above-named classes, no man of undoubted loyalty 
 will be molested. ^ 
 
 Among robel sympathizers will be classed those pe^ns 
 in Kentucky, nominally Union men, but opposed to the 
 Government and to the prosecution of the war, whose acts 
 and words alike hinder the speedy and proper termination 
 of the rebellion. Mk 
 
 Property will only be taken by*Bne proper staff officers, 
 who will in every case give receipts for it. Appropriate 
 blank receipts will be furnished by the chief commissary 
 and chief quartermaster at these headquarters. 
 
 By command of Major General Hartsuff. 
 
 GEORGE B. DRAKE, A. A. G. 
 
 No. 7.] 
 
 Headquarters District op Kentucky, 
 Louisville, July 25, 1S63. 
 
 By authority of the general commanding the depart- 
 ment, the following general order is made: 
 
 1. It is ordered that no forage or other property belong- 
 ing to loyal citizens in the State of Kentucky bo seized or 
 impressed except in cases of absolute necessity, and then 
 only on the written authority from the headquarters of the 
 twenty-third Army corps or from these headquarters. 
 
 2. Whenever it becomes necessary to seize or impress 
 private property for military purposes, the property of 
 sympathizers with the rebellion and of those opposed to fur- 
 nishing any more men or any more money to maintain the 
 Federal Government and suppress the rebellion will be first 
 seized and impressed. 
 
 3. The negroes of loyal citizens will not b* impressed on 
 the public works and military roads unless absolutely ne- 
 cessary. The negroes cf citizens who are for no more meu 
 and uo more money to suppress the rebellion, and the sup- 
 porters, aiders, and abettors of such, will be first impressed, 
 and officers detailed for the purpose are required strietty to 
 Observe this order in the execution of their duties. 
 
 4. All horses of the enemy captured or subject to capture 
 will be taken possession of by quartermasters and reported 
 to Captain Jenkins, chief quartermaster, Louisville, who is 
 ordered to allow loyal citizens to retain horses to supply 
 the places of those stolen by the enemy ; but disloyal per- 
 sons mentioned in paragraphs two and three, who encour- 
 age raids by the enemy, will not in any case be allowed to 
 retain captured horses or horses justly subject tocapture. 
 
 5. For all property seized or impressed proper and regu- 
 lar vouchers will be given, with indorsement as to the loy- 
 alty or disloyalty of the owners of the property. 
 
 By order of Brigadier General Boyle : 
 
 A. C. SEMPLE, A. A. G. 
 
 [General Orders, No. 23.1 
 
 Headquarters First Bric&de, 
 Sscond Division, Twenty-Third Army Corps, 
 Russbllyille, Kentucky, July 30, 1863. 
 
 Tu order that the proclamation of the Governor and the 
 laws of the State of Kentucky may be observed and en- 
 forced, post commandants and officers of this command will 
 see that the following regulations are strictly complied 
 with at the approaching State election : 
 
 None but loyal citizens will act as officers of the election. 
 
 No one will be allowed to offer himself as a candidate for 
 office, or be voted for at said election, who is not in all 
 things loyal to the State and Federal Government, and in 
 favor of a vigorous prosecution of the war for the suppres- 
 sion of the rebellion. 
 
 The judges of election will allow no ono to vote at said 
 election unless he is known to them to be an undoubtedly 
 loyal citizen, or unless he shall first take the oath required 
 by the laws of the State of Kentucky. 
 
 No disloyal man will offer himself as a candidate, or at- 
 tempt to vote, except for treasonable purposes ; and all such 
 efforts will be summarily suppressed by the military au- 
 thrities. 
 
 All necessary protection will he supplied and guarantied 
 at the polls to Union men by all the military force within 
 this command. 
 
 By order of Brigadier General J. M. Shackleford, com- 
 manding : 
 
 . J. E. HUFFMAN", 
 
 Assistant Adjutant General. 
 
 Oath to he taken at the Election. 
 
 I do solemnly swear that I have not been in the Servlco 
 of the so-called confederate States .in cither a civil or mili- 
 tary capacity, or in the service of the so-called provisional 
 government of Kentucky ; that I have not givm any aid, 
 assistance or comfort to any person in arms against the 
 United states; and that I have in all things demeaned my- 
 self as a loyal citizen since the beginning of the present 
 rebellion ; so help me God. 
 
 Colonel John W. Foster, of the sixty-fifth In- 
 diana regiment, commanding post at Henderson, 
 Kentucky, issued an order similar to the above 
 order' of General Shackleford. 
 
 [General Order.] 
 
 Headquarters United States Forces, 
 
 Smithland, Kentucky, July 16, 1S63. 
 
 Tho county court judges of the counties of Trigg, CalJ- 
 well, Lyon, Crittenden and Livingston, are hereby directed, 
 in appointing judges and clerks for conducting the State 
 elections in August next, to observe strictly the laws of Ken- 
 tucky, which require that such judges and clerks shall bo 
 unconditional Union men. 
 
 Judges and clerks so aproiuted are hereby directed not 
 to place the namo of any person on tho poll-books to be 
 vofed for at said election who is not a Union man, or who 
 may be opposed to furnishing men and money for a vigorous 
 prosecution of the war against the rebellion against the United 
 States Government. The judges and clerks are further di- 
 rected to permit uo person to vote at said election without 
 taking the oath required by the laws of Kentucky, unless 
 said person so presenting himself to vote is personally 
 known to the judges to bo a Union man. 
 
 Any person violating this order will bo regarded as an 
 enemy to the Government of the United States, and will be 
 arrested and punished accordingly. 
 
 By order of THOMAS JOHNSON, 
 
 Lieutenant Colonel Commanding. 
 
 The oath prescribed by Lieutenant Colonel 
 Johnson, to be taken by voters, is in substance 
 similar to the oath attached to the proclamation 
 of General Shackleford. 
 
 [Special Orders, No. 158.] 
 
 Headquarters Sixteenth Army Corps, 
 
 Memphis, Tennessee, July, 1863. 
 I. In so much of the State of Kentucky as is within tho 
 district of Columbus, it is ordered — 
 
 1. That no person be permitted to he a candidate for offlcn 
 who is not avowedly und unconditionally for tho Union and 
 the suppression of the rebellion. 
 
 2. That uo person shall exercise the privilege of an elec- 
 tor and vote at said elections who is not avowedly and un 
 conditionally for the Union and the suppression of the re- 
 bellion. 
 
 3. The military authorities in said district of Columbus 
 will see to it that this order be carried out. Judges of elec- 
 tion will bo governed by the principles herein set forth, and 
 will demand evidence upon oaths in such cases as may be 
 in doubt, and allow no person to exercise the franchise of 
 voting who does not take the oath required. 
 
 By orders of Major General S. A. Hurlbut : 
 
 HENRY DIXMORE, 
 Assistant Adjutant General. 
 
 [Orders.] 
 
 Headquarters District op Columbus, 
 Sixth Division, Sixteenth Army Corps, 
 Columbus, Kentucky, July 15,'1S63. 
 The above orders of the general commanding corps aro 
 communicated to the civil and military authorities for their 
 information. Military officers making arrests for violation 
 of these orders will be governed by the circu'ar from office 
 of Commissary General of Prison, dated 'Washington, May 
 11,1563. . 
 
 By order of Brigadier General Asboth. 
 
 T. H. nARRRIS. 
 Assistant Adjutant General. 
 
36 
 
 [General Orders, No. 47.] 
 
 District op Columbus, 
 Headquarters, Sixth Division, 
 Sixteenth Army Corps, 
 Columbus, Kt., July 29, 1S63. 
 
 That no further doubt may exist as to the intent and 
 moaning of Special Orders No. 159, dated Headquarters 
 Sixteenth Army Corps, July 14, 18C3, it is ordered that no 
 person shall be permitted to be voted for, or he a candidate 
 for office, who has been or is now under arrest or bonds, 
 by property authority, for uttering disloyal language or 
 Bontiments. 
 
 County judges within this district are hereby ordored to 
 appoint, as judges and clerks of the ensuing August elec- 
 tion, only such persons as are avowedly and unconditionally 
 for the Union and the suppression of the rebellion, and are 
 further ordered to revoke and recall any appointment of 
 judges and clerks already made, who are not such loyal 
 persons. , 
 
 Judges and clerks of elections are hereby ordered not to 
 place the name of any person upon the poll -books, to be 
 voted for at said election, who is not avowedly and uncon- 
 ditionally for the Union and the suppression of the rebel- 
 lion, or may be opposed to furnishing men and money for 
 the suppression of the rebellion. 
 
 The following oath is prescribed and will be administered 
 by judges of elections to voters and to such candidates as 
 reside within this district : , 
 
 " I do solemnly swear that I have never entered the ser- 
 vice of the so-called confederate States; that I have not 
 been engaged in the service of the so-called ' provisional 
 government of Kentucky,' either in a civil or military ca- 
 pacity; that I have never, either directly or indirectly, 
 aided the rebellion against the Government of the United 
 States or the State of Kentucky; that I am uncondition- 
 ally for the Union and the suppression of the rebellion, and 
 am willing to furnish men and money for the vigorous 
 prosecution of the war against the rebellious league known 
 as the ' confederate States;' so help me God." 
 
 Any voter, judge, or clerk of elections, or other persons, 
 who may evade, neglect, or refuse compliance with the pro- 
 visions of this order will be arrested and sent before a mil- 
 itary commission as soon as the facts are substantiated. 
 
 By order of Brigadier General Asboth. 
 
 T. H. HARRIS, 
 Assistant Adjutant General 
 
 On this order of General Asboth is the fol- 
 lowing indorsement : 
 
 I had the within order enforced in the counties of Mc- 
 Crackeu, Graves, Callaway, and Marshall. 
 
 J. S. MARTIN, 
 Colonel Commanding Post of Paducah. 
 
 No. 14.] 
 
 Deatsvtlle, Nelson County, Kentucky, 
 
 August 3, 1S63. 
 
 I, Moses D. Leeson, captain commanding company B, 
 
 fifth Indiaua cavalry, hereby cortify that under the oidcrs 
 
 and instructions of Lieutenant Colonel Thomas H. Butler, 
 commanding fifth Indiana cavalry, I ordered the polls to be 
 opened by the regularly appointed judges, sheriff, and clerk, 
 namely W. R. Livers, T. C. Warren, Thomas Cown, and 
 R. E. Harrcll, and permitted no other candidates' names to 
 appear on the poll-books but the following : for Governor, 
 Thomas E. Bramlette ; for Lieuteuaut Governor, R. T. Ja- 
 cob • for attorney general, John M. Harlan ; for State treas- 
 urer, James Garrard ; for auditor, W. T. Samuels ; for reg- 
 ister of land office, James A. Davidson ; for superintendent 
 of public instruction, Stevenson ; for Congress, Aaron Har- 
 ding • for the Legislature, Dr. W. Elliott : for county attor- 
 ney, G. W. Hite ; lor county clerk, W. T. Spalding and Wil- 
 liam M. Powell. 
 
 MOSES D. LEESON, 
 Captain Commanding Company B, Fifth, Indiana Cavalry. 
 
 No. 15.1 
 
 We, the undersigned, do hereby certify, as officers of 
 Precinct No. 2, at Cloverport, Kentucky, that, alter opening 
 the polls, Captain Hernbook, by authority from General 
 Shackleford, ordered us to strike off the entire Wickliffe 
 
 ticket, and also Milton Board's name, from the poll-book, 
 Which was accordingly done in obedience to said order. 
 
 • WILLIAM B. JONES,) Judaa 
 
 WILLIAM S. ALLEN, .r"^ - 
 Attest : J. C. Hest, Cleric. 
 
 J. R. Allen, Sheriff. 
 
 #_ 
 
 Forks of Rough, August 3, 1863. 
 I do certify that at Rough Creek Spring precinct, District 
 No. 4, there was a poll opened for C. A. Wickliffe and oth- 
 ers forming a Democratic ticket, and for Stato officers ; that 
 I suppressed tho same by order of General Shackleford, 
 between seven and eight o'clock a. m. 
 
 WILLIAM BROWN, 
 Sergeant in Command. 
 
 [General Orders, No. 53.] 
 
 Headquarters Middle Department, 
 
 Eighth Army Corps, i 
 
 Baltimore, Maryland, October 27, 1863. 
 It is known that there are many evi [-disposed persons, 
 now at largo in the State of Maryland, who have been en- 
 gaged in rebellion against tho lawful Government, or have 
 given aid and comfort or encouragement to others so en- 
 gaged, or who do not recognize their allegiance to the Uni- 
 ted States, and who may avail themselves of the indulgence 
 of the authority which tolerates their presence to embar- 
 rass the approaching election, or, through it, to foist ene- 
 mies of tho United States into power. It is therefore or- 
 dered, 
 
 1. That all provost marshals and other military officers 
 do arrest all such persons-found at, or hanging about, or 
 approaching any poll or place of election ob the 4th of No- 
 vember, 1863, and report such arrest to these headquar- 
 ters. 
 
 2. That all provost marshals and other military officers 
 commanding in Maryland shall support the judges of elec- 
 tion on the 4th of November, 1S63, in requiring an oath of 
 allegiance to the United States, as the test of citizenship 
 of any ono whose vote may be challenged on the ground 
 that he is not loyal, or does not admit his allegiance to the 
 United States, which oath shall be in the following form and 
 terms : 
 
 " I do solemnly swear that I will support, protect, and » 
 defend the Constitution and Government of tho United States 
 against all enemies, whether domestic or foreign ; that I 
 hereby pledge my allegiance, faith, and loyalty to the same, 
 any ordinance, resolution, or law of any State convention 
 or State Legislature to the contrary notwithstanding ; that 
 I will at all times yield a hearty and willing obedience to 
 the said Constitution and Government ; and will not, either 
 directiy or indirectly, do any act in hostility to the same, 
 cither by, taking up arms against them, or aiding, abetting, 
 or countenancing those in arms against them ; that, without 
 permission from tho lawful authority, I will have no com- 
 munication, direct or indirect, with the States in insurrec- 
 tion against tho United States, or with either of them, or 
 with any person or persons within said insurrectionary 
 States ; and that I will in aH things deport myself as a good 
 and loyal citizen of the United States. This I do in good 
 faith, with full determination, pledge, and purpose to keep 
 this, my sworn obligation, and without any montal reserva- 
 tion or evasion whatever." 
 
 3. Provost marshals and other military officers are di- 
 rected to report to these headquarters any judge of an elec- 
 tion who shall refuse his aid in carrying out this order, or 
 who, on challenge of a vote being made on the ground of 
 disloyalty or hostility to tho Government, shall refuse to 
 require tie oath of allegiance from such voter. 
 
 By order of Major General Schenck : 
 
 W. II. CHESEBROUGH, 
 Lieutenant Colonel and Assistant Adjutant General. 
 
 War Department, 
 Washington, November 2, 1863. 
 Sir : Tours of the 31st ultimo was received yesterday 
 about noon, aud since then I have been giving most earnest 
 attention to the subject-matter of it. At my call General 
 Schenck has attended, and he assures me it is almost certain 
 that violence will bo used at some ofthe voting places on 
 election day, unless prevented by his provost guards. He 
 says that at some of those places the Union voters will not 
 
 * 
 
37 
 
 ttend at all, or run a ticket, unless they have some assu- 
 
 ance of protection. This makes the Missouri case of my 
 action, in regard to which you express your approval. 
 
 The remaining point of your letter is a protest against 
 any person offering to vote being put to any test not found 
 in the laws of Maryland. This brings us to a difference be- 
 tween Missouri and Maryland. With the same reason In 
 both States, Missouri has, by law, provided a test for the 
 Toter with reference to the present rebellion, while Mary- 
 laud has not. For example, General Trimble, captured 
 fighting us at Gettysburg, is, without recanting his treason, 
 a legal voter by the laws of Maryland. Even General 
 Schenck's order admits him to vote, if he recants upon oath. 
 I think that is cheap enough. My order in Missouri, which 
 you'approve, and General Schenck's order here, reach pre- 
 cisely the same end. Each assures the right of voting to 
 aH loyal men, and whether a man is loyal, each allows that 
 man to fix by his own oath. Your suggestion that nearly 
 all the candidates are loyal I do not think quite meets the 
 case. In this struggle for the nation's life, I cannot so con- 
 fidently rely on those whose election may have depended 
 upon disloyal votes. Such men, when elected, may prove 
 true, Vut such votes are given them in the expectation that 
 they will prove false. Nor do I think that to keep the 
 peace at the polls, and to prevent the persistently disloyal 
 from voting, constitutes just cause of offense to Maryland. 
 I think sho has her own example for it. If I mistake not, 
 it is precisely what General Dix did when your Excelleney 
 was elected Governor. I revoke the first of the three proposi- 
 tions in General Schenck's General Order No. 53, not that 
 it is wrong in priuciple, but because the military being, of 
 necessity, exclusive judges as to who shall bo arrested, the 
 provision is liable to abuse. For the revoked part I sub 
 Btituto the following: 
 
 That all provost marshals and other military officers do 
 prevent all disturbance and violence at or about the polls, 
 whether offered by sush persons as above described, or by 
 any other person or persons whatsoever. 
 
 The other two propositions of the order I allow to stand 
 General Schenck is fully determined, and has my strict 
 order besides, that all loyal men may vote, and vote for 
 whom they please. 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 A. LINCOLN, 
 President of the United States. 
 
 His Excellency A. W- Bradford, 
 
 Governor of Maryland. 
 
 t ExEcunvE Mansion, 
 Washington, January 20, 1804. 
 Major General Steele fS(K 
 
 Sundry citizens of the State of Arkansas petition me that 
 an election may be held in that State at which to elect a 
 Governor ; that it be assumed at that election, and hence- 
 forward, that tho constitution and laws of the State as 
 before the rebellion are in full forco, except that the consti- 
 tution is so modified as to declare that there shall be neither 
 slavery nor involuntary servitude, except in the punish- 
 ment of crimes, whereof the party shall have been duly 
 convicted ; that the General Assembly may make such pro- 
 vision for the freed people as shall recognize and declare 
 their permanent freedom, and provide for their education, 
 and whic\i may yet be construed as a temporary arrange- 
 ment suitable to their present condition as a laboring, 
 landless, and homeless class ; that said election shall be 
 held on tho 2Sth of March, 1864, at all the usual places of 
 the State, or all such as voters may attend for that pur- 
 rose ; that the voters may attend at such place at eight 
 o'clock in the morning of said day, may choose judges and 
 clerks of election for that purpose ; that all persons quali- 
 fied by said constitution and laws, and taking the oath 
 presented in the President's proclamation of December 8, 
 1864, either before or at the election, and none others, may 
 be voters ; that each set of judges and clerks may make 
 
 returns directly to you, on or before the day of 
 
 next ; that in all other respects said elections may be con- 
 ducted according to said modified constitution and laws ; 
 that, on receipt of said returns, when five thousand four 
 hundred and six votes shall have been cast, you can re- 
 rceive said votes, and ascertain all who shall thereby appear 
 
 to have been elected : that on tho day of next all 
 
 persous appearing to nave been elected, who shall appear 
 before you at Little Rock, and take the oath, to be by you 
 Severally administered, to support the Constitution of th 
 
 United States and said modified constitution of the State o 
 Arkansas, and be by you declared qualified aud empowered 
 to enter immediately upon the duties of tho office to which 
 they have been respectively oleeted. 
 
 You will please order an election to tako plaoe on tho 
 28th of March, 1864, aud returns to bo made iu fifteen days 
 thereafter. 
 
 A. LINCOLN. 
 
 General Butler recently issued the following 
 order : 
 
 (General Orders, No. 3.) 
 
 Norfolk, Virginia, February 11, 1S64. 
 
 All places of public worship in Norfolk and Portsmouth ' 
 arc heroby placed UDdcr the control of the provost mar- 
 shals of Norfolk and Portsmouth respectively, who shall see 
 the pulpits properly filled by displacing, when necessary, 
 the present incumbents, and substituting men of known 
 loyalty and the same sectarian denomination, either mili- 
 tary or civil, subject to the approval of tho commanding 
 general. They shall see that all churches are open freely to 
 all officers and soldiers, white or colored, at the usual hour 
 of worship, and at other times, if desired ; and they shall 
 seo that no insult or indignity be offered to them, either by 
 word, look, or gesture, on the part of the congregation. 
 The necessary expenses will bo levied, as far as possible, 
 in accordance with the previous usages or regulations of 
 each congregation respectively. 
 
 No property shall bo removed, either public or private, 
 without permission from these headquarters. 
 
 By command of Brigadior Genoral E. A. Will. 
 
 Louisville, June 13, 1863. 
 
 Dear Sir: The undersigned, in behalf of maDy in a3 
 parts of this Commonwealth, believe it a political necessity 
 to reorganize the Democratic party in tho State, in associa- 
 tion with those of the North who have stood by the Gov- 
 ernment and the Constitution throughout this deplorable 
 civil war. They constitute the only political party of tho 
 North with whom any party South will have any affilia- 
 tion, while a political association between the two sec- 
 tions of the country is indispensable to a restoration of the 
 Union. 
 
 We cannot consent to the doctrine that the Constitution 
 and laws are inadequate to the presont emergency ; that 
 the constitutional guarantees of liberty and property can be 
 suspended by war. 
 
 Our fathers certainly did not intend that our Constitution 
 should be a fair-weather document, to bo laid away in a 
 storm, or a fancy garment to be worn only in dry weather. 
 On the contrary, it is in times like the present that consti- 
 tutional restraints on tho power of thoso iu authority ar« 
 needed. 
 
 We hold the Federal Government one of limited powers, 
 that cannot bo enlarged by the existeuco of civil commo- 
 tion. 
 
 We hold tho rights reserved to the States equally sacrod 
 
 with thoeo grantod to tho Unitod Btat.eg. Tho Government 
 
 has ncftnore right to disregard tho constitutions and laws 
 of tho States than the States havo to disregard the Constitu- 
 tion and laws of tho United States. 
 
 We hold that the Administration has committed grave 
 errors in confiscation bills, lawless proclamations, and mili- 
 tary orders settiDg aside constitutions and laws, and making 
 arrests outside of military lines where there is no public 
 danger to excuse it. 
 
 It is now obvious that the fixed purpose of the Adminis- 
 tration is to arm the negroes of the South to make war upon 
 the whites, and we hold it to be the duty of the people of 
 Kentucky to enter against such a policy a solemn and most 
 emphatic protest. 
 
 Wo hold as sacred and inalienable the right of free speech 
 and a free press ; that the Government bolongs to the peo- 
 ple and not tho people to the Government. 
 
 We hold this rebellion utterly unjustifiable in its incep- 
 tion, and a dissolution of tho Union tho greatest of calam- 
 ities. We would seo all just and constitutional means 
 adopted to tho suppression of tho one and the restoration o( 
 tho other. 
 
 Having observed your uniform and consistent course 
 since the origin of our troubles, we believe you a faithful 
 erepresentatiye of our views, and urgontly request that you 
 
38 
 
 permit your name to be used as a Democratic candidate for 
 
 Governor at the next ensuing election. 
 Yours respectfully, 
 
 W. F. BULLOCK, 
 
 ROBERT COCHRAN, 
 
 L. S. TRIMBLE, 
 
 Tilt >M AS P- HUGHES, 
 
 R. C. PALMER, 
 
 ALFRED HERR, 
 
 J. P. CHAMBERS, 
 
 WILLIAM K. THOMAS, 
 
 WILLIAM G. REASOR, 
 
 ROBERT K. WHITE, 
 
 J. II. HARNEY, 
 
 WILLIAM KAYE, 
 
 N. WOLFE, 
 
 S. M. HALL, 
 
 JOHN HERR, 
 
 CHARLES L. HARRISON, 
 
 JOSHUA F. BULLITT, 
 
 GEORGE W. JOHNSTON, 
 
 ROBERT M. tMITH, 
 
 T. J. CONN, 
 
 W. A. DUDLEY, 
 
 W. P. SIMMONS, 
 
 JOHN T BRIDGES, 
 
 T. J. HALL, 
 
 SAMUEL N. HALL, 
 
 PHIL. TOMPl'ERT, Jr.. 
 
 JE-SE F. HAMMON, 
 
 P. M. CAMPION, 
 
 W. II. BAILEY, 
 
 JACOB ABNY, 
 
 J. U. PRICE. 
 
 Hon. C. A. Wickliffe. 
 
 Extract from. Slal.ute of George II, chapter 30, [1735. ] 
 
 An act far regulating the quartering of soldiers during the 
 time of the elections of members to serve in Parliament 
 
 Whereas, by the ancient common law of this land, all 
 elections ought to be free ; and whereas by an act passed in 
 the third year of the reign of King Edward I, of famous 
 memory, it is commanded upon great forfeiture that no man 
 by force of arms nor by malice or menacing shall disturb 
 any to make free election ; and forasmuch as the freedom 
 of elections of members to serve in Parliament is of the ut- 
 most consequence to the preservation of the rights and lib- 
 erties of this kingdom ; and whereas it hath been the usage 
 and practice to cause any regiment, troop, or company, or 
 any number of soldiers which hath been quartered in any 
 city, borough, town, or place where any election of mem- 
 bers tosorvein Parliament hath been appointed to be made, 
 to remove and continue out of the same during the time of 
 such election, except in such particular cases as are herein- 
 after specified : To the ehd, therefore, that the said usage 
 and practice may be settled and established for the future, 
 
 Be it enacted by the King's most excellent majesty, by and 
 Willi Vte advice and consent of the lords spiritual and tempo- 
 ral and commons in Parliament assembled, and by the au- 
 thority of the same, That when and as often as any election 
 of any peer or peers to represent the peers of Scotland in 
 Parliament, or of any member or members to serve in Par- 
 liament shall be appointed to bo made, tho i-'ficret^y at 
 
 War for the time being, or in case there shall be mo Secre- 
 tary at War, then such person who shall officiate in the 
 place cf the Secretary at War shall, and is hereby required, 
 at some convenient time before the day appointed for such 
 election, to issue and send forth. proper orders in writing 
 for the removal of every such regiment, troop, or company, 
 or other number of soldiers as shall be quartered or billeted 
 in any such city, borough, town, or place where such elec- 
 %on shall be appointed to be made, out of every such city, 
 borough, town, or place, one day at the least before the day 
 appointed for such election, to the distance of two or more 
 miles from such city, borough, town, or place, and not to 
 make any nearer approach to such city, borough, town, or 
 
 place as aforesaid until one day at the least after the poll 
 to be taken at such election shall be ended, and the poll- 
 books closed. 
 
 H. And be it further enacted by the authority aforesaid, 
 That in the case the Secretary at War for the time being, or 
 such person who shall officiate in the place of the Secretary 
 at War, shall neglect or omit to issue or send forth such 
 orders as aforesaid, according to the true intent and mean- 
 ing of this act, and shall be thereof lawfully convicted upon 
 any indictment to bo preferred at the next assizes, or ses- 
 sions of oyer and terminer, to be held for the county where 
 such offense shall be committed, or on an information to be 
 exhibited in the court of King's Bench, within six months 
 after such offense committed, such Secretary at War, or 
 person who shall officiate in the place- of the Secretary at 
 War, shall for such offense be discharged from their said 
 rospectivo offices and shall from thenceforth be 'utterly dis- 
 abled, and made incapable to hold any office or employment, 
 civil or military, in his Majesty's service. 
 
 An act to regulate elections, approved April IS, =1846. 
 
 " Pec. 33. No such election shall bo appointed to be heft. 
 on any day on which the militia of that State shall be re- 
 quired to do military duty, nor shall the militia of this State 
 be required to do military duty on any day on which any 
 such election shall be appointed to be held." — Nixon's Di- 
 gest, Laws of New Jersey, 1709-1855, p. 220. 
 
 Of the manner of conducting elections and returning votes. 
 
 " Sec. 1. No meeting for the election of national, State, 
 district, county, city, or town officers, shall be held on a day 
 upon which tho militia of the Commonwealth are by law 
 required to do military duty." — General Statutes of 'Massa- 
 chusetts, 1860, chap. 7, p. 58. 
 
 Penal provisions and regulations affecfins 
 elections. 
 
 the purity of 
 
 " Sec. 62. If any officer of the militia parades his men» 
 or exercises any military command on a day of election of 
 a public officer, as described in section sixty -three of chap- 
 ter ten, and not thereby excepted, or except in time of waj- 
 or public danger, ho shall for each offense forfeit not loss 
 than ten nor more than three hundred dollars." — Revised 
 Statutes of Maine, 1857, chap. 4, p. 84. 
 
 Penalties for the violation of election laws. 
 
 " Sec. 5. If any officer or other person shall call out or 
 order any of the militia of this State to appear and'exercise 
 on any day during any election to be he'd by virtue of this 
 chapter, or within five days previous thereto, except in 
 cases of invasion or insurrection, ho shall forfeit the sum 
 of $500 for every such offense." — Revised Statutes of New 
 Tor7c,Banlcs<£ Brothers, Fifth Edition, vol. l,.title 7, chap. 
 6, p. 448. 
 
 1. Of election by the citizens. 
 
 '•110. No body of troops in the army of tho United States 
 or of this Commonwealth shall be present, either armed 
 or unarmed, at any place of election within this Common- 
 wealth, during the time of such election: Provided, That! 
 nothing herein contained shall be so construed as to prevent 
 an officer or soldier from exercising tho right of suffrage in 
 the election district to which he may belong if otherwise 
 qualified according to law." — Purdon's Digest; Brightly, 
 1700-1SC1 ; Latvs of Pennsylvania, p. CS3. 
 

 A ™i^°^**ZZl° N f- L union 
 
 The « C„„ ST „„ I0! , AL „ ^J™»" « i. waT " 3 " "• "1 '*e restoration of 
 
 '•"lis inscrutable l£d£, ^B*! Mrt »' <«= Pre eS be "i" 5 " « mean, ",7™. 
 and a free and unWmded ball ffn CBtly CQntend fo? t e ^ C t ? n8t {J u «o««al right ofTh e 
 
 Clubs, ft, the «*, S^ e ^j -UO subscribers, ^ , t „ , 
 
 of $2 a yea,, ant a. less pricesT'cK"* C ° pies ' * 3 *1*W by nuii , 
 
 E»peeial attention is solicited ,„ "OIVAE UlMOIV 
 
 Sf^XC'S ^T^SZ^lRM? * ' ~- sbee, ,£ 
 
 Two Copies, one year . .' .' 
 
 i en kopjes, to one address ™Uh'^ $2 00 
 
 Additional names can be added to 11 n, I W ° lbe P moa <*•>&£ <h,a«i ' ' 11 6 ° 
 
 r^ specie copies J::Z ™£ ^ «™. - *. «i^i. M 00 
 
 A " °" b »» «• b. i-iabW ia advaaee. Z" "* "" "» ™* **• *- 
 
 An Q v . . "" tu lne address of 
 
 AH aubacnpuona to be invariably ,» ad?ance . ^^ 
 
 THO^S B. FLOEENCE, 
 330 E street, Waslai ngtoa> p/^ 
 
 The Constitutional Union p G „ 
 
 The Democratic and ConservatT f ^^^^ and Indorsed. 
 
 "■Resolved That the T) 
 
 r oi sound Democratic doctrines."