f 
 
 

 aux_ 
 
SPEECHES 
 
 OF 
 
 ANDREW JOHNSON, 
 
 PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. 
 
 WITH 
 
 A BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION 
 
 By FRANK MOORE, 
 
 BOSTON: 
 LITTLE, BROWN, AND COMPANY. 
 
 1866. 
 
^A> 
 
 : 
 
 <^\ 
 
 Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1866, by 
 
 Little, Brown and Company, 
 
 In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of Massachusetts 
 
 X 
 
 <7 %~t D 
 
 University Press: Welch, Bigelow, & Co., 
 Cambridge. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Biographical Introduction .... v 
 
 Speech to the Colored Men of Nashville, 
 
 Tenn xxxvii 
 
 Speech at Washington, April 3, 1865 . . xliii 
 
 Speech at his Inauguration as President, 
 
 April 15, 1865 xlviii 
 
 On the Veto-Power, delivered in the House of 
 Representatives of the United States, August 
 2, 1848 1 
 
 On the Homestead Bill, delivered in the Senate 
 
 of the United States, May 20, 1858 . . 12 
 
 On the Constitutionality and Rightfulness 
 of Secession, delivered in the Senate, De- 
 cember 18 and 19, 1860 .... 77 
 
 On the State of the Union, delivered in the 
 
 Senate, February 5 and 6, 1861 . . . 176 
 
 Reply to Senator Lane of Oregon, delivered 
 
 in the Senate, March 2, 1861 . . . 290 
 
 Speech at Cincinnati, Ohio, June 20, 1861 . 316 
 
 On the War for the Union, delivered in the 
 
 Senate, July 27, 1861 .... 328 
 
IV CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 On the Proposed Expulsion of Mr. Jesse D. 
 
 Bright, January 31, 1862 . . . . 405 
 Appeal to the People of Tennessee, March 
 
 18, 1862 451 
 
 Inaugural Address, delivered in the Senate of 
 
 the United States, March 4, 1865 . . 457 
 
 Joint Resolution Proposing Amendments to 
 
 the Constitution of the United States 461 
 Reply to the Illinois Delegation, April 18, 
 
 1865 468 
 
 Reply to the British Ambassador . . 473 
 Speech to the Diplomatic Corps . . . 476 
 Address to Loyal Southerners . . . 477 
 Speech to the Indiana Delegation . . 481 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Andrew Johnson was born on tne 29th day 
 of December, 1808, at Raleigh, North Carolina. 
 While yet in his fifth year, his father lost his life 
 through generous and successful efforts to save 
 Col. Thomas Henderson, editor of the " Raleigh 
 Gazette," from drowning, leaving his wife and son 
 dependent upon themselves for future support. The 
 untoward event of his father's death prevented the 
 lad from receiving even an ordinary education, and, 
 at the ao-e of ten years, he was apprenticed to a tailor 
 in his native town. Devoting himself steadily and 
 earnestly to his new occupation, he thus began life 
 by a struggle with its daily duties, brightened by 
 probable visions of the future, but into which 
 dreams the possibility of an attainment to his pres- 
 ent position presumed not to enter. 
 
 In the society of his fellow-workmen he became 
 conscious of his great ignorance, and was possessed 
 with a desire to learn to read. The visits to the 
 workshop of a gentleman who lightened the hours 
 of toil by reading to the workmen, still further 
 aroused the ambition of the young apprentice. 
 The volume thus read, (a collection of speeches by 
 
VI BIOGEAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 British statesmen,) sowed in his mind a germ which 
 in after-years was developed in the legislative halls. 
 He devoted the hours after his day's work was done 
 to mastering the alphabet, and then asked the loan 
 of the volume that he might learn to spell. The 
 gentleman, pleased at his earnestness and appreciat- 
 ing his ambition, presented to him the book, and 
 otherwise assisted him in his studies. Through in- 
 dustry and patience, aided by a strong determina- 
 tion to overcome all obstacles, success crowned his 
 efforts, and books were no longer sealed volumes 
 to his youthful mind. 
 
 At the expiration of his apprenticeship in 1824, 
 he went to Laurens Court House, S. C, where he 
 worked as journeyman tailor until May, 1826, when 
 he returned to Raleigh. There he remained until 
 September of the same year, when with his mother 
 he removed to Greenville, a small town in Eastern 
 Tennessee, at which place he succeeded in obtaining 
 work. Soon after his settlement in Greenville, he 
 married a young woman whose attainments and de- 
 votion exerted a marked and beneficial influence on 
 his future life. Sharing in the desires of her hus- 
 band to acquire knowledge, and in his ambition to 
 rise to distinction, she read to him and instructed 
 him by her conversation as he plied the needle on 
 his work-bench, thus lightening his labor by her 
 presence and encouragement. At night the instruc- 
 tions of the day were continued by lessons in writing 
 and arithmetic. Actuated by the highest motives, 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. vii 
 
 his efforts seconded by unflagging perseverance and 
 an indomitable will, he proved an attentive student 
 and a good scholar, and his estimable wife realized 
 the first-fruits of her teachings in his growing pop- 
 ularity with the workingmen of the town in which 
 they lived. 
 
 Thinking to improve his fortunes he left Green- 
 ville and moved further West, but after an absence 
 of about a year, he returned with his wife to his 
 former home, where he permanently settled. Self- 
 reliance and energy were early developed in his 
 character, while the method of his education sharp- 
 ened and improved his reasoning faculties. The 
 broad and comprehensive views of the more liberal 
 British statesmen, implanted in his mind by the 
 readings in the old workshop, took deep root ; and 
 in his further studies, the principle of Republican 
 government — the fact that it is a government of 
 the people, by the people, and for the people — be- 
 came the centre around which clustered all his 
 thoughts, hopes, and aspirations. 
 
 He saw that the aristocracy of the town, who 
 were supported by slave labor, despised the white 
 man who maintained himself and family by his own 
 exertions ; that capital, represented by the few, was 
 to rule, and not the intelligence of the many who 
 earned their bread by their daily toil. This was 
 contrary to all his preconceived ideas, and he de- 
 voted himself heart and soul to the correction of the 
 fallacy. By his appeals to the laboring classes he 
 
Vlli BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 aroused them to assert their right to representation 
 in the town councils, and, in 1828, the young tailor 
 was chosen as Alderman, which position he held un- 
 til 1830. In this latter year he was elected Mayor, 
 and served in that capacity for the three succeeding 
 years. He was also appointed Trustee of Rhea 
 Academy by the County Court. In 1834 he in- 
 terested himself successfully in the adoption of a 
 new constitution for Tennessee, by which impor- 
 tant rights were guaranteed to the mass of the peo- 
 ple, the freedom of the press established, and other 
 liberal measures adopted. 
 
 Andrew Johnson was now fairly enlisted in 
 public life. Identified with the interests of the 
 working classes, he devoted himself earnestly to 
 improving their condition, to raising them from 
 the position to which the aristocrats had doomed 
 them, to the independence and dignity of freemen. 
 His zeal in their behalf secured for him their uni- 
 versal esteem ; they looked to him as their friend 
 and champion, and were ever willing to advance his 
 interests by their hearty support and by their votes. 
 Consequently, in 1835, having proved himself in 
 every way w T orthy of their suffrage, he was elected 
 a member of the House of Representatives of the 
 State for the counties of Greene and Washington. 
 He became an active member of this body, but was 
 particularly noted for his opposition to a grand 
 scheme of internal improvements, which he boldly 
 denounced as a base fraud tending to impoverish 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. ix 
 
 the State treasury and increase State taxation. This 
 course rendered him unpopular at the time, and at 
 the election in 1837 his place was filled by another 
 representative. Time placed him right on the rec- 
 ord, however. The scheme he had opposed proved, 
 as he had predicted, a useless burden on the peo- 
 ple, and in 1839 he was again returned to the 
 Legislature. 
 
 During the Presidential contest of 1840, between 
 Harrison and Van Buren, Mr. Johnson, in the ca- 
 pacity of Presidential Elector, canvassed the State 
 in behalf of the latter candidate. He has been 
 described as " an effective stump-speaker. His voice 
 at first appears to be whining, but as he warms with 
 his subject seems to entwine itself around the hearts 
 of his followers and holds them spellbound." 
 
 In 1841 he was elected State Senator from Haw- 
 kins and Greene counties, and during the two ensu- 
 ing years labored efficiently for the improvement of 
 Eastern Tennessee. In the Senate, as in the lower 
 branch of the Legislature, he proved a useful and 
 active member. He was not an ornamental legis- 
 lator or hackney politician, but an earnest and able 
 advocate of all that he believed to be right ; an 
 open, honest, and hearty denouncer of that which 
 he deemed wrong. 
 
 The people, recognizing his abilities, respecting 
 his character, and appreciating his services, deter- 
 mined to enlarge his sphere of usefulness, and in 
 1843 he was nominated for Congress from the First 
 
X BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 District of Tennessee, embracing seven counties. He 
 canvassed the district with his opponent, Col. John 
 A. Asken, a popular gentleman of prominence and 
 ability, and handsomely defeated him. He took his 
 seat as member of the House of Representatives at 
 Washington, in December, 1843, retaining that po- 
 sition by successive elections until 1853. 
 
 The State having been redistricted previous to 
 the election of the latter year, that portion in which 
 Mr. Johnson resided was so allotted as to place him 
 in a district having a large Whig majority, and thus 
 he lost his seat in Congress. Gustavus A. Henry, 
 at that time the Whig candidate for Governor, was 
 the leading spirit in this movement, and Mr. John- 
 son determined to defeat the man who had thus 
 " Gerrymandered," or, as he called it, " Henryman- 
 dered" him out of Congress. After an exciting 
 canvass, Mr. Johnson was chosen Governor, and 
 again in 1855 he was elected, this time defeating 
 one of the ablest Whigs in the State, Meredith P. 
 Gentry. During his administration of the guber- 
 natorial duties, which he performed in the most im- 
 partial manner, he was active in urging upon Con- 
 gress the Homestead Bill, and exerted his influence 
 for the spread of popular education. Under his 
 successive regimes, much was accomplished for the 
 benefit and internal improvement of Tennessee, and 
 the sons of toil still found in him a zealous defender 
 of their rights and advocate of their wants. 
 
 In the year 1857 he was elected by the Legisla- 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. xi 
 
 ture of Tennessee United States Senator, for the 
 term of six years, and ably discharged the duties of 
 that office until the spring of 1862, when he was 
 appointed Military Governor of Tennessee. Prior 
 to his election to Congress, his public services had 
 been confined to the limits of his State, but from 
 this time he belongs to the country. 
 
 Andrew Johnson was emphatically " a represent- 
 ative of the people." Born of the people, and at 
 an early age thrown upon his own resources, he 
 lived and grew up amongst the people, becoming 
 familiar with their every-day lives and deeds, their 
 opinions, their wrongs and their asserted rights, 
 their inmost thoughts and their highest aspirations. 
 Feeling " the smart of the want of a proper edu- 
 cation while young," but proud in the consciousness 
 that for the knowledge he possessed he was in- 
 debted solely to his own exertions, he stood in the 
 legislative halls, — Andrew Johnson, Tailor and 
 Statesman, the compeer of any member of either 
 house. Modestly assuming, but thoroughly appre- 
 ciating the dignity of his position, he never permit- 
 ted any sneer at his calling, or any attempted dis- 
 paragement of the laboring classes, to pass unrebuked, 
 and we find him breaking lances with the ablest 
 debaters in Congress. 
 
 " Sir, I do not forget that I am a mechanic. I 
 am proud to own it. Neither do I forget that Adam 
 was a tailor, and sewed fig-leaves, or that our Saviour 
 was the son of a carpenter." 
 
Xll BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 He cordially hated aristocracy, and had decided 
 objections to gentlemen, reared in affluence and 
 idleness, arrogating to themselves the right to all 
 the knowledge in the world. When Jefferson Davis 
 superciliously asked, " What do you mean by l the 
 laboring classes ' ? " Andrew Johnson answered, 
 " Those who earn their bread by the sweat of their 
 face, and not by fatiguing their ingenuity." 
 
 A true Democrat, he was a firm believer in the 
 sovereignty of the people, and held that members of 
 the lower house of Congress were next in power to 
 the people. Respecting statesmen and hating poli- 
 ticians, he claimed that upon the floor of the House 
 the people had a right to be heard. He was 
 thoroughly imbued with the idea that legislation 
 was for the many, not for the few ; for the good of 
 the whole country, and not for the benefit of any 
 party. 
 
 He was always consistently in favor of retrench- 
 ment in governmental expenses, and participated in 
 nearly every debate upon appropriation bills, or acts 
 requiring the expenditure of the public funds. He 
 opposed the Smithsonian Institute, on the ground 
 that it would be a burden on the public treas- 
 ury, without commensurate good results ; — voted 
 against all direct appropriations for the District of 
 Columbia, arguing that any city in the United 
 States would cheerfully contribute to have the Na- 
 tional Capital removed to its limits ; — debated all 
 bills to increase the clerical force of the different 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. xm 
 
 departments, declaring that if the clerks — many of 
 whom he believed to be political vampires doing little 
 or nothing for government during six hours per day, 
 and devoting the remainder of their time to drink- 
 ing, gaming, and abusing honest legislators in the 
 newspapers — were made to do a decent day's work 
 there would be no necessity for such increase ; — 
 introduced resolutions to reduce the salaries of mem- 
 bers of Congress, and all officers of the Government, 
 civil, military, and naval, amounting to over $ 1000, 
 twenty per cent. ; also a resolution instructing the 
 Committee on Finance to investigate and report 
 how much and wherein the expenses of all the 
 departments might be reduced ; — opposed all appro- 
 priations for monuments and funeral expenses, and 
 called for a statement of the items in the bill for 
 funeral expenses of a distinguished member of the 
 House ; — denied the right of members to vote them- 
 selves books, &c, saying they " might just as well 
 vote to increase their salaries " ; — and refused his 
 assent to the purchase of Mr. Madison's papers and 
 Washington's Farewell Address, not from any want 
 of respect for the services and memory of either, 
 but from his dislike to " speculations and jobs." 
 
 He was the true and honest friend of the poor, 
 and of the laboring classes, and appeared in Con- 
 gress as their champion. He introduced the subject 
 of Homesteads into the House of Representatives, 
 and carried it to a successful issue in that branch. 
 He also brought up the subject in the Senate, and 
 
 b 
 
XIV BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 debated it at great length, but the bill, as passed, 
 was vetoed by Mr. Buchanan. 
 
 Believing that the burdens of the Government 
 should be borne by the rich and not by the poor, he 
 proposed an amendment to the tariff bill, taxing 
 capital instead of labor. He also opposed the tariff 
 on tea and sugar. 
 
 He had no faith in caucuses, and held that they 
 gave the controlling power to a few politicians, and 
 prevented a true representation of the people. At 
 different times he offered resolutions to amend the 
 Constitution so that the people should vote directly 
 for President. He advocated the bill to refund the 
 fine imposed upon Andrew Jackson by Judge Hall 
 at New Orleans (H. R., January 8, 1844) ; Avas in 
 favor of the Annexation of Texas (H. R., January 
 21, 1845) ; discussed the Oregon question asserting 
 our right to 54° 40', but sustained the administration 
 in the final settlement of the question (H. R., Jan- 
 uary 31, 1846) ; addressed the House on the Mex- 
 ican question, in support of the administration, De- 
 cember 15, 1846, January 5, 1847, and August 2, 
 1848 ; delivered an able argument on the veto 
 power (H. R., August 2, 1847) ; opposed the bill 
 establishing the Court of Claims (H. R., January 
 6, 1849) ; made an earnest plea for the admission 
 of California and the protection of slavery (H. R., 
 June 5, 1850) ; debated the Mexican indemnity bill 
 (H. R., January 21, 28, 1852) ; also the bill for right 
 of way on rail and plank roads (H. R., July 20, 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. XV 
 
 1852) ; made a speech on frauds in the Treasury 
 Department (H. R., January 13, 1853), and an- 
 other on coinage (H. R., February 2, 1853). 
 
 While in the Senate, in addition to the measures 
 alluded to more at length in this sketch, he opposed 
 the increase of the regular army at the time of the 
 Mormon difficulties (S., February IT, 18, 1857) ; 
 had an earnest debate with Hon. John Bell, his col- 
 league, on the Tennessee resolutions inviting Bell 
 to resign (S., February 23, 24, 1857) ; participated 
 in the debate on the admission of Minnesota (S., 
 April 6, 1858) ; opposed the Pacific Railroad bill, 
 and repudiated the idea that it was imposed upon 
 him as a Democratic measure (S., January 25, 
 1859) ; advocated retrenchment (S., January 4, 
 and February 12, 1859) ; and warmly defended 
 Tennessee (S., March 26, 1860). 
 
 Born and reared in a slave State, commencing 
 and continuing his public career in another slave 
 State, and himself the owner of slaves " acquired 
 by the toil of his own hands," he accepted slavery 
 as it existed and where it existed. Firm in the be- 
 lief that the agitation of the subject would ultimately 
 lead to the abolition of slavery, and the consequent 
 dissolution of the Union, he deprecated its introduc- 
 tion into the debates of Congress, and was amongst 
 those who declared against the right to petition upon 
 the matter, giving his reasons therefor in a speech 
 delivered January 31, 1844. 
 
 He was not an advocate of the extension of 
 
XVI BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION". 
 
 slavery, and was willing to leave the inhabitants of 
 the Territories to decide whether it should or should 
 not exist therein. 
 
 " My position is, that Congress has no power to interfere 
 with the subject of slavery; that it is an institution local in its 
 character and peculiar to the States where it exists, and no 
 other power has the right to control it." 1 
 
 Acting under these convictions, he zealously op- 
 posed any encroachments upon what he regarded 
 as the rights of the slave States. He continued 
 true to this belief, and was consistent in his course 
 to the very last ; and in the stormy scenes in the 
 Senate in December, 1860, we find him demanding 
 new guaranties for the perpetuity of slavery. 
 
 But it required the fiery ordeal of the crisis of 
 1860 and 1861 to develop the strong points in his 
 character, and to reveal his sincere love for and 
 unswerving integrity to the Union. In those dark 
 and terrible days, when each man distrusted his 
 neighbor, the country demanded men, — men with 
 comprehension to grasp the great question of the 
 day, — men with foresight to discern its bearings 
 upon the future, — men of strength, "bold to take 
 up, firm to sustain " the glorious banner of a Re- 
 public of States, " one and indivisible." It is but 
 stating truth to say, that, amongst the many who 
 were tried in the crucible of those terrible hours, 
 Andrew Johnson came forth a sagacious statesman, 
 an honest patriot, a true man. 
 
 1 Speech in House of Representatives, June 5, 1860. 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. xvii 
 
 An ardent admirer of Andrew Jackson, the mem- 
 orable words of that indomitable patriot — " The 
 Union; it must and shall be preserved" — -were 
 indelibly engraven on his heart. In a speech de- 
 livered in the House of Representatives, December 
 19, 1846, in support of the policy of Mr. Polk's 
 administration in carrying the war into Mexico, he 
 had said : — 
 
 " I am in favor of supporting the administration in this act, 
 because I believe it to be right. But, sir, I care not whether 
 right or wrong, I am for my country always." 
 
 Thus fortified, with the Constitution for his shield 
 he entered upon the stormy scenes preceding the 
 rebellion. In December, 1859, he had denounced 
 the John Brown raid on Harper's Ferry, and said 
 he believed it to be the legitimate fruits of abolition 
 teachings. He wished to have its leader punished 
 under the Constitution, for an hostile irruption into 
 a sovereign State. In 1860 he readily acquiesced 
 in the election, under the same Constitution, of 
 Abraham Lincoln to the Presidency, and feared 
 none of the phantoms which so disturbed the imag- 
 ination of a majority of the Southern Senators and 
 Representatives. He believed in conciliation, and in 
 view of the increasing excitement at the South, 
 thought the North should be willing to give some 
 new constitutional guarantees for the protection of 
 slavery, and introduced resolutions to that effect, 
 
 December 13, 1860, which were referred to the 
 
 b* 
 
xvili BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Select Committee of Thirteen. Five days later, in 
 a powerful speech, he denounced secession, and de- 
 nied the right of any State to withdraw from the 
 Union. He appealed to the Southern Senators to re- 
 main in the Union and " fight for their constitutional 
 rights on the battlements of the Constitution." He 
 did not mean to be driven out of the Union ; and if 
 anybody must go out, it must be those who had 
 violated the Constitution by passing personal liberty 
 bills and opposing the execution of the fugitive slave 
 law. 1 But treason had already begun its foul work, 
 and he soon saw that the South in its madness 
 would not listen to conciliation or compromise. 
 
 Rising above sectional prejudice, and freeing him- 
 self from old party associations, he looked beyond 
 the present, and meeting the issue boldly, declared 
 for the Union now and forever. 
 
 In the speech delivered in the Senate, February 
 5th, 1861, he alludes to his having been denounced 
 for his speech in December, but says, " I feel proud. 
 I feel that I have struck treason a blow ; " and adds, 
 " I am for preserving the Union ; and if it is to be 
 done on constitutional terms, I am ready to stand by 
 any and every man without asking his antecedents, 
 or fearing what may take place hereafter." 
 
 Thenceforward Andrew Johnson was to be found 
 in the van, boldly fighting for the Union, and ready, 
 if need be, to lay down his life for its preservation. 
 
 At the first session of the Thirty-seventh Con- 
 
 1 See page 77, Speeches. 
 
BIOGKAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. XIX 
 
 gress, in July and August, 1861, he presented the 
 credentials of the Senators from West Virginia, 
 with appropriate remarks ; on the 26th of July, 
 1861, he introduced a resolution defining the ob- 
 jects of the war, as follows : — 
 
 Resolved, That the present deplorable civil war has been 
 forced upon the country by the disunionists of the Southern 
 States, now in revolt against the Constitutional Government, 
 and in arms around the Capitol ; that, in this national emer- 
 gency, Congress, banishing all feeling of mere passion or 
 resentment, will recollect only its duty to the whole country ; 
 that this war is not prosecuted upon our part in any spirit of 
 oppression, nor for any purpose of conquest or subjugation, 
 nor for the purpose of authorizing or interfering with the 
 rights or established institutions of those States, but to defend 
 and maintain the supremacy of the Constitution and all laws 
 made in pursuance thereof, and to preserve the Union, with 
 all the dignity, equality, and rights of the several States, unim- 
 paired; that as soon as these objects are accomplished, the 
 war ought to cease. 
 
 This was passed, after a long debate, by a vote 
 of thirty to five. 
 
 On the 27th of July he delivered another memo- 
 rable speech, in which he arraigned his former asso- 
 ciates in the Senate as traitors, and by unanswerable 
 arguments and an exhaustless statement of facts, 
 convicted them by their own record. In his remarks 
 on voting for the tariff, in August, he argued that 
 it was no time to discuss details, and freely voted 
 for the bill in order to sustain the Government. 
 
 On the 31st of January, 1862, he made an 
 able speech on the conduct of Senator Bright, and 
 
XX BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 voted for the expulsion of the man, who, four years 
 before, had administered to him the Senatorial oath. 
 
 Meanwhile, affairs in the Border States were 
 becoming more and more complicated. From the 
 outset of the rebellion, the Secessionists had been 
 rampant in Tennessee. The State had been sold 
 to the rebels by Governor Harris and his myrmi- 
 dons. Mob law prevailed, and ruffians, with all the 
 malignity of hate and the ferocity of brutes, had in- 
 augurated a reign of terror, and citizens who remained 
 true to the Union, were subjected to every possible 
 indignity and persecution. This had been carried 
 so far, and the State had received so little protec- 
 tion and assistance from the General Government, 
 that many of the Unionists had become submis- 
 sionists to rebel rule for the sole purpose of saving 
 their lives. The course of Senator Johnson in Con- 
 gress, in 1860, had entailed upon him the wrath of 
 the leading and most bitter Secessionists. In De- 
 cember, he had been burned in effigy at Memphis ; 
 and on his return to Tennessee in April, 1861, at 
 the close of the session of Congress, he was assailed 
 at various places along his route, was threatened 
 with lynching, and repeatedly insulted by mobs of 
 infuriated men. A price was set upon his head, and 
 personal violence threatened if he remained in the 
 State. 
 
 In June, 1861, while on his way to Washington 
 to attend the special session of Congress, he re- 
 ceived an ovation from the loval citizens of Cincin- 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION". XXI 
 
 nati, and in an able speech, defined his position, 
 announcing his unalterable determination to stand 
 by the Union. While in Washington, he urged 
 upon the President and Secretary of War the im- 
 portance and the justice of aiding and protecting 
 the Unionists of East Tennessee. Returning to the 
 West, in September, he addressed Union meetings 
 at Newport, Ky., and at other places, and devoted 
 himself zealously to arousing those Unionists who 
 had fallen into or been forced into a state of apathy 
 by the aspect of war. 
 
 Meanwhile Kentucky had been invaded, and the 
 rebels were overrunning Tennessee, — plundering, 
 burning, and murdering. In the Eastern portion of 
 that State, they confiscated Mr. Johnson's slaves, 
 went to his home, drove his sick wife with her child 
 into the street, and turned their house, built by his 
 own hands, into a hospital and barracks. 
 
 In February, 1862, General Grant entered Ten- 
 nessee, and captured Forts Henry and Donelson. 
 The subsequent advance of General Buell's forces 
 compelled the withdrawal of the main body of the 
 rebels from Western and Middle Tennessee. The 
 larger portion of the State having been thus re- 
 covered and in the occupation of the Federal forces, 
 President Lincoln appointed Andrew Johnson Mili- 
 tary Governor, with the rank of Brigadier-General 
 of Volunteers. This appointment was confirmed 
 by the Senate, March 5th, and Governor Johnson 
 left his seat in that body to enter upon the duties 
 of his new position. 
 
Xxii BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 It is difficult to conceive of a more fitting appoint- 
 ment than this. On the floor of the Senate, amidst 
 the mountains of East Tennessee, and in the cities 
 and towns of the State, he had openly denounced 
 treason and boldly proclaimed that traitors should 
 be hung. He had borne many personal indigni- 
 ties, had been outlawed by outlaws who had set 
 a price on his head, his family had been merci- 
 lessly persecuted, and his friends and neighbors had 
 been driven from their homes. Neither threats nor 
 bullets could intimidate him. Fearless but just, reso- 
 lute but compassionate, he was the man of all men 
 to " rule with a rod of iron " over traitors, to bring 
 order out of anarchy, and to restore confidence where 
 fear had had sway. Governor Johnson reached 
 Nashville on the 12th of March, in company with 
 Horace Maynard, Emerson Etheredge, and others 
 who had been political exiles. He w r as enthusiasti- 
 cally received by the long suffering Unionists, and, in 
 response to a serenade, addressed the assemblage, 
 setting forth the views of the administration and 
 shadowing his purposed policy. From his long and 
 thorough acquaintance with Tennesseans, he knew 
 the men with whom he had to deal. In a few days 
 he published an " Appeal to the People," in which 
 the subjects of secession, the state of affairs which 
 then existed, and the promise of the future, were 
 treated in a clear and comprehensive manner. 
 This paper will be found in full in the following 
 pages. Later in March, Governor Johnson ordered 
 
BIOGKAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. xxiti 
 
 the Mayor and City Council of Nashville to take the 
 oath of allegiance. Upon their declining so to do, 
 their places were declared vacant, other officials 
 were appointed, and they were subsequently incar- 
 cerated in the penitentiary. The press throughout 
 the State was placed under proper supervision, and 
 it was soon understood that spoken or written trea- 
 son would subject the offenders to justice. In April 
 the editor of the "Nashville Banner" was arrested 
 and his paper suppressed. Judge Guild, of the 
 Chancery Court, was also imprisoned on a charge 
 of treason. 
 
 On the 12th of May an important convention 
 was held at Nashville, to consider the subject of 
 the restoration of the State to the Union. The 
 meeting was numerously attended by citizens from 
 all parts of the State, and Governor Johnson made 
 one of his impassioned and characteristic addresses. 
 The Unionists continuing to suffer from the depre- 
 dations of guerrillas, Governor Johnson issued the 
 following proclamation : — 
 
 Executive Office, Nashville, Tenn., ) 
 May 9, 1862. J 
 
 Whereas, Certain persons, unfriendly and hostile to the 
 Government of the United States, have banded themselves 
 together, and are now going at large through many of the 
 counties of this State, arresting, maltreating, and plundering 
 Union citizens wherever found : 
 
 Now therefore, I, Andrew Johnson, Governor of the State 
 of Tennessee, by virtue of the power and authority in me 
 vested, do hereby proclaim that in every instance in which a 
 Union man is arrested and maltreated by the marauding bands 
 
Xxiv BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 aforesaid, five or more rebels, from the most prominent in the 
 immediate neighborhood, shall be arrested, imprisoned, and 
 otherwise dealt with as the nature of the ease may require ; 
 and further, in all eases where the property of citizens loyal to 
 the Government of the United States is taken or destroyed, 
 full and ample remuneration shall be made to them out of the 
 property of such rebels in the vicinity as have sympathized 
 with, and given aid, comfort, information, or encouragement to 
 the parties committing such depredations. 
 
 This order will be executed in letter and spirit. All citizens 
 are hereby warned, under heavy penalties, from entertaining, 
 receiving, or encouraging such persons so banded together, or 
 in any wise connected therewith. 
 
 By the Governor : ANDREW JOHNSON. 
 
 Edward II. East, 
 
 Secretary of State. 
 
 An election for judge of the Circuit Court of 
 Nashville having been ordered, Turner S. Foster, a 
 well-known Secessionist, was chosen. The Gov- 
 ernor, too much of a law-abiding citizen to ignore an 
 election ordered by himself, gave Foster his com- 
 mission as judge ; but fearing that he might abuse 
 the power thus vested in him, ordered his arrest 
 and sent him to the penitentiary on the same day. 
 Early in June he issued an order that all persons 
 guilty of uttering disloyal sentiments who should 
 refuse to take the oath, and give bonds in $1000 
 for their future good behavior, should be sent South, 
 and be treated as spies if again found within the 
 Federal lines. During this month Union meetings 
 were held in various districts of the State, at all 
 of which Governor Johnson appeared and took an 
 active part. 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. XXV 
 
 Later in the same month six prominent clergy- 
 men of Nashville, who not only entertained treason- 
 able sentiments but boldly preached them from their 
 pulpits, were summoned before the Governor, and 
 desired to take the oath. They requested five days 
 to decide as to their course, which request was 
 granted. At the expiration of that time they de- 
 clined to " turn from the error of their ways," 
 whereupon five of them were sent to prison, and 
 the sixth, on account of illness, paroled. 
 
 The next four months proved a dark and peril- 
 ous period for the citizens of Nashville and the 
 safety of the Provisional Government. In addi- 
 tion to the guerrillas under Forrest, which had in- 
 fested the State, the confederate forces under Kirby 
 Smith, Anderson, Marshall, and Bragg, moved 
 northward through Tennessee, to invade Kentucky. 
 At different times Nashville was wholly isolated, its 
 communications cut off in every direction, and the 
 city in a state of siege. Provisions became scarce, 
 and prices ruled enormously high ; the laws were 
 with difficulty enforced, and much suffering pre- 
 vailed. Through all these trying times Governor 
 Johnson remained hopeful and self-reliant, inspiring 
 confidence in all around him, and reviving courage 
 by his calmness and determination. Among the 
 inhabitants of Nashville were many whose fathers, 
 husbands, brothers, and sons were in arms against 
 the Government, leaving their families to be cared 
 for by the authorities. To remedy this, Governor 
 
XXvi BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Johnson addressed the following circular to such of 
 the avowed Secessionists of the city as were able 
 pecuniarily to respond : — 
 
 State of Tennessee, Executive Department, 1 
 Nashville, August 18, 18G2. J 
 
 Sir, — There are many wives and helpless children in the 
 city of Nashville and county of Davidson, who have been re- 
 duced to poverty and wretchedness in consequence of their 
 husbands and fathers having been forced into the armies of 
 this unholy and nefarious rebellion. Their necessities have 
 become so manifest, and their demands for the necessaries of 
 life so urgent, that the laws of justice and humanity would be 
 violated unless something was done to relieve their suffering 
 and destitute condition. 
 
 You are therefore requested to contribute the sum of 
 dollars, which you will pay over within the next five days to 
 James Whitworth, Esq., Judge of the County Court, to be by 
 him distributed among these destitute families in such manner 
 as may be prescribed. 
 
 Respectfully, &c. 
 
 ANDREW JOHNSON, 
 Attest : Military Governor. 
 
 Edward H. East, 
 Secretary of State. 
 
 The amounts so assessed varied from fifty to three 
 hundred dollars. 
 
 In September General Buell evacuated his posi- 
 tion in Southern Tennessee, falling back on Nash- 
 ville, and then proposed to abandon that city. 
 Governor Johnson earnestly protested against such 
 a course, asserting that the city should be defended 
 to the last extremity, and then destroyed to prevent 
 its falling into the hands of the enemy. He was 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. xxvii 
 
 so disgusted with General Buell's movements that 
 he addressed a letter to President Lincoln on the 
 subject, and recommended his removal. General 
 Thomas, who was placed in command of the city, 
 heartily seconded Governor Johnson's determination, 
 and the city was strongly fortified. Afterwards 
 General Negley was assigned to the command, and 
 under him the more important operations were con- 
 ducted. Governor Johnson encouraged and aided 
 General Negley in all his operations, and was active 
 throughout the siege. He had no thought of 
 retreating or of surrendering. " I am no military 
 man," he said ; " but any one who talks of surren- 
 dering, I will shoot." 
 
 After several attacks upon the city which were 
 gallantly repulsed by General Negley, the rebels 
 were forced to retire, as General Rosecrans, who 
 had relieved General Buell, was advancing from the 
 direction of Bowling Green. Early in November 
 the forces under command of the latter General 
 entered the city, and found its defenders on half 
 rations, but brave and determined still. In October 
 Governor Johnson's family rejoined him, after a 
 series of perilous adventures on their journey from 
 Bristol, in the northeastern part of the State. 
 
 During the same month President Lincoln rec- 
 ommended an election for members of Congress in 
 several districts in Tennessee, but the military opera- 
 tions then in progress prevented the accomplish- 
 ment of this design until December, when Governor 
 
XXVlii BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Johnson issued a proclamation for elections in the 
 Ninth and Tenth Districts. He had from the first 
 opposed the idea of allowing rebel sympathizers to 
 vote on any of the acts necessary to the restora- 
 tion of the State, and closed his proclamation thus: 
 " No person will be considered an elector qualified 
 to vote, who, in addition to the other qualifications 
 required by law, does not give satisfactory evidence 
 to the judges holding the election of his loyalty to 
 the Government of the United States." 
 
 On the 13th of December Governor Johnson 
 issued an order nearly identical with his circular of 
 August 18, assessing the property of the Secession- 
 ists to the amount of sixty thousand dollars, for the 
 support of the poor, the widows, and the orphans, 
 made so by the war. 
 
 In the spring of 1863, and again in the fall, he 
 visited Washington, to confer with President Lin- 
 coln on the restoration of Tennessee to the Union. 
 The military operations during the year succeeded 
 in freeing the State of all organized bodies of rebels, 
 and it was thought the time had arrived for the ful- 
 filment of their hopes. Conventions were held at 
 different places in the State, at which Governor 
 Johnson and other leading men spoke in reference 
 to the all-absorbing topic. The people, who had so 
 long been subject to the tyranny of rebel thieves and 
 murderers, were overjoyed at their deliverance, but 
 needed instruction as to the method to be used for 
 the accomplishment of the great and good work. 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. XXIX 
 
 Governor Johnson pithily and tersely stated the case 
 as follows : — 
 
 " Tennessee is not out of the Union, never has been, and 
 never will be out. The bonds of the Constitution and the 
 Federal power will always prevent that. This Government 
 is perpetual ; provision is made for reforming the Government 
 and amending the Constitution, and admitting States into the 
 Union ; not for letting them out of it. 
 
 " Where are we now ? There is a rebellion ; this was antic- 
 ipated, as I said. The rebel army is driven back. Here lies 
 your State ; a sick man in his bed, emaciated and exhausted, 
 paralyzed in all his powers, and unable to walk alone. The 
 physician comes. Don't quarrel about antecedents, but admin- 
 ister to his wants, and cure him as quickly as possible. The 
 United States sends an agent, or a military governor, which- 
 ever you please to call him, to aid you in restoring your Gov- 
 ernment. Whenever you desire, in good faith, to restore civil 
 authority, you can do so, and a proclamation for an election 
 will be issued as speedily as it is practicable to hold one. One 
 by one all the agencies of your State Government will be set 
 in motion. A legislature will be elected ; judges will be ap- 
 pointed temporarily, until you can elect them at the polls ; and 
 so of sheriffs, county court judges, justices, and other officers, 
 until the way is fairly open for the people, and all the parts 
 of civil government resume their ordinary functions. This is 
 no nice, intricate, metaphysical question. It is a plain, com- 
 mon-sense matter, and there is nothing in the way but obsti- 
 nacy." 
 
 On the 8th and 21st of January, 1864, Governor 
 Johnson addressed meetings at Nashville, and on the 
 26th of the same month issued a proclamation for 
 a State election. April 12th he addressed the peo- 
 
 c* 
 
XXX BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 pie of Tennessee, at Knoxville, and again on the 
 16th of the same month, at which latter time the 
 citizens of the State, in mass meeting assembled, 
 declared in favor of emancipation, and for a con- 
 vention to alter the Constitution so as to make Ten- 
 nessee a free State. 
 
 On the 6th of June Governor Johnson was unani- 
 mously nominated by the National Union Conven- 
 tion, assembled at Baltimore, as the candidate for 
 the Vice-Presidency of the United States, Abraham 
 Lincoln having been renominated for the Presi- 
 dency. When this intelligence reached Nashville, 
 a mass meeting was held, and Governor Johnson 
 invited to address them. He was greeted with the 
 greatest enthusiasm. In the course of his remarks 
 he spoke upon the topics of slavery and emancipa- 
 tion. Alluding to the nation as being " in the 
 throes of a mighty revolution," he said : — 
 
 " "While society is in this disordered state, and we are seek- 
 ing security, let us fix the foundations of the Government on 
 principles of eternal justice, which will endure for all time. 
 There are those in our midst who are for perpetuating the 
 institution of slavery. Let me say to you, Tennesseans, and 
 men from the Northern States, that slavery is dead. It was 
 not murdered by me. I told you long ago what the result 
 would be, if you endeavored to go out of the Union to save 
 slavery, and that the result would be bloodshed, rapine, devas- 
 tated fields, plundered villages and cities ; and therefore I 
 urged you to remain in the Union. In trying to save slavery 
 you killed it, and lost your own freedom. Your slavery is 
 dead, but I did not murder it. As Macbeth said to Banquo's 
 bloody ghost, — 
 
I BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. XXXI 
 
 1 Never shake thy gory locks at me, 
 Thou canst not say I did it.' 
 
 " Slavery is dead, and you must pardon me if I do not 
 mourn over its dead body ; you can bury it out of sight. In 
 restoring the State, leave out that disturbing and dangerous 
 element, and use only those parts of the machinery which will 
 move in harmony. 
 
 " Now, in regard to emancipation, I want to say to the 
 blacks that liberty means liberty to work and enjoy the fruits 
 of your labor. Idleness is not freedom. I desire that all men 
 shall have a fair start and an equal chance in the race of life, 
 and let him succeed who has the most merit. This, I think, 
 is a principle of Heaven. I am for emancipation for two rea- 
 sons : first, because it is right in itself; and, second, because 
 in the emancipation of the slaves we break down an odious 
 and dangerous aristocracy. I think that we are freeing more 
 whites than blacks in Tennessee. I want to see slavery bro- 
 ken up, and when its barriers are thrown down, I want to see 
 industrious, thrifty emigrants pouring in from all parts of the 
 country." 
 
 In formally accepting the nomination of the Con- 
 vention, Governor Johnson wrote as follows : — 
 
 " Nashville, Tenn., July 2, 1864. 
 " Hon. William Dennison, Chairman, and others, Committee of the 
 National Union Convention: 
 
 " Gentlemen, — Your communication of the 9th ult., in- 
 forming me of my nomination for the Vice-Presidency of the 
 United States by the National Convention held at Baltimore, 
 and enclosing a copy of the resolutions adopted by that body, 
 was not received until the 25th ult. 
 
 "A reply on my part had been previously made to the action 
 of the Convention in presenting my name, in a speech deliv- 
 ered in this city on the evening succeeding the day of the 
 adjournment of the Convention, in which 1 indicated my ac- 
 
XXxii BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 ceptance of the distinguished honor conferred by that body, 
 and defined the grounds upon which that acceptance was 
 based, substantially saying what I now have to say. From 
 the comments made upon that speech by the various presses 
 of the country to which my attention has been directed, I 
 considered it to be regarded as a full acceptance. 
 
 " In view, however, of the desire expressed in your commu- 
 nication, I will more fully allude to a few points that have been 
 heretofore presented. 
 
 " My opinions on the leading questions at present agitating 
 and distracting the public mind, and especially in reference to 
 the rebellion now being waged against the Government and 
 authority of the United States, I presume are generally under- 
 stood. Before the Southern people assumed a belligerent at- 
 titude, (and repeatedly since,) I took occasion most frankly to 
 declare the views I then entertained in relation to the wicked 
 purposes of the Southern politicians. They have since under- 
 gone but little, if any, change. Time and subsequent events 
 have rather confirmed than diminished my confidence in their 
 correctness. 
 
 " At the beginning of this great struggle I entertained the 
 same opinion of it I do now, and in my place in the Senate I 
 denounced it as treason, worthy the punishment of death, and 
 warned the Government and people of the impending danger. 
 But my voice was not heard or counsel heeded until it was 
 too late to avert the storm. It still continued to gather over 
 us without molestation from the authorities at Washington, 
 until at length it broke with all its fury upon the country. 
 And now, if we would save the Government from being over- 
 whelmed by it, we must meet it'in the true spirit of patriot- 
 ism, and bring traitors to the punishment due their crime, and, 
 by force of arms, crush out and subdue the last vestige of 
 rebel authority in every State. I felt then, as now, that the 
 destruction of the Government was deliberately determined 
 upon by wicked and designing conspirators, whose lives and 
 fortunes were pledged to carry it out ; and that no compro- 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. xxxiii 
 
 mise, short of an unconditional recognition of the independence 
 of the Southern States could have been, or could now be pro- 
 posed, which they would accept. The clamor for " Southern 
 Rights," as the rebel journals were pleased to designate their 
 rallying cry, was not to secure their assumed rights in the Union 
 and under the Constitution, but to disrupt the Government, and 
 establish an independent organization, based upon Slavery, 
 which they could at all times control. 
 
 " The separation of the Government has for years past been 
 the cherished purpose of the Southern leaders. Baffled in 
 1832 by the stern, patriotic heroism of Andrew Jackson, they 
 sullenly acquiesced, only to mature their diabolical schemes, 
 and await the recurrence of a more favorable opportunity to 
 execute them. Then the pretext was the tariff, and Jackson, 
 after foiling their schemes of nullification and disunion, with 
 prophetic perspicacity warned the country against the renewal 
 of their efforts to dismember the Government. 
 
 " In a letter, dated May 1, 1833, to the Rev. A. J. Crawford, 
 after demonstrating the heartless insincerity of the Southern 
 nullifiers, he said : ' Therefore the tariff was only a pretext, 
 and disunion and a Southern Confederacy the real object. 
 The next pretext will be the negro, or Slavery question.' 
 
 " Time has fully verified this prediction, and we have now 
 not only ' the negro, or Slavery question,' as the pretext, but 
 the real cause of the rebellion, and both must go down to- 
 gether. It is vain to attempt to reconstruct the Union with 
 the distracting element of Slavery in it. Experience has dem- 
 onstrated its incompatibility with free and republican govern- 
 ments, and it would be unwise and unjust longer to continue 
 it as one of the institutions of the country. While it remained 
 subordinate to the Constitution and laws of the United States, 
 I yielded to it my support; but when it became rebellious, and 
 attempted to rise above the Government, and control its action, 
 I threw my humble influence against it. 
 
 " The authority of the Government is supreme, and will ad- 
 mit of no rivalry. No institution can rise above it, whether 
 
XXXIV BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 it be Slavery or any other organized power. In our happy 
 form of government all must be subordinate to the will of the 
 people, when reflected through the Constitution and laws 
 made pursuant thereto — State or Federal. This great prin- 
 ciple lies at the foundation of every government, and cannot 
 be disregarded without the destruction of the government 
 itself. In the support and practice of correct principles we 
 can never reach wrong results ; and by rigorously adhering to 
 this great fundamental truth, the end will be the preservation 
 of the Union, and the overthrow of an institution which has 
 made war upon, and attempted the destruction of the Govern- 
 ment itself. 
 
 " The mode by which this great change — the emancipation 
 of the slave — can be effected, is properly found in the power 
 to amend the Constitution of the United States. This plan 
 is effectual and of no doubtful authority ; and while it does 
 not contravene the timely exercise of the war power by the 
 President in his Emancipation Proclamation, it comes stamped 
 with the authority of the people themselves, acting in accord- 
 ance with the written rule of the supreme law of the land, and 
 must therefore give more general satisfaction and quietude to 
 the distracted public mind. 
 
 " By recurring to the principles contained in the resolutions 
 so unanimously adopted by the Convention, I find that they 
 substantially accord with my public acts and opinions hereto- 
 fore made known and expressed, and are therefore most cordi- 
 ally indorsed and approved, and the nomination, having been 
 conferred without any solicitation on my part, is with the 
 greater pleasure accepted. 
 
 " In accepting the nomination I might here close, but I cannot 
 forego the opportunity of saying to my old friends of the Demo- 
 cratic party proper, with whom I have so long and pleasantly 
 been associated, that the hour has now come when that great 
 party can justly vindicate its devotion to true Democratic 
 policy and measures of expediency. The war is a war of 
 great principles. It involves the supremacy and life of the 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. XXXV 
 
 Government itself. If the rebellion triumphs, free government 
 — North and South — fails. If, on the other hand, the Gov- 
 ernment is successful, — as I do not doubt, — its destiny is 
 fixed, its basis permanent and enduring, and its career of 
 honor and glory just begun. In a great contest like this for 
 the existence of free government, the path of duty is patriot- 
 ism and principle. Minor considerations and questions of 
 administrative policy should give way to the higher duty of 
 first preserving the Government; and then there will be time 
 enough to wrangle over the men and measures pertaining to 
 its administration. 
 
 " This is not the hour for strife and division among ourselves. 
 Such differences of opinion only encourage the enemy, pro- 
 long the war, and waste the country. Unity of action and 
 concentration of power should be our watchword and rallying 
 cry. This accomplished, the time will rapidly approach when 
 their armies in the field — that great power of the rebellion — 
 will be broken and crushed by our gallant officers and brave 
 soldiers ; and ere long they will return to their homes and fire- 
 sides to resume again the avocations of peace, with the proud 
 consciousness that they have aided in the noble work of re- 
 establishing upon a surer and more permanent basis the great 
 temple of American Freedom. 
 
 "I am, gentlemen, with sentiments of high regard, 
 " Yours, truly, 
 
 "ANDREW JOHNSON." 
 
 On the 4th of October Governor Johnson ad- 
 dressed a meeting at Logansport, Indiana, and on the 
 24th of the same month spoke to the colored people 
 at Nashville, denouncing the aristocracy, and prom- 
 ising that their condition should be improved and 
 their rights guaranteed and protected. This speech, 
 and the circumstances attending it, are reported as 
 
XXX vi BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 follows, by a correspondent of the " Cincinnati Ga- 
 
 I have said the speech of Governor Johnson, delivered to 
 the colored population of Nashville on Monday night, was one 
 of the most remarkable to which it was ever my fortune to 
 listen. The time, the place, the circumstances, the audience, 
 the man, all combined to make a powerful impression upon a 
 spectator's mind. 
 
 The time was the fourth year of the rebellion, — the eve of 
 a great political contest which was to determine for all time 
 whether freedom or slavery in America should be over- 
 thrown. 
 
 The place was the proud city of the slaveholders, and im- 
 mediately in front of the haughty Capitol of Tennessee. 
 
 The circumstances were such as exist only amid the throes 
 and struggles of a mighty revolution. 
 
 The audience were men and women who only three years 
 ago were abject, miserable slaves, for whom there was appar- 
 ently no future and no hope. 
 
 The man was he who in a few days was certain to be chosen 
 to the second highest office within the gift of the American 
 people. 
 
 And this man, whose views and those of the President, soon 
 to be rechosen, are known to be in exact accord, and who, 
 from the position he holds, represents, more than any other 
 man save Lincoln, the power and majesty of the Republic, — 
 this man, standing before that audience of trembling, crouch- 
 ing bondsmen, — tore in pieces the last lingering excuse for 
 outrage and wrong ; threw from him the dishonored and dis- 
 honorable fragments, and planting himself squarely upon the 
 principles of justice and eternal right, declared that so far as 
 he was concerned there should henceforth be no compromise 
 with slavery anywhere ; but that the hour had come when 
 worth and merit, without regard to color, should be the stand- 
 ard by which to judge the value of a man. 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. XXXVU 
 
 Governor Johnson had already commenced speaking when 
 I succeeded in forcing my way through the dense crowd of 
 men and women who surrounded him, and stood within a few 
 feet of him. I have said that he spoke from the steps leading 
 up from the street (Cedar) to the State-House yard. In front 
 the street was filled up by a mass of human beings, so closely 
 compacted together that they seemed to compose one vast 
 body, no part of which could move without moving the whole. 
 The State-House yard itself, and the great stone wall which 
 separates it from the street, were also thronged. Over this 
 vast crowd the torches and transparencies, closely gathered 
 together near the speaker, cast a ruddy glow ; and, as far as 
 the light extended, the crowd could be seen stretching either 
 way up and down the street. 
 
 I had heard cheers and shouts long before I could distin- 
 guish the words of the speaker ; but when at last I succeeded 
 in getting close to the spot where he stood, a dead silence 
 prevailed, unbroken save by the speaker's voice. I listened 
 closely, and these, as far as my memory serves me, were the 
 wonderful words : — 
 
 " Colored Men of Nashville, — You have all heard of 
 the President's Proclamation, by which he announced to the 
 world that the slaves in a large portion of the seceded States 
 were thenceforth and forever free. For certain reasons, which 
 seemed wise to the President, the benefits of that Proclamation 
 did not extend to you or to your native State. Many of you 
 consequently were left in bondage. The taskmaster's scourge 
 was not yet broken, and the fetters still galled your limbs. 
 Gradually this iniquity has been passing away ; but the hour 
 has come when the last vestiges of it must be removed. Con- 
 sequently, I, too, without reference to the President or any 
 other person, have a proclamation to make; and, standing 
 here upon the steps of the Capitol, with the past history of the 
 State to witness, the present condition to guide, and its future 
 to encourage me, I, Andrew Johnson, do hereby proclaim free- 
 dom, full, broad; and unconditional, to every man in Ten- 
 
 d 
 
XXXV1U BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 It was one of those moments when the speaker seems in- 
 spired, and when his audience, catching the inspiration, rises 
 to his level and becomes one with him. Strangely as some of 
 the words of this immortal utterance sounded to those uncul- 
 tivated ears, I feel convinced that not one of them was misun- 
 derstood. With breathless attention those sons of bondage hung 
 upon each syllable ; each individual seemed carved in stone 
 until the last word of the grand climax was reached ; and then 
 the scene which followed beggars all description. One simul- 
 taneous roar of approval and delight burst from three thousand 
 throats. Flags, banners, torches, and transparencies were 
 waved wildly over the throng, or flung aloft in the ecstasy of 
 joy. Drums, fifes, and trumpets added to the uproar, and 
 the mighty tumult of this great mass of human beings rejoic- 
 ing for their race, woke up the slumbering echoes of the cap- 
 itol, vibrated throughout the length and breadth of the city, 
 rolled over the sluggish waters of the Cumberland, and rang 
 out far into the night beyond. 
 
 I am not attempting to repeat the Governor's speech. I 
 had neither note-book nor pencil when I listened to him ; and 
 if I had both of them I could not have used them in the 
 midst of that closely wedged crowd. I wish only to describe a 
 few of the points in his speech which made the deepest im- 
 pression on my mind. 
 
 Who has not heard of the great estate of Mack Cockrill, 
 situated near the city of Nashville, — an estate whose acres 
 are numbered by the thousand, whose slaves were once counted 
 by the score ? Mack Cockrill being a great slave-owner, was 
 of course a leading rebel, and in the very wantonness of 
 wealth, wrung from the sweat and toil and stolen wages of 
 others, gave fabulous sums at the outset of the war to aid Jeff. 
 Davis in overturning the Government. 
 
 Who has not heard of the princely estates of Gen. W. D. 
 Harding, who, by means of his property alone, outweighed in 
 influence any other man in Tennessee, no matter what were 
 that other's worth, or wisdom, or ability. Harding, too, early 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. XXXIX 
 
 espoused the cause of treason, and made it his boast that he 
 had contributed, and directly induced others to contribute, 
 millions of dollars in aid of that unholy cause. 
 
 These estates suggested to Governor Johnson one of the 
 most forcible points of his speech : — 
 
 " I am no agrarian," said he. " I wish to see secured to 
 every man, rich or poor, the fruits of his honest industry, ef- 
 fort, or toil. I want each man to feel that what he has gained 
 by his own skill, or talent, or exertion, is rightfully his, and 
 his alone. But if, through an iniquitous system, a vast amount 
 of wealth has been accumulated in the hands of one man, or 
 a few men, then that result is wrong, and the sooner we can 
 right it the better for all concerned. It is wrong that Mack 
 Cockrill and W. D. Harding, by means of forced and unpaid 
 labor, should have monopolized so large a share of the lands 
 and wealth of Tennessee ; and I say if their immense planta- 
 tions were divided up and parcelled out amongst a number of 
 free, industrious, and honest farmers, it would give more good 
 citizens to the Commonwealth, increase the wages of our me- 
 chanics, enrich the markets of our city, enliven all the arteries 
 of trade, improve society, and conduce to the greatness and 
 glory of the State." 
 
 And thus the Governor discussed the profoundest problems 
 of politics and social life in the presence of the despised blacks 
 of Nashville ; in their hearing denounced the grasping and 
 bloated monopoly of their masters ; and used the overgrown 
 estates of Harding and Cockrill to illustrate his doctrines, in 
 the presence of Harding's and CockrhTs slaves. 
 
 That portion of the Governor's speech in which he de- 
 scribed and denounced the aristocracy of Nashville, I cannot 
 hope to render properly ; but there was one point which I 
 must not overlook. 
 
 " The representatives of this corrupt, (and if you will per- 
 mit me almost to swear a little,) this damnable aristocracy, 
 taunt us with our desire to see justice done, and charge ua 
 with favoring negro equality. Of all living men they should 
 
xl BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 be the last to mouth that phrase ; and, even when uttered in 
 their hearing, it should cause their cheeks to tinge and burn 
 with shame. Negro equality, indeed ! Why, pass, any day, 
 along the sidewalks of High Street where these aristocrats 
 more particularly dwell, — these aristocrats, whose sons are 
 now in the bands of guerillas and cut-throats who prowl and 
 rob and murder around our city, — pass by their dwellings, I 
 say, and you will see as many mulatto as negro children, the 
 former bearing an unmistakable resemblance to their aristo- 
 cratic owners ! 
 
 " Colored men of Tennessee ! This, too, shall cease J Your 
 wives and daughters shall no longer be dragged into a concu- 
 binage, compared to which polygamy is a virtue, to satisfy 
 the brutal lusts of slaveholders and overseers ! Henceforth 
 the sanctity of God's holy law of marriage shall be respected 
 in your persons, and the great State of Tennessee shall no 
 more give her sanction to your degradation and your shame ! " 
 
 " Thank God ! thank God ! " came from the lips of a thou- 
 sand women, who in their own persons had experienced the 
 hellish iniquity of the man-seller's code. <l Thank God ! " fer- 
 vently echoed the fathers, husbands, brothers of these women. 
 
 " And if the law protects you in the possession of your 
 wives and children, if the law shields those whom you hold 
 dear from the unlawful grasp of lust, will you endeavor to be 
 true to yourselves, and shun, as it were death itself, the path 
 of lewdness, crime, and vice ? " 
 
 " We will ! we will ! " cried the assembled thousands ; and 
 joining in a sublime and tearful enthusiasm, another mighty 
 shout went up to heaven. 
 
 " Looking at this vast crowd of colored people," continued 
 the Governor, " and reflecting through what a storm of perse- 
 cution and obloquy they are compelled to pass, I am almost 
 induced to wish that, as in the days of old, a Moses might arise 
 who should lead them safely to their promised land of freedom 
 and happiness." 
 
 " You are our Moses," shouted several voices, and the ex- 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. xli 
 
 clamation was caught up and cheered until the Capitol rung 
 again. 
 
 " God," continued the speaker, " no doubt has prepared 
 somewhere an instrument for the great work he designs to per- 
 form in behalf of this outraged people, and in due time your 
 leader will come forth ; your Moses will be revealed to you." 
 
 ** We want no Moses but you ! " again shouted the crowd. 
 
 11 Well, then," replied the speaker, " humble and unworthy 
 as I am, if no other better shall be found, I will indeed be 
 your Moses, and lead you through the Red Sea of war and 
 bondage to a fairer future of liberty and peace. I speak now 
 as one who feels the world his country, and all who love 
 equal rights his friends. I speak, too, as a citizen of Tennes- 
 see. I am here on my own soil ; and here I mean to stay and 
 fight this great battle of truth and justice to a triumphant end. 
 Rebellion and slavery shall, by God's good help, no longer 
 pollute our State. Loyal men, whether white or black, shall 
 alone control her destinies ; and when this strife in which we 
 are all engaged is past, I trust, I know, we shall have a better 
 state of things, and shall all rejoice that honest labor reaps 
 the fruit of its own industry, and that every man has a fair 
 chance in the race of life." 
 
 It is impossible to describe the enthusiasm which followed 
 these words. Joy beamed in every countenance. Tears and 
 laughter followed each other in quick succession. The great 
 throng moved and swayed back and forth in the intensity of 
 emotion, and shout after shout rent the air. 
 
 A man might have exchanged an ordinary immortality to 
 have made such a speech to such an audience, and been much 
 the gainer. 
 
 It was a speech significant of one of the loftiest positions to 
 which mankind, struggling upward toward universal freedom, 
 has as yet attained. 
 
 The great Tribune descended from the steps of the Capitol. 
 As if by ma^ic the dense throng parted to let him through. 
 And all that night long his name was mingled with the curses 
 d* 
 
xlii BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 and execrations of the traitor and oppressor, and with the 
 blessings o^ the oppressed and poor. 
 
 The result of the Presidential election on the 
 14th of November, 1864, is well known. All of the 
 States voting save three, gave immense majorities 
 for Lincoln and Johnson, thus indorsing the former 
 administration of Mr. Lincoln and promising renewed 
 and continued support. 
 
 On the 4th of March, 1865, the ceremonies of 
 inauguration were performed at Washington, in 
 the presence of an immense concourse of people. 
 Vice-President Johnson was duly qualified, and 
 assumed the duties of President of the Senate. 
 The affairs of the nation were progressing in the 
 most auspicious manner. The military operations 
 of Generals Grant and Sherman attracted and 
 absorbed the attention of the nation. President 
 Lincoln, who was at the front with the Lieutenant- 
 General, had sent despatch after despatch containing 
 words of good cheer, culminating with the news of 
 the evacuation of Richmond and Petersburg, and 
 the occupation of those cities by the Federal troops. 
 The country was wild with delight, and throughout 
 the loyal States the people gathered together to give 
 expression to their satisfaction. At the meeting 
 in Washington on the 3d of April, Vice-President 
 Johnson spoke as follows : — 
 
 "As I have been introduced, I will make one or two remarks, 
 for I feel that no one would be justified in attempting to make 
 an address on such an occasion, when the excitement is justly 
 at so great a height. 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. xliii 
 
 " We are now, my friends, winding up a rebellion, — a great 
 effort that has been made by bad men to overthrow the Govern- 
 ment of the United States, — a Government founded upon free 
 principles, and cemented by the best blood of the Revolution. 
 [Cheers.] You must indulge me in making one single remark 
 in connection with myself. At the time that the traitors in the 
 Senate of the United States plotted against the Government, 
 and entered into a conspiracy more foul, more execrable, and 
 more odious than that of Catiline against the Romans, I 
 happened to be a member of that body, and, as to loyalty 
 stood solitary and alone among the Senators from the Southern 
 States. 
 
 " I was then and there called upon to know what I could do 
 with such traitors, and I want to repeat my reply here. I 
 said, if we had an Andrew Jackson he would hang them as 
 high as Hainan ; but as he is no more, and sleeps in his grave 
 in his own beloved State, where traitors and treason have even 
 insulted his tomb and the very earth that covers his remains, 
 humble as I am, when you ask me what I would do, my reply 
 is, I would arrest them — I would try them — I would convict 
 them, and I would hang them. 
 
 "As humble as I am and have been, I have pursued but one, 
 undeviating course. All that I have — life, limb, and property 
 — have been put at the disposal of the country in this great 
 struggle. I have been in camp, I have been in the field, I 
 have been everywhere where this great rebellion was ; I have 
 pursued it until I believe I can now see its termination. Since 
 the world began, there never has been a rebellion of such 
 gigantic proportions, so infamous in character, so diabolical in 
 motive, so entirely disregardful of the laws of civilized war. It 
 has introduced the most savage mode of warfare ever prac- 
 tised upon the earth. 
 
 " I will repeat here a remark, for which I have been in no 
 small degree censured. What is it, allow me to ask, that has 
 sustained the nation in this great struggle ? The cry has been, 
 you know, that our Government was not strong enough for a 
 time of rebellion ; that in such a time she would have to con- 
 
xliv BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 tend against internal weakness as well as internal foes. We 
 have now given the world evidence that such is not the fact ; 
 and when the rebellion shall have been crushed out, and the 
 nation shall once again have settled down in peace, our Gov- 
 ernment will rest upon a more enduring basis than ever be- 
 fore. 
 
 " But, my friends, in what has the great strength of this Gov- 
 ernment consisted. Has it been in one-man power ? Has 
 it been in some autocrat, or in some one man who held abso- 
 lute government ? No ! I thank God I have it in my power 
 to proclaim the great truth, that this Government has derived 
 its strength from the American people. They have issued the 
 edict ; they have exercised the power that has resulted in the 
 overthrow of the rebellion, and there is not another govern- 
 ment upon the face of the earth that could have withstood the 
 shock. 
 
 " We can now congratulate ourselves that we possess the 
 strongest, the freest, and the best Government the world ever 
 saw. Thank God that we have lived through this trial, and 
 that, looking in your intelligent faces here to-day, I can an- 
 nounce to you the great fact that Petersburg, the outpost to 
 the strong citadel, has been occupied by our brave and gallant 
 officers and our untiring, invincible soldiers. And not content 
 with that, they have captured the citadel itself, — the strong- 
 hold of traitors. Richmond is ours, and is now occupied by 
 the forces of the United States ! Her gates have been en- 
 tered, and the glorious Stars and Stripes, the emblem of 
 Union, of power, and of supremacy, now float over the enemy's 
 capitol ! 
 
 " In the language of another, let that old flag rise higher and 
 higher, until it meets the sun in his coming, and let the parting 
 day linger to play upon its ample folds. It is the flag of your 
 country, it is your flag, it is my flag, and it bids defiance to all 
 the nations of the earth, and the encroachments of all the 
 powers combined. It is not my intention to make any im- 
 prudent remarks or allusions, but the hour will come when 
 those nations that exhibited toward us such insolence and 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. xlv 
 
 improper interference in the midst of our adversity, and, as 
 they supposed, of our weakness, will learn that this is a Gov- 
 ernment of the people possessing power enough to make itself 
 felt and respected. 
 
 " In the midst of our rejoicing, we must not forget to drop 
 a tear for those gallant fellows who have shed their blood that 
 their Government must triumph. We cannot forget them 
 when we view the many bloody battle-fields of the war, the 
 new-made graves, our maimed friends and relatives, who have 
 left their limbs, as it were, on the enemy's soil, and others 
 who have been consigned to their long narrow houses, with 
 no winding-sheet save their blankets saturated with their 
 blood. 
 
 " One word more, and I have done. It is this : I am in favor 
 of leniency ; but, in my opinion, evil-doers should be punished. 
 [Cries of ' That 'a so.'] Treason is the highest crime known 
 in the catalogue of crimes, and for him that is guilty of it — 
 for him that is willing to lift his impious hand against the au- 
 thority of the nation — I would say death is too easy a pun- 
 ishment. My notion is that treason must be made odious 
 and traitors must be punished and impoverished, their social 
 power broken, though they must be made to feel the penalty 
 of their crime. You, my friends, have traitors in your very 
 midst, and treason needs rebuke and punishment here as well 
 as elsewhere. It is not the men in the field who are the 
 greatest traitors. It is the men who have encouraged them to 
 imperil their lives, while they themselves have remained at 
 home, expending their means and exerting all their power to 
 overthrow the Government. Hence I say this : ' The halter 
 to intelligent, influential traitors.' But to the honest boy, to 
 the deluded man, who has been deceived into the rebel ranks, 
 I would extend leniency ; I would say, ' Return to your alle- 
 giance, renew your support to the Government, and become a 
 good citizen ; ' but the leaders I would hang. I hold, too, that 
 wealthy traitors should be made to remunerate those men who 
 have suffered as a consequence of their crime, — Union men 
 who have lost their property, who have been driven from their 
 
xlvi BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 homes, beggars and wanderers among strangers. It is well to 
 talk about these things here to-day, in addressing the well- 
 informed persons who compose this audience. You can, to a 
 very great extent, aid in moulding public opinion, and in giv- 
 ing it a proper direction. Let us commence the work. We 
 have put down these traitors in arms ; let us put them down in 
 law, in public judgment, and in the morals of the world." 
 
 The fall of Richmond was followed by the sur- 
 render of Lee's army on the 9th of April. Five 
 days after, on the evening of the 14th, the bullet 
 of the assassin struck down the head of the Na- 
 tion, but it did not still the pulsations of its heart 
 nor paralyze the action of its limbs. As the 
 dreadful intelligence flashed over the electric wire, 
 throughout the length and breadth of the land, the 
 whole country stood for a moment, speechless and 
 breathless, appalled by the dastardly outrage. The 
 first thought of the Nation was for the safety of its 
 Government. Self-perpetuating, the Government 
 received, but scarcely felt, a shock which would 
 have overthrown the dynasties of the Old World. 
 The wires were yet trembling with the burden of 
 the sad message, " Abraham Lincoln died this morn- 
 ing at twenty-two minutes after seven o'clock." when 
 they were again called to proclaim that " Andrew 
 Johnson was sworn into office as President of the 
 United States, by Chief Justice Chase, to-day at 
 eleven o'clock." 
 
 The formal ceremonies were brief but dignified, 
 promptly performed, but invested with an unusual 
 solemnity by the sad event which had rendered 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. xlvii 
 
 them necessary. Immediately on the death of 
 President Lincoln, Hon. James Speed, Attorney- 
 General of the United States, waited upon Vice- 
 President Johnson with the following official com- 
 munication : — 
 
 " Washington City, April 15, 1865. 
 11 Andrew Johnson, Vice-President of the United States. 
 
 " Sir, — Abraham Lincoln, President of the United 
 States, was shot by an assassin last evening at Ford's Theatre, 
 in this city, and died at the hour of twenty-two minutes after 
 seven o'clock. About the same time at which the President 
 was shot, an assassin entered the sick chamber of Hon. W. H. 
 Seward, Secretary of State, and stabbed him in several places 
 in the throat, neck, and face, severely, if no tmortally, wound- 
 ing him. Other members of the Secretary's family were dan- 
 gerously wounded by the assassin, while making his escape. 
 
 " By the death of President Lincoln the office of President 
 has devolved, under the Constitution, upon you. The emer- 
 gency of the Government demands that you should immedi- 
 ately qualify according to the requirements of the Constitution, 
 and enter upon the duties of President of the United States. 
 If you will please make known your pleasure, such arrange- 
 ments as you deem proper will be made. 
 
 " Your obedient servants, 
 "Hugh McCulloch, Secretary of the Treasury; Ed- 
 win M. Stanton, Secretary of War; Gideon 
 Welles, Secretary of the Navy; William Den- 
 nison, Postmaster- General ; J. P. Usher, Secre- 
 tary of the Interior; James Speed, Attorney- 
 General." 
 
 Mr. Johnson suggested ten o'clock as the hour, 
 and his apartments at the Kirkwood House as the 
 place, where, at the hour designated, the ceremony 
 was performed. 
 
xlviii BIOGRAPHICAL INTRODUCTION. 
 
 After the oath had been administered, President 
 Johnson delivered the following address : — 
 
 "Gentlemen, — I must be permitted to say that I have 
 been almost overwhelmed by the announcement of the sad 
 event which has so recently occurred. I feel incompetent to 
 perform duties so important and responsible as those which 
 have been so unexpectedly thrown upon me. As to an in- 
 dication of any policy which may be pursued by me in the 
 administration of the Government, I have to say, that that 
 must be left for development as the administration progresses. 
 The message or declaration must be made by the acts as they 
 transpire. The only assurance that I can now give of the 
 future, is by reference to the past. The course which I have 
 taken in the past, in connection with this rebellion, must be 
 regarded as a guarantee of the future. My past public life, 
 which has been long and laborious, has been founded, as I in 
 good conscience believe, upon a great principle of right, which 
 lies at the basis of all things. The best energies of my life 
 have been spent in endeavoring to establish and perpetuate 
 the principles of free government, and I believe that the 
 Government, in passing through its present trials, will settle 
 down upon principles consonant with popular rights more 
 permanent and enduring than heretofore. I must be permit- 
 ted to say, if I understand the feelings of my own heart, I 
 have long labored to ameliorate and alleviate the condition of 
 the great mass of the American people. Toil, and an honest 
 advocacy of the great principles of free government, have 
 been my lot. The duties have been mine — the consequences 
 are God's. This has been the foundation of my political 
 creed. I feel that in the end the Government will triumph, 
 and that these great principles will be permanently established. 
 
 In conclusion, gentlemen, let me say that I want your en- 
 couragement and countenance. I shall ask and rely upon you 
 and others in carrying the Government through its present 
 perils. I feel, in making this request, that it will be heartily 
 responded to by you, and all other patriots and lovers of the 
 rights and interests of a free people." 
 
SPEECH ON THE VETO-POWER. 
 
 DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED 
 STATES, AUGUST 2, 1848. 
 
 Mr. Chairman : — I have for some days 
 attempted to obtain possession of the floor when 
 the House has been in Committee of the Whole 
 on the state of the Union, and having at length 
 succeeded, I may not confine myself to the pending 
 question, but diverge to others of a more general 
 character, as other gentlemen have done who have 
 preceded me in debate. I make the admission 
 frankly that I shall introduce some general topics of 
 discussion in the course of my argument, if anything 
 that I shall say may be dignified with the appella- 
 tion of an argument. However, as an hour is but 
 a very limited time in which to speak on such varied 
 and important questions as present themselves to my 
 mind, I shall directly address myself to those ques- 
 tions, and if I cannot embody all my views, I may 
 be able to present the outline, the bones, the general 
 contour of those subjects, and leave to those who 
 may feel sufficient interest in them to listen to my 
 remarks to fill up the outlines and clothe the bones 
 with suitable muscles and flesh. 
 
 For the last two or three days, and I may say 
 
2 THE SPEECHES 
 
 weeks, the more immediate subjects of discussion 
 have been twofold. The first was the veto-power ; 
 and the next was the origin, progress, and conse- 
 quences of the war with Mexico. To these ques- 
 tions, then, I shall confine myself. And, in relation 
 to the veto-power, I confess I feel great diffidence 
 in approaching a subject of so much importance ; 
 for at one period of my life I entertained some 
 doubts as to the exercise of the veto-power myself. 
 But from the most thorough investigation, I have 
 become entirely satisfied as to the propriety of the 
 creation and establishment of this power by the 
 Constitution. 
 
 In the discussion of the veto-power, and tracing 
 it from its origin to the present time, I may be 
 charged with something of ultraism ; for, upon a 
 more complete examination, I find it to be of plebeian 
 origin. 
 
 Where did the veto-power originate ? It was 
 established to enable the people to resist and repel 
 encroachments on their rights. The veto-power had 
 its origin in old Rome 3507 Anno Mundt ; and be- 
 fore Christ 497 ; and from the building of the city 
 of Rome 255 ; which would make, since its origin, 
 2345 years. These dates will show that the people 
 of Rome had been submitting to gradual encroach- 
 ments two hundred and fifty-five years, until further 
 submission was insupportable. At this period the 
 levies and laws of the Roman Senate were so enor- 
 mous and oppressive that the people were compelled 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 3 
 
 to employ means to resist their further encroach- 
 ment. The people en masse retired to a mountain 
 three miles distant from Rome, called Monsacer, 
 and were there addressed by Junius Lucius and 
 Sicinius Bellerus with masculine eloquence, — ■ 
 always the child of nature, — which induced the 
 people to compel the Roman Senate to yield the 
 power to them to establish five tribunes from among 
 themselves, which, in process of time, were increased 
 to ten, who should be clothed with the veto-power. 
 These tribunes were placed at the Senate-door, and 
 all laws passed by the Roman Senate were pre- 
 sented to them for their approval or rejection. If 
 they approved a law, it was signed with the letter 
 T ; but if not approved, they used the word veto, 
 which signifies " I forbid." This is the origin of 
 the veto-power ; and so long as it was exercised by 
 tribunes or officers immediately responsible to the 
 people for their election or appointment, the end 
 that the people designed was successfully accom- 
 plished — that is, resistance to encroachments on 
 their rights. And so long as this power was pre- 
 served in its original purity and simplicity, it was 
 exercised to the advancement of the people's rights 
 and interests. 
 
 Augustus, 706 years from the building of the city 
 of Rome, or four hundred' and fifty-one years after 
 the establishment of the veto-power by the people, 
 so managed as to have the power in practice con- 
 ferred upon himself; and here is the first union of 
 
4 THE SPEECHES 
 
 the veto-power and royalty. The tribunes were still 
 elected, and existed nominally, but in fact they ex- 
 ercised no tribunitian power. The tribunes, in fact, 
 continued to exist until the reign of Constantine, 
 which was nine hundred and thirty-three years from 
 the building of the city, or six hundred and seventy- 
 eight years from the creation of the veto, when the 
 office of tribune was completely merged in royalty, 
 and abolished. 
 
 We may now pass on from this period of time to 
 the exercise of the veto-power in modern Europe ; 
 and, from the days of Augustus, we shall see that the 
 exercise of this power has passed to the opposite end 
 of the line, — that is, from the people to the Crown. 
 
 In England, by a resolution of parliament, this 
 power was conferred upon the King, and has not 
 been exercised by him since 1692, which makes one 
 hundred and fifty-six years ; and from this an argu- 
 ment is drawn to prove that even the King of Eng- 
 land is afraid to exercise the veto-power, and there- 
 fore it is dangerous, and should never be exercised 
 in a democracy or a republic. 
 
 The King of England is not immediately respon- 
 sible to the people for the exercise of this power, or 
 responsible to them for the position he holds. He 
 ascends the throne in the course of hereditary suc- 
 cession ; and, when the power is exercised by him, 
 in most instances it is to resist popular will, instead 
 of carrying it out ; hence the great fear of exercising 
 the veto-power in England, lest the popular will 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 5 
 
 should become so strong that it would overturn the 
 throne ; and consequently the King resorts to the 
 liberal bestowment of the immense patronage at his 
 disposal to defeat those measures, on their passage, 
 which would require the exercise of the veto-power, 
 as necessary to protect the other prerogatives of the 
 Crown. 
 
 The Constituent Assembly of France conferred 
 the veto-power on the King in 1789, but the very 
 first exercise of it proved his ruin ; it was in opposi- 
 tion to popular will, and in protection of the pre- 
 rogatives of the Crown. The same power was also 
 vested with the King of Norway, and in this in- 
 stance it was exercised twice to sustain the family 
 upon the throne, until at last the popular will be 
 came so strong that it resulted in his overthrow. 
 
 I might go into detail, or more at length, in the 
 cases enumerated, and even refer to others, but time 
 will not permit. 
 
 I will now pass to a point of time when this power 
 returns to its original source, — the people. 
 
 The patriots and sages of the Revolution, who 
 were perfectly familiar with the veto-power as it 
 existed in the colonies and the mother-country, 
 after effecting our separation from Great Britain, 
 were called upon to form a Constitution, and in that 
 Constitution we find the veto-power established, 
 and to be exercised by the people. This Consti- 
 tution was submitted to the States, and, after mature 
 and deliberate consideration by them, it was adopted, 
 l* 
 
6 THE SPEECHES 
 
 On the 4th of March, 1789, George Washington, 
 the father of his country, delegate to and president 
 of the Convention that framed the Constitution, was 
 inaugurated President of the United States, and, for 
 the first time under the Constitution, the veto-power 
 was exercised, — or, according to our opponents of 
 this day, the " one-man " or u despotic power, " and 
 that, too, upon the ground of convenience and econ- 
 omy, and the second time upon constitutional 
 grounds. And in this connection, although Mr. 
 Jefferson never exercised the power while Presi- 
 dent, we can adduce proof which shows that he 
 approved of the incorporation of the power into our 
 Constitution, and of its exercise afterwards. In his 
 letter to Mr. Madison, written when he was in 
 Paris, dated December 20, 178T, he takes decided 
 ground in favor of the veto. 
 
 In his opinion, as written out whilst Secretary of 
 State during General Washington's administration, 
 he urged its exercise, upon the ground that its 
 omission might be construed into a non-user, or 
 an official negligence. We find, then, that these 
 two men, whose patriotism and purity of purpose 
 no mortal man can doubt, were in favor of the 
 veto-power, as established in the Constitution. 
 
 James Madison, the third Republican President, 
 and, as he is called by some, " the great Apostle of 
 Liberty," who was a member of the Convention 
 that framed the great chart of American liberty, 
 and afterwards President of the United States, and 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 7 
 
 that, too, while all was fresh and green on his 
 memory of the oppressions and outrages that had 
 been committed by the British Government, under 
 every pretence whatever, exercised this power six 
 times during his eight years' administration. 
 
 Next, we come to Mr. Monroe ; and, during his 
 administration, it will be remembered that it was 
 called " the era of good-will and conciliation of all 
 parties " ; who, it may be said, came into power 
 almost without opposition, and under whose ad- 
 ministration parties were almost merged, — a man 
 that no one will charge with possessing the first 
 element of the tyrant or the despot, and of whom 
 it might be said, that he was a war-hating and 
 peace-loving man ; he ventured to exercise this 
 power once. 
 
 We then pass over Mr. J. Q. Adams's adminis- 
 tration to that of Andrew Jackson ; and, notwith- 
 standing he has been denounced as arbitrary and 
 tyrannical, — that his will was iron and his nerves 
 were steel, — even he, in the use of this power, 
 always exercised it in defence of the people's inter- 
 ests, and in resisting encroachments on their rights. 
 By this man it was exercised nine times, and the 
 people said, " Well done, thou good and faithful 
 servant." 
 
 We will pass by the administration of Mr. Van 
 Buren to that of John Tyler, called by some — but 
 not by me — in derision, " the Accidency Presi- 
 dent," who exercised this power four times; and 
 
8 THE SPEECHES 
 
 under his administration is the only instance in 
 which a law was passed over a veto, by two thirds 
 of the two Houses of Congress, since the origin of 
 the government, and that an unimportant law. 
 Next comes Mr. Polk's administration, and since 
 he came into power it has been exercised three 
 times. 
 
 Thus it will be seen, that from the origin f the 
 government to the present time this power has 
 been exercised twenty-five times. The whole num- 
 ber of laws passed, from the organization of the 
 government, and approved, is about seven thou- 
 sand ; which would make one veto to every two 
 hundred and eighty acts, — a very small propor- 
 tion ; and I think I may appeal with confidence to 
 all those who are conversant with legislation here, 
 whether it would not have been better for the peo- 
 ple and the country if five thousand out of the 
 seven thousand had been vetoed. I have been thus 
 particular in giving the origin and exercise of the 
 veto-power to prove, that whenever it has been 
 exercised in compliance with the popular will, by a 
 tribune or president, or by any other name you may 
 think proper to give him, so that he is immediately 
 responsible to the people, it operates well. And to 
 show further, that whenever this power is retained 
 in the hands of the people, men entertaining certain 
 principles, without any regard to their party name, 
 make war upon this power when at this end of the 
 line ; but whenever it is transferred to the other 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 9 
 
 end, and placed in the hands of irresponsible per- 
 sons, they become its defenders and advocates. 
 And this brings me up directly to one of the issues 
 between the parties in this government. 
 
 By an examination of the Constitution, we find 
 the veto-power lodged in another department of the 
 government, as well as with the Executives ; and 
 that department is irresponsible to the people. I 
 mean that the Judiciary, who are appointed to 
 office during life, — or, tantamount thereto, dur- 
 ing good behavior, — exercise the veto-power abso- 
 lutely. They are men, and subject to all the prej- 
 udices and influences of other men, according to 
 their construction of the Constitution. They can 
 veto every act of Congress, after its approval by the 
 President, and that veto is final. But against the 
 exercise of this power by this department of the 
 government the Federal party make no complaint ; 
 but think it a perfectly safe place for the lodg- 
 ment of the power, as it is beyond the reach of 
 the people ; which will at once show to every 
 reflecting and intelligent mind the sincerity of 
 the Opposition in making war on the exercise of 
 the veto-power, when exercised by that department 
 of the Government immediately responsible to the 
 people. 
 
 I cannot, Mr. Chairman, though pressed for time, 
 
 dismiss the subject without noticing the figure or 
 
 simile of the snag-boat used by the gentleman from 
 
 Ohio. 1 In this illustration he represents the Con- 
 
 1 Mr. Schenck. 
 
10 THE SPEECHES 
 
 stitution as the Mississippi, and the veto-power 
 as a " snag " ; and he comes forward making great 
 preparation w T ith his snag-boat, throwing out his 
 grappling-irons, raising the steam, the wheels revolv- 
 ing, determined to extract this principle, the veto, 
 from the Constitution. 
 
 This is an illustration of what I have just before 
 said, that where the people, either directly or indi- 
 rectly, can exert their power through the Constitu- 
 tion by an officer chosen by themselves, the snag- 
 boat of Federal power is brought forward to tear it 
 out by the roots. But I do not look upon the veto 
 power as a " snag " on the Mississippi, to obstruct 
 the navigation to our commerce ; but as a break- 
 water, to use the figure, placed on the people's sea 
 or Constitution, to arrest the mighty current of Fed- 
 eral power, heavily setting in, or to break the dash- 
 ing waves of encroachments upon their liberties and 
 their interests. The veto, as exercised by the Ex- 
 ecutives, is conservative, and enables the people, 
 through their tribunitian officer, the President, to 
 arrest or suspend for the time being unconstitutional, 
 hasty, and improvident legislation, until the people, 
 the sovereigns in this country, have time and oppor- 
 tunity to consider of its propriety. But the member 
 from Ohio seems determined to tear out that portion 
 of the Constitution where the people can be heard 
 and felt. 
 
 But in that other department of government 
 where they have no voice, they are compelled to 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. H 
 
 submit to its absolute exercise, unless they resort to 
 a revolution or to an amendment of the Constitution. 
 
 For myself, I will take the instrument as it is 
 handed down by Washington and his compeers ; 
 and if it is tyranny to exercise this power as it has 
 been, — approved by every Republican President 
 from Washington's inauguration down to the pres- 
 ent time, not even excepting General Harrison, 
 who was brought into power by the Whigs, out of 
 that chaotic state of things which existed in 1840, 
 I am willing to abide by it, and await the ultimate 
 decision of the people on the subject. If the gen- 
 tleman from Ohio could succeed with his Federal 
 snag-boat in extracting the people's power, the veto, 
 from the Constitution, the harmony of our beautiful 
 though complex form of government would be lost, 
 — the equilibrium would be gone, and some of the 
 departments would absorb the others, or become 
 liquids, and result in the concentration of all power 
 in one department. 
 
 Time will not permit, if I were disposed and 
 capable, of going into an analysis of the power of 
 this Government. I have not the time \o take it 
 down and examine each element, and then set it up 
 again. I must content myself with what I have 
 hastily and crudely said, and pass on to the next 
 proposition I propose to discuss. 
 
]2 THE SPEECHES 
 
 SPEECH ON THE HOMESTEAD BILL. 
 
 DELIVERED IN THK SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, MAY 20, 1858. 
 
 The Senate having under consideration the bill to grant to 
 any person who is the head of a family, and a citizen of the 
 United States, a homestead of one hundred and sixty acres of 
 land out of the public domain, upon the condition of occu- 
 pancy and cultivation of the same for the period of five years, 
 Mr. Johnson said : — 
 
 Mr. President : — The immediate proposition 
 before the Senate is an amendment offered by 
 the honorable Senator from North* Carolina, 1 
 which provides that there shall be a land-warrant 
 issued to each head of a family, by the Secre- 
 tary of the Interior, and distributed among those 
 who do not emigrate to the public domain and take 
 possession of and cultivate the land for the term of 
 years specified in the bill. I have something to say 
 in reference to that amendment, but I will not say 
 it in this connection. I will take it up in its order. 
 I propose, in the first place, to explain briefly the 
 provisions of the bill. 
 
 The first section provides for granting one hun- 
 dred and sixty acres of land to every head of a 
 family who will emigrate to any of the public do- 
 
 1 Mr. Clingman. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 13 
 
 main and settle upon it, and cultivate it for a term 
 of five years. Upon those facts being made known 
 to the register of the land-office, the emigrant is to be 
 entitled to obtain a patent. The second section pro- 
 vides that he shall make an affidavit, and show to the 
 satisfaction of the officer that his entry is made in 
 good faith, and that his intention is to cultivate the 
 soil and become an actual settler. The sixth section 
 of the bill provides that any person who is now an 
 inhabitant of the United States, but not a citizen, if 
 he makes application, and in the course of five years 
 becomes a citizen of the United States, shall be 
 placed on a footing of equality with the native-born 
 citizens of the country in this respect. The third 
 section provides that those entries shall be confined 
 to land that has been in market, and subjected to 
 private entry ; and that the persons entering the land 
 shall be confined to each alternate section. 
 
 These are substantially the leading provisions of 
 this bill.- It does not proceed upon the idea, as 
 some suppose, of making a donation or gift of the 
 public land to the settler. It proceeds upon the 
 principle of consideration ; and I conceive, and I 
 think many others do, that the individual who 
 emigrates to the West, and reclaims and reduces to 
 cultivation one hundred and sixty acres of the public 
 domain, subjecting himself to all the privations and 
 hardships of such a life, pays the highest considera- 
 tion for his land. 
 
 But, before I say more on this portion of the 
 2 
 
14 THE SPEECHES 
 
 subject, I desire to premise a little by giving the 
 history of this homestead proposition. Some per- 
 sons from my own region of the country, or, in 
 other words, from the South, have thrown out the 
 intimation that this is a proposition which panakes, 
 to some extent, of the nature of the Emigrant Aid 
 Society, and is to operate injuriously to the Southern 
 States. For the purpose of making the starting- 
 point right, I want to go back and show when this 
 proposition was first introduced into the Congress 
 of the United States. I am not sure but that the 
 Presiding Officer 1 remembers well the history of 
 this measure. 
 
 In 1846, on the 27th day of March, long before 
 we had any emigrant aid societies, long before we 
 had the compromises of 1850 in reference to the 
 slavery question, long before we had any agitation 
 on the subject of slavery in 1854, long before we 
 had any agitation upon it in 1858, this proposition 
 made its advent into the House of Representatives. 
 It met with considerable opposition. It scarcely 
 received serious consideration for a length of time ; 
 but the measure was pressed until the- public mind 
 took hold of it ; and it was still pressed until the 
 12th day of May, 1852, when it passed that body 
 by a two-thirds vote. Thus we see that its origin 
 and its consummation, so far as the House of 
 Representatives was concerned, had nothing to do 
 with North or South, but proceeded upon that 
 
 1 Mr. Foot of Vermont in the chair. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 15 
 
 great principle which interests every man in this 
 country, and which, in the end, secures and pro- 
 vides for him a home. By putting these dates 
 together, it will be perceived that it was just six 
 years five months and fifteen days from the introduc- 
 tion of this bill until its passage by the House of 
 Representatives. 
 
 I shall not detain the Senate by any lengthy re- 
 marks on the general principles of the bill ; for I do 
 not intend to be prolix, or to consume much of the 
 Senate's time. What is the origin of the great idea 
 of a homestead of land ? We find, on turning to 
 the first law-writer, — and I think one of the best, 
 for we are informed that lie wrote by inspiration, — 
 that he advances the first idea on this subject. 
 Moses made use of the following language : — 
 
 " The land shall not be sold forever ; for the land is mine — 
 for ye are strangers and sojourners with me." — Leviticus, 
 chapter xxv. verse 23. 
 
 We begin, then, with Moses. The next writer 
 to whom I will call the attention of the Senate is 
 Vattel — one of the ablest, if not the ablest writer 
 upon the laws of nations. He lays down this great 
 principle : x 
 
 "Of all the arts, tillage or agriculture is the most useful and 
 necessary. It is the nursing-father of the State. The culti- 
 vation of the earth causes it to produce an infinite increase ; 
 it forms the surest resource, and the most solid fund of rich 
 commerce for the people who enjoy a happy climate. 
 
 " This affair, then, deserves the utmost attention from gov- 
 
 l Vattel, Book I. ch. 7. 
 
16 THE SPEECHES 
 
 ernment. The sovereign ought to neglect no means of 
 rendering the land under his obedience as well cultivated as 
 possible. He ought not to allow either communities or private 
 persons to acquire large tracts of land to leave uncultivated. 
 These rights of common, which deprive the proprietor of the 
 free liberty of disposing of his lands, — that will not allow him 
 to farm them, and cause them to be cultivated in the most 
 advantageous manner, — these rights, I say, are contrary to the 
 welfare of the state, and ought to be suppressed or reduced to 
 a just bound. The property introduced among the citizens 
 does not prevent the nation's having a right to take the most 
 effectual measures to cause the whole country to produce the 
 greatest and most advantageous revenue possible. 
 
 " The government ought carefully to avoid everything 
 capable of discouraging husbandmen, or of diverting them 
 from the labors of agriculture. Those taxes, those excessive 
 and ill-proportioned impositions, the burden of which falls 
 almost entirely upon the cultivators, and the vexations they 
 suffer from the commissioners who levy them, take from the 
 unhappy peasant the means of cultivating the earth, and 
 depopulate the country. Spain is the most fertile, and the 
 worst cultivated country in Europe. The Church possesses 
 too much land, and the undertakers of royal magazines, who 
 are authorized to purchase at low prices all the corn they find 
 in possession of a peasant, above what is necessary for the sub- 
 sistence of his wife and family, so greatly discourage the 
 husbandman, that he sows no more corn than is necessary for 
 the support of his own household. Whence arises the greatest 
 scarcity in a country capable of feeding its neighbors. 
 
 "Another abuse injurious to agriculture is, the contempt 
 cast upon husbandmen. The inhabitants of cities, even the 
 most servile artist and the most lazy citizen, consider him 
 who cultivates the soil with a disdainful eye ; they humble and 
 discourage him ; they dare to despise a profession that feeds the 
 human race — the natural employment of man. A stay-maker 
 places far beneath him the beloved employment of the first 
 consuls and dictators of Rome. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. > 17 
 
 " China has wisely prevented this abuse. Agriculture ia 
 there held in honor ; and to preserve this happy manner of 
 thinking, every year, on a solemn day, the Emperor himself, 
 followed by the whole court, sets his hands to the plow and 
 sows a small piece of land. Hence China is the best cultivated 
 country in the world. It nourishes an innumerable multitude 
 of people that at first appears to the traveller too great for the 
 space they possess. 
 
 " The cultivation of the soil is not only to be recommended 
 by the government on account of the extraordinary advan- 
 tages that flow from it, but from its being an obligation im- 
 posed by nature on mankind. The whole earth is appointed 
 for the nourishment of its inhabitants, but it would be incapa- 
 ble of doing it was it uncultivated. Every nation is then 
 obliged by a law of nature to cultivate the ground that has 
 fallen to its share, and it has no right to expect or require 
 assistance from others, any further than the land in its pos- 
 session is incapable of furnishing it with necessaries. Those 
 people, like the ancient Germans and modern Tartars, who, 
 having fertile countries, disdain to cultivate the earth, and 
 rather choose to live by rapine, are wanting to themselves, and 
 deserve to be exterminated as savage and rapacious beasts. 
 There are others who avoid agriculture, who would only live 
 by hunting and flocks. This might doubtless be allowed in 
 the first ages of the world, when the earth produced more than 
 was sufficient to feed its few inhabitants; but at present, when 
 the human race is so greatly multiplied, it would not subsist if 
 all nations resolved to live in this manner. Those who still 
 retain this idle life, usurp more extensive territories than they 
 would have occasion for were they to use honest labor, and 
 have, therefore, no reason to complain if other nations, more 
 laborious and too closely confined, come to possess a part. 
 Thus, though the conquest of the civilized empires of Peru 
 and Mexico was a notorious usurpation, the establishment 
 of many colonies in North America may, on their confining 
 themselves within just bounds, be extremely lawful. The 
 2* 
 
18 • THE SPEECHES 
 
 people of those vast countries rather overran than inhabited 
 them." 
 
 I propose next to cite the authority of General 
 Jackson, who was believed to be not only a friend 
 to the South but a friend to the Union. He 
 inculcated this great doctrine in his message of 
 
 1832: — 
 
 " It cannot be doubted that the speedy settlement of those 
 lands constitutes the true interest of the Republic. The wealth 
 and strength of a country are its population, and the best part 
 of the population are cultivators of the soil. Independent 
 farmers are everywhere the basis of society, and the true 
 friends of liberty." 
 
 " It seems to me to be our true policy that the public lands 
 shall cease, as soon as practicable, to be a source of revenue ; 
 and that they be sold to settlers in limited parcels, at prices 
 barely sufficient to reimburse the United States the expense 
 of the present system, and the cost arising from our Indian 
 contracts." 
 
 " It is desirable, however, that the right of the soil, and the 
 future disposition of it, be surrendered to the States respect- 
 ively in which it lies. 
 
 '* The adventurous and hardy population of the West, be- 
 sides contributing their equal share of taxation under the 
 impost system, have, in the progress of our Government, for 
 the lands they occupy, paid into the treasury a large propor- 
 tion of forty million dollars, and of the revenue received there- 
 from but a small portion has been expended among them. 
 When, to the disadvantage of their situation in this respect, 
 we add the consideration that it is their labor alone that gives 
 real value to the lands, and that the proceeds arising from 
 these sales are chiefly distributed among States that had not 
 originally any claim to them, and which have enjoyed the un- 
 divided emoluments arising from the sales of their own lands, 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 19 
 
 it cannot be expected that the new States will remain longer 
 contented with the present policy, after the payment of the 
 public debt. To avert the consequences which may be appre- 
 hended from this cause, to stop forever all partial and inter- 
 ested legislation on this subject, and to afford every American 
 citizen of enterprise the opportunity of securing an inde- 
 pendent freehold, it seems to me, therefore, best to abandon 
 the idea of raising a future revenue out of the public lands." 
 
 Tims we have standing before us, in advocacy of 
 this great principle, the first writer of laws, Moses ; 
 next we have Vattel ; and in the third place we 
 have General Jackson. 
 
 Now, let us see whether there has been any 
 homestead policy in the United States. By turn- 
 ing to our statutes, we find that the first Homestead 
 Bill ever introduced into the Congress of the United 
 States was in 1791. I know that it is said by 
 some, and it is sometimes cantingly and slurringly 
 reiterated in the newspapers, that this is a dema- 
 gogical movement, and that some person has intro- 
 duced and advocates this policy purely for the pur- 
 pose of pleasing the people. I want to see who 
 some of these demagogues are ; and, before I read 
 the section of this statute, I will refer, in connection 
 with Jackson and these other distinguished indi- 
 viduals, to the fact that Mr. Jefferson, the philos- 
 opher and statesman, recognized and appreciated 
 this great doctrine. In 1791, the first bill passed by 
 the Congress of the United States recognizing the 
 homestead principle, is in the following words : — 
 
 " That four hundred acres of land be given " — 
 
20 THE SPEECHES 
 
 that is the lano-ua^e of the statute. We do not 
 assume in this bill to give land. We assume that 
 a consideration passes ; but here was a law that 
 was based on the idea that four hundred acres of 
 land were to be given 
 
 — " to each of those persons who, in the year 1783, were heads 
 of families at Vincennes, or the Illinois country, or the Missis- 
 sippi, and who, since that time, have removed from one of the 
 said places to the other ; but the Governor of the Territory 
 northwest of the Ohio is hereby directed to cause the same to 
 be laid out for them at their own expense," &c. 
 
 Another section of the same act provides, — 
 
 " That the heads of families at Vincennes, or in the Illinois 
 country, in the year 1 783, who afterwards removed without 
 the limits of said Territory, are nevertheless entitled to the 
 donation of four hundred acres of land made by the resolve 
 of Congress," &c. 
 
 That act recognized the principle embraced in 
 the Homestead Bill. If this is the idea of a dema- 
 gogue, if it is the idea of one catering or pandering 
 to the public sentiment to catch votes, it was intro- 
 duced into Congress in 1791, and received the 
 approval of Washington, the father of his country. 
 I presume that if he -lived at this day, and were to 
 approve the measure, as he did in 1791, he would 
 be branded, and put in the category of those per- 
 sons who are denominated demagogues. Under his 
 administration there was another bill passed of a 
 similar import, recognizing and carrying out the 
 great homestead principle. Thus we find that this 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 21 
 
 policy, so far as legislation is concerned, commenced 
 with Washington, and received his approval as 
 early as 1791. From General Washington's ad- 
 ministration there are forty-four precedents running 
 through every administration of this Government, 
 down to the present time, in which this principle 
 has been recognized and indorsed. 
 
 We discover from this historical review that this 
 is no new idea, that it is no recent invention, that 
 it is no new movement for the purpose of making 
 votes ; but it is a principle wellnigh as old as the 
 Government itself, which was indorsed and ap- 
 proved by Washington himself. 
 
 This would seem, Mr. President, to settle the 
 question of power. I know it has been argued by 
 some that Congress had not the power to make 
 donations of land ; but even the statute, to which I 
 have referred, makes use of the word " give " with- 
 out consideration. It was considered constitutional, 
 by the early fathers to give away land. We pro- 
 ceed in this bill upon the principle that there is a 
 consideration. If I were disposed to look for prec- 
 edents, even for the donations of the public lands, 
 I could instance the bounty-land act, I could take 
 you through other acts donating land, showing that 
 the principle has been recognized again and again, 
 and that there is not now a question as to its con- 
 stitutionality. . 
 
 I believe there is a clear difference in the power 
 of the Federal Government in reference to its ap- 
 
22 THE SPEECHES 
 
 propriations of money and its appropriations of the 
 public land. The Congress of the United States 
 has power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, 
 and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the 
 common defence and general welfare. I believe it 
 has the power to lay and collect duties for these 
 legitimate purposes ; but when taxes have been laid, 
 collected, and paid into the treasury, I do not 
 think it has that general scope or that latitude in 
 the appropriation of money that it has over the 
 public lands. Once converted into revenue, Con- 
 gress can only appropriate the revenue to the spe- 
 cific objects of the Constitution. It may derive 
 revenue from the public lands, and being revenue, 
 it can only be appropriated to the purposes for 
 which revenue is raised under the Constitution. 
 
 But when we turn to another provision of the 
 Constitution, we find that Congress has power " to 
 dispose of and make all needful rules and regula- 
 tions respecting the territory or other property be- 
 longing to the United States." Congress has, in 
 the organization of all the Territories and in the 
 admission of new States, recognized most clearly 
 the principle of appropriating the public lands for 
 the benefit of schools, colleges, and academies. It 
 has granted the sixteenth and thirty-sixth sections 
 in every township for school purposes ; it has 
 granted lands for public buildings and various other 
 improvements. I am very clear on this point, that 
 in the disposition of the public lands they should be 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 23 
 
 applied to national purposes. If we grant the pub- 
 lic lands to actual settlers, so as to induce them to 
 settle upon and cultivate them, can there be any- 
 thing more national in its character ? What is the 
 great object of acquiring territory? Is it not for 
 settlement and cultivation ? We may acquire ter- 
 ritory by the exercise of the treaty-making power. 
 We may be engaged in a war, and as terms or 
 conditions of peace we may make large acquisi- 
 tions of territory to the United States. But what 
 is the great idea and principle on which you ac- 
 quire territory ? Is it not to settle and cultivate it ? 
 I am aware that the argument is used, if you 
 can dispose of the public lands for this purpose or 
 that purpose, cannot you sell the public lands and 
 apply the proceeds to the same purpose ? I think 
 there is a clear distinction between the two cases. 
 It is equally clear to me that, if the Federal Gov- 
 ernment can set apart the public lands for school 
 purposes in the new States, it can appropriate lands 
 to enable the parent to sustain his child whilst en- 
 joying the benefits conferred upon him by the Gov- 
 ernment in the shape of education. The argument 
 is as sound in the one case as it is in the other. If we 
 can grant lands in the one case, we can in the other. 
 If, without making a contract in advance, you can 
 grant your public lands as gratuities, as donations 
 to men who go out and fight the battles of their 
 country, after the services have been rendered, is 
 it not strange, passing strange, that you cannot 
 
24 THE SPEECHES 
 
 grant land to those who till the soil and make pro- 
 vision to sustain your army while it is fighting the 
 battles of the country ? It seems to me that the 
 argument is clear. I do not intend to argue the 
 constitutional question, for I think there can be 
 really no doubt on that point. I do not believe 
 any one at this day will seriously make any point 
 on that ground against this bill. Is its purpose a 
 national one ? The great object is to induce per- 
 sons to cultivate the land, and thereby make the soil 
 productive. By doing this, you induce hundreds 
 of persons throughout the United States, who are 
 now producing but little, to come in contact with 
 the soil and add to the productive capacity of the 
 country, and thereby promote the national weal. 
 
 I come now to the amendment offered by the 
 Senator from North Carolina. I have not looked 
 over the Globe this mornino; to read his remarks 
 of yesterday ; but if I understood him correctly, he 
 advocated the proposition of issuing a warrant for 
 a hundred and sixty acres of land to each head of a 
 family in the United States. I am inclined to think 
 the Senator is not serious in this proposition. It 
 has been offered on some occasions heretofore, and 
 rejected by very decided votes. Let us compare it 
 with the proposition of the bill. The idea of the 
 honorable Senator seems to be that this bill was 
 designed to force or compel, to some extent, the 
 citizens of other States to go to the new States. 
 Why, sir, there is no compulsory process in the 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 25 
 
 bill. It leaves each man at his own discretion, at 
 his own free will, either to go or to stay, just as it 
 suits his inclinations. 
 
 The Senator seems to think too — and the same 
 idea was advanced by his predecessor — that at this 
 time such a measure would have a tendency to 
 diminish the revenue. He intimates that the na- 
 tion is now bankrupt, that we are borrowing money, 
 that the receipts from customs have been greatly 
 diminished, and that therefore it would be danger- 
 ous to pass this bill, because it would have a ten- 
 dency to diminish the revenue. Let us compare the 
 Senator's proposition and that of the bill, in this 
 respect. His amendment is to issue warrants to 
 each head of a family. The population of the 
 United States is now estimated at about twenty- 
 eight millions. Let us assume, for the sake of 
 illustration, that there are three million heads of 
 families in the United States. His proposition, 
 then, is to issue and throw upon the market three 
 millions of warrants, each warrant entitling the 
 holder to one hundred and sixty acres of land. If 
 that were done, and those warrants were thrown 
 upon the market, what would they sell for ? Little 
 or nothing. If such land- warrants were thrown 
 broadcast over the country, who would enter an- 
 other acre of land at $1.25 ? Would not the war- 
 rants pass into the hands of land speculators and 
 monopolists at a merely nominal price? Would 
 they bring more than a quarter of a dollar an acre ? 
 
26 THE SPEECHES 
 
 If you were to throw three millions of land- warrants 
 into the market at one time, would they bring any- 
 thing? Then the effect of that proposition would 
 be to do but little good to those to whom the war-' 
 rants were issued, and by throwing them into the 
 market, it would cut off the revenue from public 
 lands entirely, for no one would enter land for cash 
 as long as warrants could be bought. That propo- 
 sition, then, is to aid and feed speculation. I do 
 not say that is the motive or intention, but it is the 
 tendency and effect of the Senator's proposition to 
 throw a large portion of the public lands into the 
 hands of speculators, and to cut them off from the 
 treasury as a source of revenue. 
 
 But what does this bill propose ? Will it dimin- 
 ish the receipts into the treasury from the public 
 lands ? The bill provides that the entries under it 
 shall be confined to the alternate sections, and that 
 the person who obtains the benefit of the bill must 
 be an actual settler and cultivator. In proportion 
 as you settle and cultivate any portion of the public 
 lands, do you not enhance the value of the remain- 
 ing sections, and bring them into the market much 
 sooner, and obtain a better price for them than you 
 would without this bill ? What is the principle 
 upon which you have proceeded in all the railroad 
 grants you have made ? They have been defended 
 upon the ground that by granting alternate sections 
 for railroads, you thereby brought the remaining 
 lands into the market, and enabled the Govern- 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 27 
 
 ment to realize its means at a much earlier period, 
 making the remainder of the public lands more 
 valuable than they were before. This bill pro- 
 ceeds upon the same idea. You have granted 
 an immense amount of lands to railroads on this 
 principle, and now why not do something for the 
 people ? 
 
 I say, that instead of wasting the public lands, 
 instead of reducing the receipts into the treasury, 
 this bill would increase them. In the first place, it 
 will enhance the value of the reserved quarter- 
 sections. This may be illustrated by an example. 
 In 1848 we had nine million quarter-sections ; 
 in 1858 we have about seven millions. Let us 
 suppose that our population is twenty-eight mill- 
 ions, and that under the operation of this bill one 
 million heads of families who are now producing 
 but very little, and who have no land to cultivate, 
 and very scanty means of subsistence, shall each 
 have a quarter-section of land, what will the effect 
 be ? At present these persons pay little or nothing 
 for the support of the Federal Government, under 
 the operation of our tariff system, for the reason 
 that they have not got much to buy with. How 
 much does the land yield to the Government while 
 it is lying in a state of nature, uncultivated ? Noth- 
 ing at all. At the rate we have been selling the 
 public lands, about three million dollars' worth a 
 year, estimating them at $1.25 an acre, it will take 
 a fraction less than seven hundred years to dispose 
 of the public domain. 
 
28 THE SPEECHES 
 
 I will take a case that will demonstrate as clearly 
 as the simplest sum in arithmetic that this is a reve- 
 nue measure. Let us take a million families who 
 can now hardly procure the necessaries of life, and 
 place them each on a quarter-section of land, — 
 how Ions will it be before their condition will be 
 improved so as to make them able to contribute 
 something to the support of the Government? 
 Now, here is soil producing nothing, here are hands 
 producing but little. Transfer the man from the 
 point where he is producing nothing, bring him in 
 contact with a hundred and sixty acres of produc- 
 tive soil, and how long will it be before that man 
 changes his condition ? As soon as he gets upon 
 the land he begins to make his improvements, 
 he clears out his field, and the work of production 
 is commenced. In a short time he has a crop, he 
 has stock and other things that result from brinoino; 
 his physical labor in contact with the soil. He has 
 the products of his labor and his land, and he is 
 enabled to exchange them for articles of consump- 
 tion. He is enabled to buy more than he did be- 
 fore, and thus he contributes more to the support 
 of his Government, while, at the same time, he 
 becomes a better man, a more reliable man for all 
 governmental purposes, because he is interested in 
 the country in which he lives. 
 
 To illustrate the matter further, let us take a 
 family of seven persons in number who now have 
 no home, no abiding place that they can call their 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 29 
 
 own, and transfer them to a tract of one hundred 
 and sixty acres of land which they are to possess 
 and cultivate. Is there a Senator here who does 
 not believe, that, by changing their position from 
 the one place to the* other, they would produce at 
 least a dollar more than they did before ? I will 
 begin at a point scarcely visible, — a single dollar. 
 Is there a man here or anywhere else who does not 
 know the fact to be, that you increase a man's abil- 
 ity to buy when he produces more, by bringing his 
 labor in contact with the soil. The result of that 
 contact is production ; he produces something that 
 he can convert and exchange for the necessities of 
 his family. Suppose the increase was only a dollar 
 a head for a million of families, each family consist- 
 ing of seven persons. By transferring a million of 
 families from their present dependent condition to 
 the enjoyment and cultivation of the public domain, 
 supposing it would only increase their ability to buy 
 foreign imports to the extent of a dollar each, you 
 would create a demand for seven millions' worth of 
 imports. Our rates of duties, under the tariff act 
 of 1846, are about thirty per cent., and thus, at the 
 almost invisible beginning of a single dollar a head, 
 you, in this way, increase the pecuniary and finan- 
 cial means of the Government to the extent of 
 $2,100,000. 
 
 This would be the result, supposing that there 
 would only be an addition of one dollar per head to 
 the ability of each family by being taken from a con- 
 3* 
 
30 THE SPEECHES 
 
 dition of poverty and placed upon one hundred and 
 sixty acres of land. This is the result, supposing 
 them to have seven dollars more, with which to buy 
 articles of consumption, than they had when they 
 had no home, no soil to cultivate, no stimulant, no 
 inducement to labor. If you suppose the effect 
 would be to increase their ability two dollars per 
 head, you would increase their consumption to the 
 amount of $14,000,000, which, at thirty per cent, 
 duty, would yield $4,200,000. If you supposed it 
 increased the ability of a family four dollars per 
 head, the total amount would be $28,000,000, which 
 would yield a revenue of $8,400,000. I think that 
 this would be far below the truth, and if you gave a 
 family one hundred and sixty acres of land to culti- 
 vate, the effect would be to increase the ability of 
 that family so as to buy fifty-six dollars' worth more 
 than they bought before, — eight dollars a head. 
 That would be a small increase to a family who had 
 a home, compared with the condition of that family 
 when it had none. The effect of that would be to 
 run up the amount they buy to $56,000,000, which, 
 at a duty of thirty per cent., would yield the sum of 
 $16,800,000. 
 
 I show you, then, that, by taking one million 
 families, consisting of seven persons each, and put- 
 ting them each upon a quarter-section of land, mak- 
 ing the soil productive, if you thereby only added to 
 their capacity to buy goods to the amount of fifty-six 
 dollars per family, you would derive a revenue of 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 31 
 
 nearly seventeen million dollars. When you have 
 done this, how much of the public lands would you 
 have disposed of? Only one million quarter-sec- 
 tions, and you would have nearly six million quarter- 
 sections left. By disposing of one sixth of your pub- 
 lic domain in this way, upon this little miniature 
 estimate, you bring into the coffers of the Federal 
 Government by this bill 116,800,000 annually. 
 
 Does this look like diminishing the revenue ? 
 Does it not rather show that this bill is a revenue 
 measure ? I think it is most clearly a revenue 
 measure. Not only is this the case in a money 
 point of view, so far as the imports are concerned, 
 but, by settling the alternate sections with actual 
 cultivators, you make the remaining sections more 
 valuable to the Government, and you bring them 
 sooner into market. In continuation of this idea, I 
 will read a portion of the argument which I made 
 upon this subject when I first introduced the bill 
 into the other House. I read from the report of my 
 speech on that occasion : — 
 
 " Mr. J. said, it will be remembered by the House that he 
 had already shown, that by giving an individual a quarter-sec- 
 tion of the land, the Government would receive back, in the 
 shape of a revenue, in every seven years, more than the 
 Government price of the land ; and, upon this principle, the 
 Government would, in fact, be realizing two hundred and ten 
 dollars every subsequent term of seven years. The whole 
 number of acres of public land belonging to the United States 
 at this time, or up to the 30th of September, 1848, is one 
 billion four hundred and forty-two millions two hundred and 
 
82 THE SPEECHES 
 
 sixteen thousand one hundred and sixty-eight acres. This 
 amount, estimated at $1.25 per acre, will make $1,802,770,000. 
 To dispose of $3,000,000 worth per annum, which is more than 
 an average sum, would require seven hundred years, or a frac- 
 tion less, to dispose of the entire domain. It will now be per- 
 ceived at once, that the Government would derive an immense 
 advantage by giving the land to the cultivator, instead of 
 keeping it on hand this length of time. We find by this pro- 
 cess the Government would derive from each quarter-section 
 in six hundred years, (throwing off the large excess of nearly 
 one hundred years,) $17,000, — seven going into six hundred 
 eighty-five times. This, then, shows on the one hand what 
 
 the Government would gain by giving the land away 
 
 He said that this expose ought, to satisfy every one, that instead 
 of violating the plighted faith of the Government, it was en- 
 larging and making more valuable, and enabling the Govern- 
 ment to derive a much larger amount of revenue to meet all 
 its liabilities, and thereby preserving its faith inviolate." 
 
 I do not think there can be any question as to the 
 revenue part of this proposition. We show that by 
 granting a million quarter-sections you derive more 
 revenue upon the public lands than you do by your 
 entire land system, as it now stands. In 1850, it 
 was estimated that each head of a family consumed 
 8100 worth of home manufactures. If we increase 
 the ability of the cultivator and occupier of the soil 
 fifty-six dollars in the family, of course it is reason- 
 able to presume that he would consume a corre- 
 spondingly increased proportion of home manufac- 
 tures. Can that proposition be controverted ? I 
 think not. Then we see on the one hand, that we 
 should derive more revenue from granting the land, 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 33 
 
 on the principle laid down in the bill, and also that 
 we should open a market for articles manufactured 
 in our own country. Then, taking both views of the 
 subject, we see that it is an advantage to the manu- 
 facturing interest, and that it is also an advantage 
 to the Government, so far as imports are concerned. 
 I should like to know, then, where can the objection 
 be, upon the score of revenue. 
 
 But, Mr. President, the question of dollars and 
 cents is of no consideration to me. The money 
 view of this subject does not influence my mind by 
 the weight of a feather. I think it is clear, though ; 
 and this view has been presented to prove to Sena- 
 tors that this bill will not diminish, but, on the con- 
 trary, will increase the revenue. 
 
 But this is not the most important view of the 
 subject. When you look at our country as it is, you 
 see that it is very desirable that the great mass of the 
 people should be interested in the country. By this 
 bill you provide a man with a home, you increase the 
 revenue, you increase the consumption of home 
 manufactures, and you make him a better man, and 
 you give him an interest in the country. His condi- 
 tion is better. There is no man so reliable as he who 
 is interested in the welfare of his country ; and who 
 are more interested in the welfare of their country 
 than those who have homes ? When a man has a 
 home, he has a deeper, a more abiding interest in 
 the country, and he is more reliable in all things 
 that pertain to the Government. He is more reli- 
 
34 THE SPEECHES 
 
 able when lie goes to the ballot-box ; he is more 
 reliable in sustaining in every way the stability of 
 our free institutions. 
 
 It seems to me that this, without the other con- 
 sideration, would be a sufficient inducement. When 
 we see the population that is accumulating about 
 some of our cities, I think it behooves every man 
 who is a statesman, a patriot, and a philanthropist, 
 to turn his attention to this subject. I have lately 
 seen some statistics with reference to the city of New 
 York, in which it is assumed that one sixth of the 
 population are paupers ; that two sixths of the popu- 
 lation are barely able to sustain themselves ; leaving 
 one pauper to be sustained by three persons in every 
 six in the city of New York. Does not that present 
 a frightful state of things ? Suppose the population 
 of that city to be one million : you would have in 
 the single city of New York one hundred and sixty- 
 six thousand paupers. 
 
 I do not look upon the growth of cities and the 
 accumulation of population about cities, as being the 
 most desirable objects in this country. I do not 
 believe that a large portion of this population, even 
 if you were to offer them homesteads, would ever 
 go to them. I have no idea that they would ; 
 for a man who has spent most of his life about a 
 city, and has sunk into a pauperized condition, is 
 not the man to go West, reclaim one hundred and 
 sixty acres of land, and reduce it to cultivation. 
 He will not go there on that condition. Though 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 35 
 
 we are satisfied of this, may not our policy be such 
 as to prevent, as far as practicable, the further accu- 
 mulation of such an unproductive population about 
 our cities ? Let us try to prevent their future ac- 
 cumulation ; let these live, have their day, and pass 
 away, — they will ultimately pass away, — but let our 
 policy be such as to induce men to become mechan- 
 ics and agriculturists. Interest them in the country ; 
 pin them to the soil ; and they become more reliable 
 and sustain themselves, and you do away with much 
 of the pauperism in the country. The population 
 of the United States being twenty-eight millions, if 
 the same proportion of paupers as in the city of New 
 York existed throughout the country, you would 
 have four million six hundred and sixty-six thou- 
 sand paupers in the United States. Do we want all 
 our population to become of that character? Do 
 we want cities to take control of this Government ? 
 Unless the proper steps be taken, unless the proper 
 direction be given to the future affairs of this Govern- 
 ment, the cities are to take charge of it and control 
 it. The rural population, the mechanical and agri- 
 cultural portions of this community, are the very 
 salt of it. They constitute the " mud-sills," to use a 
 term recently introduced here. They constitute the 
 foundation upon which the Government rests ; and 
 hence we see the state of things before us. Should 
 we not give the settlement of our public lands and 
 the population of our country that direction which 
 will beget and create the best portion of the popu- 
 lation ? Is it not fearful to think of four million 
 
36 THE SPEECHES 
 
 six hundred and sixty-six thousand paupers in the 
 United States, at the rate they have them in the city 
 of New York ? Mr. Jefferson never said a truer 
 thing than when he declared that large cities were 
 eye-sores in the body-politic : in democracies they 
 are consuming cancers. 
 
 I know the idea of some is to build up great 
 populous cities, and that thereby the interests of the 
 country are to be promoted. Sir, a city not only 
 sinks into pauperism, but into vice and immorality 
 of every description that can be enumerated ; and I 
 would not vote for any policy that I believed would 
 build up cities upon this principle. Build up your 
 villages, build up your rural districts, and you will 
 have men who rely upon their own industry, who 
 rely upon their own efforts, who rely upon their own 
 ingenuity, who rely upon their own economy and 
 application to business for a support ; and these are 
 the people whom you have to depend upon. Why, 
 Mr. President, how was it in ancient Rome? I 
 know there has been a great deal said in denuncia- 
 tion of agrarianism and the Gracchi. It has been 
 said that a doctrine something like this led to the 
 decline of the Roman empire ; but the Gracchi 
 never had their day until a cancerous influence had 
 destroyed the very vitals of Rome ; and it was the 
 destruction of Rome that brought forth Tiberius 
 Gracchus. It was to prevent land monopoly, not 
 agrarianism, in the common acceptation of the term, 
 — which is dividing out lands that had been ac- 
 quired by individuals. They sought to take back 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 37 
 
 and put in the possession of the great mass of the 
 people that portion of the public domain which had 
 been assumed by the capitalists, who had no title to 
 it in fact. The Gracchi tried to carry out this 
 policy, — to restore that which had been taken from 
 the people. The population had sunk into the con- 
 dition of large proprietors on the one hand, and 
 dependants on the other ; and when this dependent 
 condition was brought about, as we find from Nie- 
 buhr's History, the middle class of the community 
 was all gone ; it had left the country ; there was 
 nothing but an aristocracy on the one hand, and de- 
 pendants upon that aristocracy on the other ; and 
 when this got to be the case, the Roman empire 
 went down. 
 
 Having this illustrious example before us, we 
 should be warned by it. Our true policy is to build 
 up the middle class, to sustain the villages, to 
 populate the rural districts, and let the power of 
 this Government remain with the middle class. I 
 want no miserable city rabble on the one hand ; 
 I want no pampered, bloated, corrupted aristocracy 
 on the other. I want the middle portion of society 
 to be built up and sustained, and to let them have 
 the control of the Government. I am as much op- 
 posed to agrarianism as any Senator on this floor, 
 or any individual in the United States ; and this 
 bill does not partake in the slightest degree of agra- 
 rianism ; but, on the contrary, it commences with 
 men at the precise point where agrarianism ends, 
 
38 THE SPEECHES 
 
 and it carries them up in an ascending line, while 
 that carries them down. It gives them an interest 
 in their country, an interest in public affairs ; and 
 when you are involved in war, in insurrection, 
 or rebellion, or danger of any kind, they are the 
 men who are to sustain you. If you should have 
 occasion to call volunteers into the service of the 
 country, you will have a population of men hav- 
 ing homes, having wives and children to care for, 
 who will defend their hearth-stones when invaded. 
 What a sacred thins it is to a man to feel that he 
 has a hearth-stone to defend, a home, and a wife 
 and children to care for, and to rest satisfied that 
 they have an abiding place. Such a man is inter- 
 ested individually in repelling invasion ; he is inter- 
 ested individually in having good government. 
 
 I know there are many, and even some in the 
 Democratic ranks, whose nerves are a little timid 
 in regard to trusting the people with too much 
 power. Sir, the people are the safest, the best, 
 and the most reliable lodgment of power, if you 
 have a population of this kind. Keep up the mid- 
 dle class ; lop off an aristocracy on the one hand, 
 and a rabble on the other; let the middle class 
 maintain the ascendency, let them have the power, 
 and your Government is always secure. Then 
 you need not fear the people. I know, as I have 
 just remarked, that some are timid in regard to 
 trusting the people ; but there can be no danger 
 from a people who are interested in their Govern- 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 39 
 
 ment, who have homes to defend, and wives and 
 children to care for. Even if we test this propo- 
 sition by that idea of self-interest which is said to 
 govern and control man, I ask you if a man, who 
 has an interest in his country, is not more reli- 
 able than one who has none ? Is not a man who 
 is adding to the wealth of his country more reli- 
 able than one who is simply a consumer and has 
 no interest in it ? If we suppose a man to be gov- 
 erned only by the principle of self-interest, is he 
 not more reliable when he has a stake in the coun- 
 try, and is it not his interest to promote and ad- 
 vance his own condition? Is it not the interest 
 of the great mass to have everything done rightly 
 in reference to Government ? The great mass of 
 the people hold no office ; they expect nothing from 
 the Government. The only way they feel, and 
 know, and understand the operations of the Gov- 
 ernment is in the exactions it makes from them. 
 When they are receiving from the Government 
 protection in common, it is their interest to do 
 right in all governmental affairs ; and that being 
 their interest, they are to be relied upon, even if 
 you suppose men to be actuated altogether by the 
 principle of self-interest. It is the interest of the 
 middle class to do right in all governmental affairs ; 
 and hence they are to be relied upon. Instead of 
 requiring you to keep up your armies, your mounted 
 men, and your footmen on the frontier, if you will 
 let the people go and possess this public land on the 
 
40 THE SPEECHES 
 
 conditions proposed in this bill, you will have an 
 army on the frontier composed of men who will 
 defend their own firesides, who will take care of 
 their own homes, and will defend the other portions 
 of the country, if need be, in time of war. 
 
 I would remark in this connection, that the pub- 
 lic lands have paid for themselves. According to 
 the report of Mr. Stuart of Virginia, the Secre- 
 tary of the Interior in 1850, it was shown that 
 then the public lands had paid for themselves, and 
 sixty millions over. We have received into the 
 treasury since that time about thirty-two million 
 dollars from the public lands. They have, there- 
 fore, already paid the Government more than they 
 cost, and there can be no objection to this bill on 
 the ground that the public lands have been bought 
 with the common treasure of the whole country. 
 Besides, this bill provides that each individual mak- 
 ing an entry shall pay all the expenses attending it. 
 
 We see, then, Mr. President, the effect this pol- 
 icy is to have on population. Let me ask here, — 
 looking to our popular elections, looking to the 
 proper lodgment of power, — is it not time that we 
 had adopted a policy which would give us men 
 interested in the affairs of the country to control 
 and sway our elections ? It seems to me that this 
 cannot long be debated ; the point is too clear. 
 The agricultural and mechanical portion of the 
 community aie to be relied upon for the preserva- 
 tion and continuance of this Government. The 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 41 
 
 great mass of the people, the great middle class, 
 are honest. They toil for their support, accept- 
 ing no favor from Government. They live by 
 labor. They do not live by consumption, but by 
 production ; and we should consume as small a 
 portion of their production as it is possible for us 
 to consume, leaving the producer to appropriate 
 to his own use and benefit as much of the product 
 of his own labor as it is possible in the nature of 
 things to do. The great mass of the people need 
 advocates — men who are honest and capable, who 
 are willing to defend them. How much legislation 
 is done for classes, and how little care seems to be 
 exercised for the great mass of the people. When 
 we are among our constituents, it is very easy to 
 make appeals to the people and professions of patri- 
 otism, and then — I do not mean to be personal or 
 invidious — it is very easy, when we are removed 
 from them a short distance, to forget the people 
 and legislate for classes, neglecting the interest of 
 the great mass. The mechanics and agriculturists 
 are honest, industrious, and economical. Let it 
 not be supposed that I am against learning or edu- 
 cation, but I might speak of the man in the rural 
 districts in the language of Pope, — 
 
 " Unlearned, he knew no schoolman's subtle art, 
 No language but the language of the heart; 
 By nature honest, by experience wise; 
 Healthy by temperance and exercise." 
 
 This is the kind of men whom we must rely 
 
 upon. Let your public lands be settled ; let them 
 
 4* 
 
42 THE SEEECHES 
 
 be filled up ; let honest men become cultivators 
 and tillers of the soil. I do not claim to be pro- 
 phetic, but I have sometimes thought that if we 
 would properly direct our legislation in reference 
 to our public lands and our other public policy, the 
 time would come when this would be the greatest 
 government on the face of the earth. Go to the 
 great valley of the Mississippi ; take the western 
 slope of the mountains to the Pacific Ocean ; take 
 the whole area of this country, and we find that 
 we have over three million square miles. Throw 
 off one fourth as unfit for cultivation, reducing the 
 area of the United States to fifteen hundred million 
 acres, and by appropriating three acres to a person, 
 it will sustain a population of over five hundred 
 million people ; and I have no doubt, if this conti- 
 nent was strained to its utmost capacity, it could 
 sustain the entire population of the world. Let us 
 go on and carry out our destiny ; interest men in 
 the soil ; let your vacant land be divided equally 
 so that men can have homes ; let them live by their 
 own industry ; and the time will come when this 
 will be the greatest nation on the face of the earth. 
 Let agriculture and the mechanic arts maintain the 
 ascendency, and other professions and pursuits be 
 subordinate to them, for on these two all others rest. 
 Since the crucifixion of our Saviour, emigration 
 has been westward ; and the poetic idea might 
 have started long before it did, — 
 
 " Westward the star of empire takes its way." 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 43 
 
 It has been taking its way westward. The United 
 States are filling np. We are going on to the Pa- 
 cific coast. Let me raise the inquiry here, when, 
 in the history of mankind, in the progress of na- 
 tions, was there any nation that ever reached the 
 point we now occupy ? When was there a nation 
 in its progress, in its settlement, in its advance in 
 all that constitutes and makes a nation great, that 
 occupied the position we now occupy ? When 
 was there any nation that could look to the East 
 and behold the tide of emigration coming, and, at 
 the same time, turn around and look to the mighty 
 West, and behold the tide of emigration approach- 
 ing from that direction. The waves of emigration 
 have usually been running in one direction, but 
 we find the tide of emigration now changed, and 
 we are occupying a central position on the globe. 
 Emigration is coming to us from the East and from 
 the West ; and when our vacant territory shall be 
 filled up, when it shall reach a population of one 
 hundred and fifty or five hundred millions, who can 
 say what will be our destiny ? 
 
 When our railroad system shall progress on 
 proper principles, extending from one extreme of 
 the country to the other, like so many arteries ; 
 when our telegraphic wires shall be stretched 
 along them as the nerves in the human frame, and 
 they shall run in parallel lines, and be crossed at 
 right angles, until the whole globe, as it were, and 
 especially this great centre, shall be covered like 
 
44 THE SPEECHES 
 
 a net-work with these arteries and nerves ; when 
 the face of the globe shall flash with intelligence 
 like the face of man ; we, occupying this important 
 point, may find our institutions so perfected, science 
 so advanced, that instead of receiving immigration, 
 instead of receiving nations from abroad, this will 
 be the great sensorium from which our notions of 
 religion, our notions of government, our improve- 
 ments in works of every description shall radiate as 
 from a common centre, and revolutionize the world. 
 
 Who dares say that this is not our destiny, if we 
 will only permit it to be fulfilled ? Then let us 
 go on with this great work of interesting men in 
 becoming connected with the soil ; interesting them 
 in remaining in your mechanic shops ; prevent their 
 accumulation in the streets of your cities ; and in 
 doing this, you will dispense with the necessity for 
 all your pauper system. By doing this you enable 
 each community to take care of its own poor. By 
 doing this you destroy and break down the great 
 propensity that exists with men to hang and loiter 
 and perish about the cities of the Union, as is done 
 now in the older countries. 
 
 It is well enough, Mr. President, to see where 
 our public lands have been going. There seems 
 to be a great scruple now in reference to the ap- 
 propriation of lands for the benefit of the people ; 
 but the Federal Government has been very lib- 
 eral heretofore in granting lands to the States for 
 railroad purposes. We can pass law after law, 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 45 
 
 making grant after grant of the public lands to 
 corporations, without alarming any one here. We 
 have already granted to railroad monopolies, to 
 corporations, twenty-four million two hundred and 
 forty-seven thousand acres. Those grants hardly 
 meet with opposition in Congress ; but it seems to 
 be very wrong, in the estimation of some, to grant 
 lands to the people on the conditions proposed in 
 the bill before us. We find, furthermore, that 
 there have been granted to the States, as swamp- 
 lands, — and some of these lands will turn out to be 
 the most productive on the globe, — forty million 
 one hundred and thirty-three thousand five hun- 
 dred and sixty-five acres. 
 
 In relation to the public lands, and the grants 
 which have been made by the Government, I have 
 obtained from the Commissioner of the General 
 Land-Office several tables, which I now submit. 
 
 Estimate of the Quantities of Land which will inure to the 
 States under Grants for Railroads, zip to June 30, 1857. 
 
 States. Acres. Date of Law. 
 
 Illinois 2,595,053 September 20, 1850. 
 
 Missouri 1,815,435 June 10, 1852; Feb. 9, 1853. 
 
 Arkansas 1,465,297 February 9, 1853. 
 
 Michigan 3,096,000 June 3, 1856. 
 
 Wisconsin 1,622,800 June 3, 1856. 
 
 Iowa 3,456,000 May 15, 1856. 
 
 Louisiana 1,102,560 June 3 and Aug. 11, 1856. 
 
 Mississippi 950,400 August 11, 1856. 
 
 Alabama 1 91 3 390 ... 5 Ma * V * 7 ' Jime 3 ' and Au ^ 
 
 Alabama 1,913,3J0--.. | n ^ 1856 . March3)1857 
 
 Florida 1,814,400 May 17, 1856. 
 
 Minnesota 4,416,000 March 3, 1857. 
 
 Total-- --24,247,335 
 
46 THE SPEECHES 
 
 Statement showing the Quantity of Swamp-land approved to 
 
 the several States, up to 30th June, 1857. 
 
 States. Acres. 
 
 Ohio 25,650.71 
 
 Indiana 1,250,937.51 
 
 Illinois . 1,369,140.72 
 
 Missouri 3,615,966.57 
 
 Alabama 2,595.51 
 
 Mississippi 2,834,796.11 
 
 Louisiana 7,601,535.46 
 
 Michigan 5,465,232.41 
 
 Arkansas 5,920,024.94 
 
 Florida 10,396,982.47 
 
 Wisconsin 1,650,712.10 
 
 Total 40,133,564.51 
 
 Estimate of unsold and unappropriated Lands in each of the 
 States and Territories, including surveyed and unsurveyed f 
 offered and unojfered Lands, on the 30th June, 1856. 
 
 States and Territo- Number of quarter- 
 lies. Acres. sections. 
 
 Ohio 43,553.34 272 
 
 Indiana 36,307.41 227 
 
 Illinois 511,662.85 3,198 
 
 Missouri 13,365,319.81 83,533 
 
 Alabama 9,459,367.74 59,121 
 
 Mississippi 5,519,390.69 34,496 
 
 Louisiana 5,933,3 73.83 3 7,083 
 
 Michigan 10,056,298.06 62,852 
 
 Arkansas 15,609,542.84 97,560 
 
 Florida 18,067,07*2.75 112,919 
 
 Iowa 6,237,661.03 38,985 
 
 Wisconsin 15,222,549.50 95,141 
 
 California 113,682,436.00 710,515 
 
 Minnesota Territory 82,502,608.33 515,641 
 
 Oregon " 118,913,241.31 743,208 
 
 Washington " 76,444,055.25 477,775 
 
 New Mexico " 155,210,804.00 970,067 
 
 Utah " 134,243,733.00 839,023 
 
 Nebraska " 206,984,747.00 1,293,655 
 
 Kansas " 76,361,058.00 477,256 
 
 Indian " 42,892,800.00 268,080 
 
 Total 1,107,297,572.74 6,920,607 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 47 
 
 The table giving the estimated quantity of all our 
 public lands, shows the feasibility of the plan in favor 
 of which I have been speaking. I know that some 
 gentlemen from the Southern States object to this 
 bill because they fear that it will carry emigrants 
 from the free States into those States. Well, sir, 
 on this point I have drawn some conclusions from 
 figures, which I will present to the Senate. In the 
 State of Alabama there are now undisposed of fifty- 
 nine thousand one hundred and twenty-one quarter- 
 sections of land. I ask my Southern friends, would 
 it not be better if a man in the State of Alabama 
 would select a quarter-section there, and take the 
 two hundred dollars it would have cost him, and 
 expend it there, even though it might be inferior 
 land, than to compel him to pay $1.25 an acre, and 
 emigrate from the State of Alabama to a place 
 where he could get better land? If you compel 
 him to pay the higher price, it becomes his interest 
 to leave his native State ; bat by permitting him to 
 take the land and expend on its improvement what 
 he would otherwise have to pay, and what it would 
 cost him to move, the chances are that he will 
 remain where he is. In the State of Mississippi 
 here are thirty-four thousand four hundred and 
 ninety-six quarter-sections ; in Louisiana, thirty- 
 seven thousand ; in Arkansas, ninety-seven thou- 
 sand ; in Florida, one hundred and twelve thousand. 
 Altogether, the quarter-sections of public lands 
 belonging to the Government amount to six million 
 
48 THE SPEECHES 
 
 nine hundred and twenty thousand. How feasible 
 the plan is. I have shown, too, that it would take 
 over six hundred years to dispose of the public lands 
 at the rate we have been disposing of them, and that 
 if you take one million quarter-sections and have 
 them settled and cultivated, you will obtain more 
 revenue, and you will enhance the remaining public 
 lands more than the value of those the Government 
 gives. 
 
 I live in a Southern State ; and, if I know my- 
 self, I am as good a Southern man as any one who 
 lives within the borders of the South. It seems to 
 be feared that by this bill we compel men to go on 
 the lands. I want to compel no man to go. I want 
 to leave each and every man to be controlled by his 
 own inclination, by his own interest, and not to 
 force him ; but is it statesmanlike, is it philanthropic, 
 is it Christian, to keep a man in a State, and refuse 
 to let him go, because, if he does go, he will help 
 to populate some other portion of the country ? If 
 a man lives in the county in which I live, and he 
 can, by crossing the line into another county, better 
 his condition, I say let him go. If, by crossing the 
 boundary of my State and going into another, he 
 can better his condition, I say let him go. If a man 
 can go from Tennessee into Illinois, or Louisiana, or 
 Mississippi, or Arkansas, or any other State, and 
 better his condition, let him go. I care not where 
 he goes, so that he locates himself in this great area 
 of freedom, becomes attached to our institutions, 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 49 
 
 and interested in the prosperity and welfare of the 
 country. I care not where he goes, so that he 
 is under the protection of our Stars and Stripes. I 
 say, let him go where he can better the condition of 
 himself, his wife, and children ; let him go where 
 he can receive the greatest remuneration for his toil 
 and for his labor. What kind of a policy is it to 
 say that a man shall be locked up where he was 
 born, and shall be confined to the place of his birth ? 
 Take the State of North Carolina, represented 
 by the honorable Senator before me, 1 — and I have 
 no doubt it is his intention to represent that 
 people to their satisfaction, — would it have been 
 proper to require the people of North Carolina, 
 from her early settlement to the present time, to be 
 confined within her boundaries ? Would they not 
 have looked upon it as a hard sentence ? Would 
 they not have looked upon it as oppressive and 
 cruel ? North Carolina has supplied the Western 
 States with a large proportion of her population, for 
 the reason that by going West they could better 
 their condition. Who would prevent them from 
 doing it ? Who would say to the poor man in North 
 Carolina, that has no land of his own to cultivate, 
 that lives upon some barren angle, or some piny 
 plain, or in some other State upon some stony ridge, 
 that he must plough and dig the land appointed to 
 him by his landlord, and that he is not to emigrate 
 to any place where he can better his condition ? 
 
 1 Mr. Clingman. 
 
50 THE SPEECHES 
 
 What is his prospect? He has to live poor; he 
 has to live hard; and, in the end, when he dies, 
 poverty, want, is the only inheritance he can leave 
 his children. There is no one who has a higher 
 appreciation of North Carolina than I have ; she 
 is my native State. I found it to be my interest 
 to emigrate, and I should have thought it cruel and 
 hard if I had been told that I could not leave her 
 boundary. Although North Carolina did not afford 
 me the advantages of education, though I cannot 
 speak in the language of the schoolmen, and call 
 her my cherishing mother, yet, in the language of 
 Cowper, " with all her faults, I love her still." She 
 is still my mother ; she is my native State ; and I 
 love her as such, and I love her people, too. But 
 what an idea is it to present, as influencing the 
 action of a statesman, that people may not emigrate 
 from one State to another ! Sir, I say let a man go 
 anywhere within the boundaries of the United States 
 where he can better his condition. 
 
 Mr. President, if I entertained the notions that 
 some of my friends who oppose this bill do, I should 
 be a more ardent advocate of its policy than I am 
 now, if that were possible. My friend from Ala- 
 bama 1 entertains some strange notions in reference 
 to democracy and the people ; and in his speech on 
 the fisheries bill, he gave this proposition a kind of 
 side-blow, a lick by indirection. I do not object to 
 that ; but if I entertained his opinions, I should be 
 
 i Mr. Clay. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 51 
 
 a more determined and zealous advocate of the 
 policy of this bill than I am now, if that were possi- 
 ble. In his speech upon the Lecompton Constitution, 
 that Senator, in speaking of the powers of the con- 
 vention which framed the Constitution, said : — 
 
 " In my opinion, they would have acted in stricter accordance 
 with the spirit and genius of our institutions if they had not 
 submitted it in whole or in part to the popular vote. Our 
 governments are republics, not democracies. The people 
 exercise their sovereignty not in person at the ballot-box, but 
 through agents, delegates, or representatives. Our fathers 
 founded republican governments in preference to democra- 
 cies, not so much because it would be impracticable as because 
 it would be unwise and inexpedient for the people themselves 
 to assemble and adopt laws." 
 
 I have always thought the general idea had been 
 that it was not practicable to do everything in a 
 strict democratic sense, and that it was more con- 
 venient for the people to appear through their del- 
 egates. But the Senator said further : — 
 
 " They were satisfied, from reading and reflection, of the 
 truth of Mr. Madison's observation about pure democracies, 
 that they ' have ever been spectacles of turbulence and con- 
 tention ; have ever been found incompatible with personal 
 security, or the rights of property ; and have in general been 
 as short in their lives as they have been violent in their 
 deaths.' 
 
 " They knew that a large body of men is more 
 
 liable to be controlled by passion or by interest than a single 
 individual, and is more apt to sacrifice the rights of the minor- 
 ity, because it can be done with more impunity. Hence they 
 endeavored to impose restraints upon themselves. Hence they 
 committed the making of all their laws, organic or municipal, 
 
52 THE SPEECHES 
 
 to their delegates or representatives, whose crimes they could 
 punish, whose errors they could correct, and whose powers 
 they could reclaim. 
 
 " The great security of our rights of life, liberty, and prop- 
 erty, is in the responsibility of those who make and of those 
 who execute the law. Establish as a principle that, to give 
 sanction to law, it must be approved by a majority at the 
 ballot-box, and you take away this security and surrender 
 those rights to the most capricious, rapacious, and cruel of 
 tyrants. I regret to see the growing spirit in Congress and 
 throughout the country to democratize our government ; 
 to submit every question, whether pertaining to organic or 
 municipal laws, to the vote of the people. This is sheer rad- 
 icalism ; it is the Red Republicanism of revolutionary France, 
 which appealed to the sections on all occasions, and not the 
 American Republicanism of our fathers. Their Republicanism 
 was stable and conservative ; this is mutable and revolutionary. 
 Theirs afforded a shield for the minority; this gives a sword 
 to the majority. Theirs defended the rights of the weak; this 
 surrenders them to the power of the strong. God forbid that 
 the demagogism of this day should prevail over the philan- 
 thropic and philosophic statesmanship of our fathers." 
 
 In the same speech, the Senator said, — 
 " Property is the foundation of every social fabric. To 
 
 preserve, protect, and perpetuate rights of property, society 
 
 is formed, and government is framed." 
 
 Now, if I entertained these notions, I should un- 
 questionably go for the Homestead Bill. I am free 
 to say, here, that I do not hold the doctrine ad- 
 vanced by the honorable gentleman from Alabama, 
 to the extent that he goes. I believe the people are 
 capable of self-government. I think they have 
 demonstrated it most clearly ; and I do not think 
 the Senator's history of democracy states the case as 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 53 
 
 it should be. I presume in the Senator's own State 
 the people acted directly upon their Constitution at 
 the ballot-box. That is the organic law. If they 
 did not there, they have done so in most of the 
 States of the Union ; not, perhaps, in their original 
 formation of their governments, but as the people 
 have gone on and advanced in popular government. 
 The honorable Senator seems to be opposed to 
 democratizing, — in other words, he is opposed to 
 popularizing our institutions ; he is afraid to trust 
 the control of things to the people at the ballot-box. 
 Why, sir, the organic law which confers all the 
 power upon your State legislatures, creates the 
 different divisions, different departments of the State. 
 The government is controlled at the ballot - box, 
 and the doctrine set forth in the Constitution of 
 Alabama is, that the people have a right to abolish 
 and change their form of government when they 
 think proper. The principle is clearly recognized ; 
 and on this my honorable friend and myself differ 
 essentially. I find a similar doctrine laid down in a 
 pamphlet which I have here : — 
 
 " In the convention that framed the Constitution of the 
 United States, Gouverneur Morris said, that ' Property is the 
 main object of society.' Mr. King said, ' Property is the 
 primary object of society.' Mr. Butler contended strenuous- 
 ly that ' Property was the only just measurer of representa- 
 tion. This was the great object of government; the great 
 cause of war ; the great means of carrying it on.' Mr. 
 Madison said, that ' In future times a great majority of the 
 people will not only be without landed, but any other sort of 
 property. These will either combine under the influence of 
 
54 THE SPEECHES 
 
 their common situation, — in which case the right of property 
 and the public liberty will not be secure in their hands, — 
 or, what is more probable, they will become the tools of opu- 
 lence and ambition.' Gouverneur Morris again said, ' Give the 
 votes to the people who have no property, and they will sell 
 them to the rich who will be able to buy them. We should 
 not confine our attention to the present moment. The time 
 is not far distant when this country will abound with mechanics 
 and manufacturers, who will receive their bread from their 
 employers. Will such men be the secure and. faithful guardians 
 of liberty '? ' Madison remarks, that those who opposed the 
 property basis of representation, did so on the ground that the 
 number of people was a fair index to the amount of property 
 in any district." 
 
 These are not notions entertained by me ; but 
 they are important as the notions of some of our 
 public men at the early formation of our Govern- 
 ment. I entertain no such notions. If, however, 
 the Senator from Alabama holds that property is 
 the main object and basis of society, he, above all 
 other men, ought to go for this bill, so as to place 
 every man in the possession of a home and an 
 interest in his country. The very doctrine that he 
 lays down appeals to him trumpet-tongued, and asks 
 him to place these men in a condition where they 
 can be relied upon. His argument is unanswerable, 
 if it be true, in favor of the Homestead Bill. It is 
 taking men out of a dependent condition ; it is pre- 
 venting this Government from sinking into that con- 
 dition that Rome did in her decline. I ask him 
 now, if he entertains these opinions, as promulgated 
 in his speech, to come up and join with us in the 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 55 
 
 passage of this bill, and make every man, if possible, 
 a property-holder, interested in his country ; give 
 him a basis to settle upon, and make him reliable at 
 the ballot-box. 
 
 His speech is a fine production. I heard it with 
 interest at the time it was delivered. I hold the 
 opposite to him. Instead of the voice of the people 
 being the voice of a demon, I go back to the old 
 idea, and I favor the policy of popularizing all our free 
 institutions. We are Democrats, occupying a posi- 
 tion here from the South ; we start together, but 
 we turn our backs upon each other very soon. His 
 policy would take the Government further from the 
 people. I go in a direction to popularize it, and 
 bring it nearer to the people. There is no better 
 illustration of this than that old maxim, which is 
 adopted in all our ordinary transactions, that " if 
 you want a thing done, send somebody to do it ; if 
 you want it well done, go and do it yourself." It 
 applies with great force in governmental affairs as in 
 individual affairs ; and if we can advance and make 
 the workings and operation of our Government 
 familiar to and understood by the people, the better 
 for us. I say, when and wherever it is practicable, 
 let the people transact their own business ; bring 
 them more in contact with their Government, and 
 then you will arrest expenditure, you will arrest 
 corruption, you will have a purer and better gov- 
 ernment. 
 
 I hold to the doctrine that man can be advanced ; 
 
56 THE SPEECHES 
 
 that man can be elevated ; that man can be exalted 
 in his character and condition We are told, on high 
 authority, that he is made in the image of his God ; 
 that he is endowed with a certain amount of divinity. 
 And I believe man can be elevated ; man can be- 
 come more and more endowed with divinity ; and as 
 he does he becomes more God-like in his character 
 and capable of governing himself. Let us go on 
 elevating our people, perfecting our institutions, 
 until democracy shall reach such a point of perfec- 
 tion that we can exclaim with truth that the voice 
 of the people is the voice of God. 
 
 As I said, I have entertained different notions from 
 those inculcated by the honorable Senator. If I 
 entertained his notions, then I should be for the 
 Homestead. I hold in my hand a document, by 
 which it was proclaimed in 1776, — 
 
 " We hold these truths to be self-evident : that all men are 
 created equal ; that they are endowed by their Creator with 
 certain inalienable rights ; that among these are life, liberty, 
 and the pursuit of happiness ; that to secure these rights govern- 
 ments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers 
 from the consent of the governed." 
 
 Is property laid down there as the great element 
 and the great basis of society ? It is only one ; and 
 Mr. Jefferson laid it down in the Declaration of In- 
 dependence, that it was a self-evident truth that 
 government was instituted — for what ? To protect 
 men in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. 
 That is what Mr. Jefferson said. And who in- 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 57 
 
 dorsed it? The men who framed the Declara- 
 tion of Independence, who did not go upon the 
 idea that property was the only element of society. 
 The doctrine established by those who proclaimed 
 our independence, was, that life, liberty, and the 
 pursuit of happiness were three great ends of gov- 
 ernment, and not property exclusively. When the 
 declaration came forth from the old Congress Hall, 
 it came forth as a column of fire and light. It 
 declared that the security of life and liberty, and 
 the pursuit of happiness, were the three great ends 
 of government. Mr. Jefferson says, in his first In- 
 augural Address, which is the greatest paper that 
 has ever been written in this Government, — and I 
 commend it to the reading of those who say they are 
 Democrats, by way of refreshing their memories, 
 that they may understand what are correct Demo- 
 cratic principles, — 
 
 " Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the 
 government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the 
 government of others ? Or have we found angels in the form 
 of kings to govern him. Let history answer this question. " 
 
 Mr. Jefferson seems to think man can be trusted 
 with the government of himself. In the Declara- 
 tion of Independence he does not embrace property ; 
 in fact, it is not referred to. But I am willing to 
 concede that it is one of the primary and elementary 
 principles in government. Mr. Jefferson declares 
 the great truth that man is to be trusted ; that man 
 is capable of governing himself, and that he has a 
 
58 THE SPEECHES 
 
 right to govern himself. In the same Inaugural 
 Address of Mr. Jefferson, we find the passage usually 
 attributed to Washington's Farewell Address, which 
 has got universal circulation, — that we should pur- 
 sue our own policy ; that we should promote our 
 own institutions, maintaining friendly relations with 
 all, entangling alliances with none. Let us carry 
 out the doctrines of the Inaugural Address of Mr. 
 Jefferson ; let us carry out the great principles laid 
 down in the Declaration of Independence, which this 
 Homestead Bill embraces. 
 
 But I wish to call attention to some other author- 
 ity on this subject. As contradistinguished from the 
 views of the Senator from Alabama, I present the 
 views of a recent writer 1 as in accordance with my 
 own notions of Democracy : — 
 
 " The democratic party represents the great principle of 
 progress. It is onward and outward in its movements. It has 
 a heart for action, and motives for a world. It constitutes the 
 principle of diffusion, and is to humanity what the centrifugal 
 force is to the revolving orbs of a universe. What motion is to 
 them, democracy is to principle. It is the soul in action. It 
 conforms to the providence of God. It has confidence in man, 
 and an abiding reliance in his high destiny. It seeks the 
 largest liberty, the greatest good, and the surest happiness. It 
 aims to build up the great interests of the many, to the least 
 detriment of the few. It remembers the past, without neglect- 
 ing the present. It establishes the present, without fearing to 
 provide for the future. It cares for the weak, while it permits 
 no injustice to the strong. It conquers the oppressor, and pre- 
 pares the subjects of tyranny for freedom. It melts the bigot's 
 
 1 Lamartine. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 59 
 
 heart to meekness, and reconciles his mind to knowledge. It 
 dispels the clouds of ignorance and superstition, and prepares 
 the people for instruction and self-respect. It adds wisdom to 
 legislation, and improved judgment to government. It favors 
 enterprise that yields a reward to the many and an industry 
 that is permanent. It is the pioneer of humanity — the con- 
 servator of nations. It fails only when it ceases to be true to 
 itself. Vox populi, vox Dei, — has proved to be both a prov- 
 erb, and a prediction. 
 
 " It is a mistake to suppose that democracy may not be ad- 
 vanced under different forms of government. Its own, it 
 should be remembered, is the highest conventional form, that 
 which precedes the lofty independence of the individual, spoken 
 of by the Apostle to the Hebrews, who will need government 
 but from the law which the Lord has placed in his heart. 
 
 "In one respect, all nations are governed upon the same 
 principle ; that is, each adopts the form which it has the under- 
 standing and the power to sustain. There is in all a greater 
 or lesser power, and it requires no profound speculation to 
 decide which will control. A tyrannical dictator may do more 
 to advance the true interests of democracy than a moderate 
 sovereign who is scrupulously guarded by an antiquated con- 
 stitution ; for the tyrant adds vigor to his opponents by his 
 deeds of oppression. 
 
 " The frequent question as to what form of government is 
 best, is often answered without any reference to condition or 
 application of principles. There can be- properly but one 
 answer, and yet the application of that answer may lead to 
 great diversity of views. 
 
 " When it is asserted that the democratic form of govern- 
 ment is unquestionably the best, it must be considered that the 
 answer not only designates the form preferred, but implies a 
 confident belief in the advanced condition of the people who 
 are to be the subjects of it. It premises the capacity for self- 
 control, and a corresponding degree of knowledge in regard to 
 the rights, balances, and necessities of society. It involves a 
 
60 THE SPEECHES 
 
 discriminating appreciation of the varied duties of the man, the 
 citizen, and the legislator. It presupposes a reasonable knowl- 
 edge of the legitimate means and ends of government, en- 
 larged views of humanity, and of the elements of national 
 existence. 
 
 " The democratic form of government is the best, because 
 its standard of moral requisition is the highest. It claims for 
 man a universality of interest, liberty, and justice. It is Chris- 
 tianity with its mountain beacons and guides. It is the stand- 
 ard of Deity based on the eternal principles of truth, passing 
 through and rising above the yielding clouds of ignorance, into 
 the regions of infinite wisdom. As we live on, this ' pillar of the 
 cloud by day, and the pillar of fire by night,' will not be taken 
 from before the people, but stand immovable, immeasurable, 
 and in the brightness of its glory continue to shed increasing 
 light on a world and a universe. 
 
 " The great objects of knowledge and moral culture of the 
 people are among its most prominent provisions. Practical 
 religion and religious freedom are the sunshine of its growth 
 and glory. It is the sublime and mighty standard spoken of 
 by the Psalmist, who exclaims, in the beautiful language of 
 poetical conception, — 
 
 " ' The Lord is high above all nations, and his glory above 
 the heavens. Who is like unto the Lord our God, who dwelleth 
 on high ; who humbleth himself to behold the things that are in 
 heaven and in the earth ? He raiseth up the poor out of the 
 dust, andlifteth the needy out of the dunghill, that he may 
 set him with princes, even with the princes of the people.' 
 
 " Democracy is a permanent element of progress, and is 
 present everywhere, whatever may be the temporary form of 
 the ruling power. Its inextinguishable fires first burst forth in 
 an empire, and its welcome lights cheer the dark domains ot 
 despotism. While tyrants hate the patriot and exile him 
 from their contracted dominions, the spirit of democracy invests 
 him as a missionary of humanity, and inspires him with an elo- 
 quence which moves a world. Its lightning rays cannot be 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 61 
 
 hidden; its presence cannot be banished. Dictators, kings, 
 and emperors, are but its servants ; and, as man becomes 
 elevated to the dignity of self-knowledge and control, their 
 administration ceases. Their rule indicates an imperfect state 
 of society, and may be regarded as the moral props of the 
 builder, necessary only to sustain a people in their different 
 periods of growth. One cannot speak of them lightly, nor in- 
 dulge in language that should seem to deny their fitness as the 
 instruments of good in the hands of Providence. Their true 
 position may be best gathered from the prediction which is 
 based upon a knowledge of the past and present condition of 
 man, — that all kingdoms and empires must cease whenever a 
 people have a knowledge of their rights, and acquire the power 
 of a practical application of principles. This is the work of 
 time. It is the work of constant, repeated trial. The child 
 that attempts to step an hundred times and falls ; the new- 
 fledged bird that tries its feeble wings again and again before 
 it is able to sweep the circle of the sky with its kindred flock, 
 indicate the simple law upon which all strength depends, 
 whether it be the strength of an insect, or the strength of a 
 nation. 
 
 " Because a people do not succeed in changing their form of 
 government, even after repeated trials, we are not to infer 
 that they are indulging in impracticable experiments, nor that 
 they will be disappointed in ultimately realizing the great ob- 
 jects of their ambition. Indeed, all failures of this class are 
 indicative of progressive endeavor. They imply an increasing 
 knowledge of the true dignity of man, and a growing disposi- 
 tion to engage in new and more and more difficult endeavors. 
 These endeavors are but the exercise of a nation, and without 
 them, no people can ever command the elements of national 
 existence and of self-control. But inquiries in regard to so 
 extensive a subject should be shaped within more practical 
 limits." 
 
 " The triumphs of democracy constitute the way-marks of 
 the world. They demand no extraneous element of endurance 
 for permanency, no fictitious splendor for embellishment, no 
 
62 THE SPEECHES 
 
 borrowed greatness for glory. Originating in the inexhaust- 
 ible sources of power, moved by the spirit of love and liberty, 
 and guided by the wisdom which comes from the instincts and 
 experience of the immortal soul, as developed in the people, 
 democracy exists in the imperishable principle of progress, 
 and registers its achievements in the institutions of freedom, 
 and in the blessings which characterize and beautify the 
 realities of life. Its genius is to assert and advance the true 
 dignity of mind, to elevate the motives and affections of man, 
 and to extend, establish, protect, and equalize the common 
 rights of humanity. 
 
 " Condorcet, although an aristocrat by genius and by birth, 
 became a democrat from philosophy." 
 
 A few years since a Whig member of the United 
 States Senate sneeringly asked Senator Allen, of 
 Ohio, the question, " What is democracy ? " The 
 following was the prompt reply : 
 
 " Democracy is a sentiment not to be appalled, corrupted, or 
 compromised. It knows no baseness ; it cowers to no danger ; 
 it oppresses no weakness ; destructive only of despotism, it is 
 the sole conservator of liberty, labor, and property. It is the 
 sentiment of freedom, of equal rights, of equal obligations — 
 the law of nature pervading the law of the land." 
 
 " ' What, sir,' asked Patrick Henry, in the Virginia Con- 
 vention of 1778, ' is the genius of democracy ? Let me read 
 that clause of the Bill of Rights of Virginia, which relates to 
 this (third clause) : That government is or ought to be in- 
 stituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the 
 people, nation, or community; of all the various modes and 
 forms of govsrnment, that is best which is capable of produ- 
 cing the greatest degree of happiness and safety, and is most 
 effectually secured against the dangers of mal-administration ; 
 and that whenever any government shall be found inadequate 
 or contrary to those principles, or contrary to those purposes, 
 a majority of the community hath an indubitable, inalienable, 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 63 
 
 and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish it, in such 
 manner as shall be judged the most conducive to the public 
 weal.' " l 
 
 In the same convention Judge Marshall said, — 
 
 " What are the favorite maxims of democracy ? A strict 
 observance of justice and public faith, and a steady adherence 
 to virtue ; - - these, sir, are the principles of a good govern- 
 ment." 2 
 
 " ' Democracy,' says the late Mr. Legare, of South Caro- 
 lina, in an article published in the ' New York Review,' ' in the 
 high and only true sense of that much-abused word, is the des- 
 tiny of nations, because it is the spirit of Christianity.' " 3 
 
 I have referred to the remarks of the Senator 
 from Alabama to show that if his doctrines were 
 true, he should go for the passage of the Homestead 
 Bill, because, in order to sustain the Government on 
 the principles laid down by him, every man should 
 be a property-holder. I want it understood that I 
 enter a disclaimer to the doctrine presented by him, 
 and merely present his argument to show why he, 
 above all others, ought to go for the Homestead 
 policy. m I refer to Mr. Legare, Judge Marshall, 
 and the author of the " History of Democracy," 
 as laying down my notions of democracy, as con- 
 tradistinguished from those laid down by the dis- 
 tinguished Senator from Alabama. We are both 
 members from the Democratic party. I claim to be 
 a Democrat, East, West, North, or South, or any- 
 where else. I have nothing to disguise. I have re- 
 ferrecl tothe Declaration of Independence, and to Mr. 
 
 l Elliot's Debates, Vol. III. p. 77. 2 Ibid. p. 223. 
 
 8 Ibid. Vol. V. p. 297. 
 
64 THE SPEECHES 
 
 Jefferson's Inaugural Address, for the purpose of 
 showing that democracy means something very dif- 
 ferent from what was laid down by the distinguished 
 Senator from Alabama. I furthermore refer to 
 these important documents to show that property 
 is not the leading element of government and of 
 society. Mr. Jefferson lays down, as truths to be 
 self-evident, that life, liberty, and the pursuit of hap- 
 piness are the leading essentials of government. 
 
 But it is not my purpose to dwell longer on that ; 
 and I wish to pass to the speech of the Senator from 
 South Carolina. 1 I disagree in much that was said 
 by that distinguished Senator ; and I wish to show 
 that he ought to go for the Homestead policy, so as 
 to interest every man in the country. If property 
 is the leading and principal element on which society 
 rests ; if property is the main object for which 
 government was created, the gentlemen who are the 
 foremost, the most zealous, and most distinguished 
 advocates of that doctrine should sustain the Home- 
 stead policy. The honorable Senator from South 
 Carolina, in his speech on the Lecompton Constitu- 
 tion, by innuendo or indirection, had a hit at the 
 Homestead — a side-blow. He said : — 
 
 " Your people are awaking. They are coming here. They 
 are thundering at our doors for homesteads, one hundred and 
 sixty acres of land for nothing ; and Southern Senators are 
 supporting them. Nay, they are assembling, as I have said, 
 with arms in their hands, and demanding work at $1000 a 
 year for six hours a day. Have you heard that the ghosts of 
 
 1 Mr Hammond. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 65 
 
 Mendoza and Torquemada are stalking in the streets of your 
 great cities ? That the Inquisition is at hand ? " 
 
 If this be true, as assumed by the distinguished 
 Senator from South Carolina, is it not an argument 
 why men should be placed in a condition where 
 they will not clamor, where they will not raise 
 mobs to threaten Government, and demand home- 
 steads ? Interest these men in the country ; give 
 them homes, or let them take homes ; let them be- 
 come producers ; let them become better citizens ; 
 let them be more reliable at the ballot-box. I want 
 to take them on their ground, their principle, that 
 property is the main element of society and of gov- 
 ernment ; and if their doctrine be true, the argu- 
 ment is still stronger in favor of the Homestead than 
 the position I assume. But the distinguished Sena- 
 tor from South Carolina goes on : — 
 
 " In all social systems there must be a class to do the menial 
 duties, to perform the drudgery of life. That is, a class re- 
 quiring but a low order of intellect, and but little skill. Its 
 requisites are vigor, docility, fidelity. Such a class you must 
 have, or you would not have that other class which leads 
 progress, civilization, and refinement. It constitutes the very 
 mud-sill of society and of political government ; and you might 
 as well attempt to build a house in the air, as to build either 
 the one or the other, except on this mud-sill. 
 
 " ' The poor ye always have with you ' ; for the man who 
 lives by daily labor, and scarcely lives at that, and who has to 
 put out his labor in the market, and take the best he can get 
 for it — in short, your whole hireling class of manual laborers 
 and ' operatives,' as you call them, are essentially slaves. 
 The difference between us is, that our slaves are hired for life 
 6* 
 
66 THE SPEECHES 
 
 and well compensated ; there is no starvation, no begging, no 
 want of employment among our people ; and not too much 
 employment either. Yours are hired by the day, not cared 
 for, and scantily compensated, which may be proved in the 
 most painful manner, at any hour, in any street in any of your 
 large towns. Why, you meet more beggars in one day, in 
 any single street of the city of New York, than you would 
 meet in a lifetime in the whole South. We do not think that 
 whites should be slaves either by law or necessity." 
 
 Ill this portion of the Senator's remarks I concur. 
 I do not think whites should be slaves ; and if sla- 
 very is to exist in this country, I prefer black slavery 
 to white slavery. But what I want to get at is, to 
 show that my worthy friend from South Carolina 
 should defend the Homestead policy, and the im- 
 policy of making the invidious remarks that have 
 been made here in reference to a portion of the 
 population of the United States. Mr. President, so 
 far as I am concerned, I feel that I can afford to 
 speak what are my sentiments. I am no aspirant 
 for anything on the face of God Almighty's earth. 
 I have reached the summit of my ambition. The 
 acme of all my hopes has been attained, and I would 
 not give the position I occupy here to-day for any 
 other in the United States. Hence, I say, I can 
 afford to speak what I believe to be true. 
 
 In one sense of the term we are all slaves. A 
 man is a slave to his ambition ; he is a slave to his 
 avarice ; he is a slave to his necessities ; and, in 
 enumerations of this kind, you can scarcely find any 
 man, high or low in society, but who, in some sense, 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 67 
 
 is a slave ; but they are not slaves in the sense we 
 mean at the South, and it will not do to assume 
 that every man who toils for his living is a slave. 
 If that be so, all are slaves ; for all must toil more 
 or less, mentally or physically. But in the other 
 sense of the term, we are not slaves. Will it do to 
 assume that the man who labors with his hands, 
 every man who is an operative in a manufacturing 
 establishment or a shop, is a slave ? No, sir ; that 
 will not do. Will it do to assume that every man 
 who does not own slaves, but has to live by his own 
 labor, is a slave ? That will not do. If this were 
 true, it would be very unfortunate for a good many 
 of us, and especially so for me. I am a laborer 
 with my hands, and I neA^er considered myself a 
 slave, in the acceptation of the term slave in the 
 South. I do own some ; I acquired them by my 
 industry, by the labor of my hands. In that sense 
 of the term I should have been a slave while I 
 was earning them with the labor of my hands. 
 
 Mr. Hammond. Will the Senator define a slave ? 
 
 Mr. Johnson. What we understand to be a 
 slave in the South, is a person who is held to ser- 
 vice during his or her natural life, subject to, and 
 under the control of, a master who has the right to 
 appropriate the products of his or her labor to his 
 own use. The necessities of life, and the various 
 positions in which a man may be placed, operated 
 upon by avarice, gain, or ambition, may cause him 
 to labor; but that does not make a slave. How 
 
68 THE SPEECHES 
 
 many men are there in society who go out and 
 work with their own hands, who reap in the field, 
 and mow in a meadow, who hoe corn, who work in 
 the shops ? Are they slaves ? If we were to go 
 back and follow out this idea, that every operative 
 and laborer is a slave, we should find that we have 
 had a great many distinguished slaves since the 
 world commenced. Socrates, who first conceived 
 the idea of the immortality of the soul, Pagan as he 
 was, labored with his own hands; — yes, wielded 
 the chisel and the mallet, giving polish and finish to 
 the stone ; he afterwards turned to be a fashioner 
 and constructor of the mind. Paul, the great ex- 
 pounder, himself was a tent-maker, and worked 
 with his hands : was he a slave ? Archimedes, who 
 declared that, if he had a place on which to rest 
 the fulcrum, with the power of his lever he could 
 move the world : was he a slave ? Adam, our 
 great father and head, the lord of the world, was a 
 tailor by trade : I wonder if he was a slave ? 
 
 When we talk about laborers and operatives, look 
 at the columns that adorn this chamber, and see 
 their finish and style. We are lost in admiration 
 at the architecture of your buildings, and their mas- 
 sive columns. We can speak with admiration. 
 What would it have been but for hands to con- 
 struct it ? Was the artisan who worked upon it a 
 slave ? Let us go to the South and see how the 
 matter stands there. Is every man that is not a 
 slaveholder to be denominated a slave because he 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 69 
 
 labors ? Why indulge in such a notion ? The 
 argument cuts at both ends of the line, and this 
 kind of doctrine does us infinite harm in the South. 
 There are operatives there ; there are laborers 
 there ; there are mechanics there. Are they slaves ? 
 Who is it in the South that gives us title and secur- 
 ity to the institution of slavery ? Who is it, let me 
 ask every Southerner around me ? Suppose, for 
 instance, we take the State of South Carolina, — 
 and there are many things about her and her people 
 that I admire, — we find that the 384,984 slaves in 
 South Carolina are owned by how many whites ? 
 They are owned by 25,556. Take the State of 
 Tennessee, with a population of 800,000, — 239,000 
 slaves are owned by 33,864 persons. The slaves in 
 the State of Alabama are owned by 29,295 whites. 
 The whole number of slaveholders in all the slave 
 States, when summed up, makes 347,000, owning 
 three and a half million slaves. The white popu- 
 lation in South Carolina is 274,000 ; the slaves 
 greater than the whites. The aggregate population 
 of the State is 668,507. 
 
 The operatives in South Carolina are 68,549. 
 Now, take the 25,000 slave-owners out, and a large 
 proportion of the people of South Carolina work 
 with their hands. Will it do to assume that, in the 
 State of South Carolina, the State of Tennessee, 
 the State of Alabama, and the other slaveholding 
 States, all those who do not own slaves are slaves 
 themselves ? Will this assumption do ? What 
 
70 THE SPEECHES 
 
 does it do at home in our own States ? It has a 
 tendency to raise prejudice, to engender opposition 
 to the institution of slavery itself. Yet our own 
 folks will do it. 
 
 Mr. Mason. Will the Senator from Tennessee 
 allow me to interrupt him for a moment ? « 
 
 Mr. Johnson. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Mason. The Senator is making an exhibi- 
 tion of the very few slaveholders in the Southern 
 States, in proportion to the white population, ac- 
 cording to the census. That is an exhibition which 
 has been made before by Senators who sit on the 
 other side of the Chamber. They have brought 
 before the American people what they allege to be 
 the fact, shown by the census, that of the white 
 population in the Southern States, there are very 
 few who are slaveholders. The Senator from Ten- 
 nessee is now doing the same thing. I understand 
 him to say there are but some — I do not remem- 
 ber exactly the number, but I think three hundred 
 thousand or a fraction more — of the whites in the 
 slaveholding States, who own three million slaves ; 
 but he made no further exposition. I ask the Sen- 
 ator to state the additional fact that the holders of 
 the slaves are the heads of families of the white 
 population ; and neither that Senator nor those 
 whose example he has followed on the other side, 
 has stated the fact that the white population in the 
 Southern States, as in the other States, embraces 
 men, women, and children. He has exhibited only 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 71 
 
 the number of slaveholders who are heads of fam- 
 ilies. 
 
 Mr. Johnson. The Senator says I have not 
 made an exhibit of the fact. The Senator inter- 
 rupted me before I had concluded. I gave way 
 as a matter of courtesy to him. Perhaps his 
 speech would have had no place, if he had waited 
 to hear me a few moments longer. 
 
 Mr. Mason. I shall wait. I thought the Sen- 
 ator had passed that point. 
 
 Mr. Johnson. I was stating the fact, that ac- 
 cording to the census-tables three hundred and 
 forty-seven thousand white persons owned the 
 whole number of slaves in the Southern States. 
 I was about to state that the families holding these 
 slaves might average six or eight or ten persons, 
 all of whom are interested in the products of slave- 
 labor, and many of these slaves are held by minors 
 and by females. I was not alluding to the matter 
 for the purpose the Senator from Virginia seems 
 to have intimated, and I should have been much 
 obliged to him if he had waited until he heard my 
 application of these figures. I was going to show 
 that expressions like those to which I have alluded, 
 operate against us in the South, and I was follow- 
 ing the example of no one. I was taking these 
 facts from the census-tables, which were published 
 by order of Congress, to show the bad policy and 
 injustice of declaring that the laboring portion of 
 our population were slaves and menials. Such 
 
72 THE SPEECHES 
 
 declarations should not be applied to the people 
 either North or South. I wished to say in that 
 connection, that, in my opinion, if a few men at 
 the North and at the South, who entertain extreme 
 views on the subject of slavery, and desire to keep 
 up agitation, were out of the way, the great mass 
 of the people, North and South, would go on pros- 
 perously and harmoniously under our institutions. 
 
 Sir, carry out the Homestead policy, attach the 
 people to the soil, induce them to love the Govern- 
 ment, and you will have the North reconciled to 
 the South, and the South to the North, and we 
 shall not have invidious doctrines preached to stir 
 up bad feelings in either section. I know that in 
 my own State, and in the other Southern States, 
 the men who do not own slaves are among the 
 first to take care of the institution. They will sub- 
 mit to no encroachment from abroad, no interfer- 
 ence from other sections. 
 
 I have said, Mr. President, much more than I 
 intended to say, and, I fear, in rather a desultory 
 manner, but I hope I have made myself under- 
 stood. I heard that some gentleman was going to 
 offer an amendment to this bill, providing that the 
 Government should furnish every man with a slave. 
 So far as I am concerned, if it suited him, and his 
 inclination led him that way, I wish to God every 
 head of a family in the United States had one to 
 take the drudgery and menial service off his family. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 73 
 
 I would have no objection to that ; but this intima- 
 tion was intended as a slur upon my proposition. 
 I want that to be determined by the people of the 
 respective States, and not by the Congress of the 
 United States. I do not want this body to inter- 
 fere by innuendo or by amendment, prescribing 
 that the people shall have this or the other. I de- 
 sire to leave that to be determined by the people 
 of the respective States, and not by the Congress 
 of the United States. 
 
 I hope, Mr. President, that this bill will be 
 passed. I think it involves the very first princi- 
 ples of the Government : it is founded upon states- 
 manship, humanity, philanthropy, and even upon 
 Christianity itself. I know the argument has been 
 made, why permit one portion of the people to go 
 and take some of this land and not another ? The 
 law is in general terms ; it places it in the power 
 of every man who will go to take a portion of the 
 land. The Senator from Alabama suggests to me 
 that a person, in order to get the benefit of this bill, 
 must prove that he is not the owner of other land. 
 An amendment was yesterday inserted in the bill 
 striking out that provision. Then it places all on 
 an equality to go and take. Why should this not 
 be done ? It was conceded yesterday that the land 
 was owned by the people. There are over three 
 million heads of families in the United States ; and 
 if every man who is the head of a family were to 
 take a quarter-section of public land, there would 
 
 7 
 
74 THE SPEECHES 
 
 still be nearly four million quarter-sections left. 
 If some people go and take quarter-sections, it does 
 not interfere with the rights of others, for he who 
 goes takes only a part of that which is his, and 
 takes nothing that belongs to anybody else. The 
 domain belongs to the whole people ; the equity is 
 in the great mass of the people ; the Government 
 holds the fee and passes the title, but the beneficial 
 interest is in the people. There are, as I have, 
 said, two quarter-sections of land for every head 
 of a family in the United States, and we merely 
 propose to permit a head of a family to take one 
 half of that which belongs to him. 
 
 I believe the passage of this bill will strengthen 
 the bonds of the Union. It will give us a better 
 voting population, and just in proportion as men 
 become interested in property, they will become 
 reconciled to all the institutions of property in the 
 country, in whatever shape they may exist. Take 
 the institution of slavery, for instance : would you 
 rather trust it to the mercies of a people liable to 
 be ruled by the mobs of which my honorable 
 friend from South Carolina spoke, or would you 
 prefer an honest set of landholders ? Which would 
 be the most reliable ? Which would guarantee the 
 greatest security to our institutions, when they 
 come to the test of the ballot-box ? 
 
 Mr. President, I hope the Senate will pass this 
 bill. I think it will be the beginning of a new 
 state of things — a new era. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 75 
 
 So far as I am concerned, — I say it not in any 
 spirit of boasting or egotism, — if this bill were 
 passed, and the system it inaugurates carried out, 
 of granting a reasonable quantity of land for a man's 
 family, and looking far into the future I could see 
 resulting from it — a stable, an industrious, a hardy, 
 a Christian, a philanthropic community, I should 
 feel that the great object of my little mission was 
 fulfilled. All that I desire is the honor and the 
 credit of being one of the American Congress to 
 consummate and to carry out this great scheme 
 that is to elevate our race and to make our insti- 
 tutions more permanent. I want no reputation 
 as some have insinuated. You may talk about 
 Jacobinism, Red Republicanism, and so on. I 
 pass by such insinuations as the idle wind which 
 I regard not. 
 
 I know the motives that prompt me to action. I 
 can go back to that period in my own history when 
 I could not say that I had a home. This being 
 so, when I cast my eyes from one extreme of the 
 United States to the other, and beholo^ the great 
 number that are homeless, I feel for them. I be- 
 lieve this bill would put them in possession of 
 homes ; and I want to see them realizing that sweet 
 conception when each man can proclaim, " I have 
 a home ; an abiding place for my wife and for my 
 children ; I am not the tenant of another ; I am 
 my own ruler ; and I will move according to my 
 own will, and not at the dictation of another." 
 
76 THE SPEECHES 
 
 Yes, Mr. President, if I should never be heard of 
 again on the surface of God's habitable globe, the 
 proud satisfaction of having contributed my little 
 aid to the consummation of this great measure is 
 all the reward I desire. 
 
 The people need friends. They have a great 
 deal to bear. They make all ; they do all ; but 
 how little they participate in the legislation of the 
 country ? All, or nearly all, of our legislation is 
 for corporations, for monopolies, for classes, and 
 individuals ; but the great mass who produce while 
 we consume, are little cared for; their rights and 
 interests are neglected and overlooked. Let us, as 
 patriots, as statesmen, let us as Christians, consum- 
 mate this great measure which will exert an in- 
 fluence throughout the civilized world in fulfilling 
 our destiny. I thank the Senate for their atten- 
 tion. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 77 
 
 THE CONSTITUTIONALITY AND EIGHTFUL- 
 NESS OF SECESSION. 
 
 SPEECH DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, ON 
 TUESDAY AND .WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 18 AND 19, 1860. 
 
 The question pending being the Joint Resolution introduced 
 by Mr. Johnson, on Thursday, the 13th of December, 1860, 
 proposing amendments to the Constitution of United States. 1 
 
 Mr. President : By the joint resolution now be- 
 fore the Senate, three amendments to the Consti- 
 tution of the United States are proposed. One 
 proposes to change the mode of election of Presi- 
 dent and Vice-President of the United States from 
 the electoral college to a vote substantially and 
 directly by the people. The second proposes that 
 the Senators of the United States shall be elected 
 by the people, once in six years, instead of by the 
 Legislatures of the respective States. The third 
 provides that the Supreme Court shall be divided 
 into three classes, — the term of the first class to 
 expire in four years from the time that the classifi- 
 cation is made ; of the second class in eight years ; 
 and of the third class in twelve years ; and as 
 these vacancies occur they are to be filled by per- 
 sons chosen, one half from the slave States and 
 the other half from the non-slaveholding States, 
 
 1 See Appendix, p. 1. 
 
 7* 
 
78 THE SPEECHES 
 
 thereby taking the judges of the Supreme Court 
 from the respective divisions of the country. 
 
 Mr. President, if these amendments had been 
 made, and the Constitution had been in the shape 
 now proposed, I think the difficulties that are now 
 upon the country would have been obviated. It 
 would have been required that either the President 
 or the Vice-President should be taken from the 
 South, and that would have destroyed, to some ex- 
 tent, the sectional character of our recent election. 
 
 The next provision of the amendment would re- 
 quire the votes cast for President and Vice-Presi- 
 dent to be cast by districts ; and if we are to take 
 as an indication the returns to the House of Rep- 
 resentatives of a majority of twenty-seven against 
 the incoming Administration, it is pretty conclu- 
 sive that a President differing in politics and sen- 
 timents from the one who has been recently elected 
 would have been chosen. Each district would 
 have voted directly for the President and Vice- 
 President of the United States. The individual 
 having a majority of the votes in that district 
 w T ould be considered as receiving one electoral 
 vote, just as we count the votes for one member 
 of Congress. Hence, if all the votes in the re- 
 spective districts had been cast on the same prin- 
 ciple, we should in the next Congress have a 
 majority of twenty-seven in opposition to the 
 incoming Administration in the House of Rep- 
 resentatives ; for they would have given us a ma- 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 79 
 
 jority in the electoral colleges. It seems to me, if 
 these propositions were adopted and made a part 
 of the Constitution, that, to a very great extent, 
 the difficulty and complaint that are now manifested 
 in different portions of the country would be ob- 
 viated, and especially so with some improvement 
 or modification of the law which provides for the 
 restoration of fugitives from labor. 
 
 It is not my purpose, sir, to discuss these prop- 
 ositions to amend the Constitution in detail to-day, 
 and I shall say but little more in reference to them 
 and to their practical operation ; but, as we are now, 
 as it were, involved in revolution, (for there is a 
 revolution, in fact, upon the country,) I think it 
 behooves every man, and especially every one occu- 
 pying a public place, to indicate, in some manner, 
 his opinions and sentiments in reference to the ques- 
 tions that agitate and distract the public mind. I 
 shall be frank on this occasion in giving my views 
 and taking my position, as I have always been upon 
 questions that involve the public interest. I believe 
 it is the imperative duty of Congress to make some 
 effort to save the country from impending disso- 
 lution ; and he that is unwilling to make an effort 
 to preserve the Union, or, in other words, to pre- 
 serve the Constitution, and the Union as an incident 
 resulting from the preservation of the Constitution, 
 is unworthy of public confidence, and the respect 
 and gratitude of the American people. 
 
 In most that I shall say on this occasion, I shall 
 
80 THE SPEECHES 
 
 not differ very essentially from my Southern friends. 
 The difference will consist in the mode and manner 
 by which this great end is to be accomplished. 
 Some of our Southern friends think that secession 
 is the mode by which these ends can be accom- 
 plished ; that if the Union cannot be preserved in 
 its spirit, by secession they will get those rights 
 secured and perpetuated that they have failed to 
 obtain within the Union. 
 
 I am opposed to secession. I believe it is no 
 remedy for the evils complained of. Instead of 
 acting with that division of my Southern friends 
 who take ground for secession, I shall take other 
 grounds, while I try to accomplish the same end. 
 I think that this battle ought to be fought not 
 outside, but inside of the Union, and upon the 
 battlements of the Constitution itself. I am un- 
 willing voluntarily to walk out of the Union which 
 has been the result of a Constitution made by the 
 patriots of the Revolution. They formed the Con- 
 stitution ; and this Union that is so much spoken 
 of, and which all of us are so desirous to preserve, 
 grows out of the Constitution ; and I repeat, I am 
 not willing to walk out of a Union growing out 
 of the Constitution that was formed by the patriots 
 and the soldiers of the Revolution. So far as I 
 am concerned, and I believe I may speak with some 
 degree of confidence for the people of my State, 
 we intend to fight that battle inside and not outside 
 of the Union ; and if anybody must go out of the 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 81 
 
 Union, it must be those who violate it. We do 
 not intend to go out. It is our Constitution ; it is 
 our Union, growing out of the Constitution ; and 
 we do not intend to be driven from it or out of the 
 Union. Those who have violated the Constitution 
 either in the passage of what are denominated per- 
 sonal-liberty bills, or by their refusal to execute the 
 fugitive-slave law, — they having violated the in- 
 strument that binds us together, — must go out, and 
 not we. If we violate the Constitution by going 
 out ourselves, I do not think we can go before 
 the country with the same force of position that 
 we shall if we stand inside of the Constitution, 
 demanding a compliance with its provisions and 
 its guarantees ; or if need be, as I think it is, de- 
 manding additional securities. We should make 
 that demand inside of the Constitution, and in the 
 manner and mode pointed out by the instrument 
 itself. Then we keep ourselves in the right; we 
 put our adversary in the wrong ; and though it 
 may take a little longer, we take the right means 
 to accomplish an end that is right in itself. 
 
 I know that sometimes we talk about compro- 
 mises. I am not a compromiser, nor a conserva- 
 tive, in the usual acceptation of those terms. I 
 have been generally considered radical, and I do 
 not come forward to-day in anything that I shall 
 say or propose, asking for anything to be done 
 upon the principle of compromise. If we ask for 
 anything, it should be for that which is right and 
 
82 THE SPEECHES 
 
 reasonable in itself. If it be right, those of whom 
 we ask it, upon the great principle of right, are 
 bound to grant it. Compromise ! I know in the 
 common acceptation of the term it is to agree upon 
 certain propositions in which some things are con- 
 ceded on one side and others conceded on the other. 
 I shall go for enactments by Congress or for amend- 
 ments to the Constitution, upon the principle that 
 they are right, and upon no other ground. I 
 am not for compromising right with wrong. If we 
 have no right, we ought not to demand it. If we 
 are in the wrong, they should not grant us what 
 we ask. I approach this momentous subject on 
 the great principles of right, asking for nothing 
 and demanding nothing but what is right in itself, 
 and what every right-minded man and a right- 
 minded community and a right-minded people, who 
 wish for the preservation of this Government, will 
 be disposed to grant. 
 
 In fighting this battle, I shall do it upon the basis 
 laid down by a portion of the people of my own 
 State, in a large and very intelligent meeting. A 
 committee of the most intelligent men in the coun- 
 try reported this resolution : — 
 
 "Resolved, That we deeply sympathize with our sister 
 Southern States, and freely admit that there is good cause 
 for dissatisfaction and complaint on their part, on account 
 of the recent election of sectional candidates to the Presi- 
 dency and Vice-Presidency of the United States; yet we, 
 as a portion of the people of a slaveholding community, are 
 not for seceding or breaking up the Union of these States 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 83 
 
 until every fair and honorable means has been exhausted 
 in trying to obtain, on the part of the non-slaveholding 
 States, a compliance with the spirit and letter of the Con- 
 stitution and all its guarantees ; and when this shall have 
 been done, and the States now in open rebellion against the 
 laws of the United States, in refusing to execute the fugi- 
 tive-slave law, shall persist in their present unconstitu- 
 tional course, and the Federal Government shall fail or 
 refuse to execute the laws in good faith, it (the Govern- 
 ment) will not have accomplished the great design of its 
 creation, and will therefore, in fact, be a practical dissolu- 
 tion, and all the States, as parties, be released from the 
 compact which formed the^ Union." 
 
 The people of Tennessee, irrespective of party, 
 go on and declare further : — • 
 
 " That in the opinion of this meeting no State has the 
 constitutional right to secede from the Union without the 
 consent of the other States which ratified the compact. 
 The compact, when ratified, formed the Union without 
 making any provision whatever for its dissolution. It (the 
 compact) was adopted by the States in toto and forever, 
 1 ivithout reservation or condition ; ' hence a secession of one 
 or more States from the Union, without the consent of the 
 others ratifying the compact, would be revolution, leading 
 in the end to civil, and perhaps servile war. While we 
 deny the right of a State, constitutionally, to secede from 
 the Union, we admit the great and inherent right of revo-. 
 lution, abiding and remaining with every people, but a right 
 which should not be exercised, except in extreme cases, and 
 in the last resort, when grievances are without redress, and 
 oppression has become intolerable." 
 
 They declare further : — 
 
 " That in our opinion, we can more successfully resist the 
 aggression of Black Republicanism by remaining within 
 
84 THE SPEECHES 
 
 • the Union, than we can by going out of it ; and more espe- 
 cially so, while there is a majority of both branches in the 
 National Legislature opposed to it, and the Supreme Court 
 of the United States is on the side of law and the Consti- 
 tution." 
 
 They go on, and declare further : — 
 
 " That we are not willing to abandon our Northern friends 
 who have stood by the Constitution of the United States, 
 and in standing by it have vindicated our rights, and in 
 their vindication have been struck down ; and now, in their 
 extremity, we cannot and will not desert them by seceding? 
 or otherwise breaking up the Union." 
 
 This is the basis upon which a portion of the 
 people of Tennessee, irrespective of party, pro- 
 pose to fight this battle. We believe that our true 
 position is inside of the Union. We deny the 
 doctrine of secession ; we deny that a State has 
 the power, of its own volition, to withdraw from 
 the Confederacy. We are not willing to do an 
 unconstitutional act, to induce or to coerce others 
 to comply with the Constitution of the United 
 States. We prefer complying with the Constitu- 
 tion, and fighting cfur battle, and making our de- 
 mand inside of the Union. 
 
 I know, Mr. President, that there are some who 
 believe — and we see that sonre of the States are 
 acting on that principle — that a State has the right 
 to secede ; that, of its own will, it has a right to 
 withdraw from the Confederacy. I am inclined to 
 think, and I know it is so in fact, that in many por- 
 tions of the country this opinion has resulted from 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 85 
 
 the resolutions of your own State, sir, 1 of 1798 and 
 1799. I propose to-day to examine that subject, for 
 I know from the examination of it that there has 
 been a false impression made upon my own mind in 
 reference to those resolutions, and the power pro- 
 posed to be exercised by a State in seceding upon 
 its own will. When we come to examine those 
 resolutions, we find that the third reads as follows : 
 
 " That this Assembly doth explicitly and peremptorily 
 declare that it views the powers of the Federal Government, 
 as resulting from the compact, to which the States are parties, 
 as limited by the plain sense and intention of the instrument 
 constituting that compact, as no further valid than they are 
 authorized by the grants enumerated in that compact; and 
 that in case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise 
 of other powers, not granted by the said compact, the States 
 who are parties thereto have the right, and are in duty bound, 
 to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for 
 maintaining within their respective limits the authorities, 
 rights, and liberties appertaining to them." 
 
 The phraseology of the Kentucky Resolution is 
 somewhat broader and more extensive. It declares 
 that a State has the right to judge of the infraction 
 of the Constitution, as well as the mode and meas- 
 ure of redress. This is what is declared by that 
 resolution which is repeated by so many in speeches 
 and publications made through the country. Now, 
 let Mr. Madison speak for himself as to what he 
 meant by that resolution. Mr. Madison, in his 
 report upon those resolutions, goes on and states ex- 
 
 1 Mr. Mason, of Virginia, in the chair. 
 
86 THE SPEECHES 
 
 pressly that in the resolution the word " States " is 
 used, notwithstanding the word " respective " is 
 used. Mr. Madison says : — . 
 
 " It appears to your committee to be a plain principle, 
 founded in common sense, illustrated by common practice, and 
 essential to the nature of compacts, that, where resort can be 
 had to no tribunal superior to the authority of parties, the 
 parties themselves must be the rightful judges, in the last re- 
 sort, whether the bargain made has been pursued or violated. 
 The Constitution of the United States was formed by the 
 sanction of the States, given by each in its sovereign capacity. 
 It adds to the stability and dignity, as well as to the authority 
 of the Constitution, that it rests on this legitimate and solid 
 foundation. The States, then, being the parties to the con- 
 stitutional compact, and in their sovereign capacity, it follows 
 of necessity, that there can be no tribunal above their author- 
 ity, to decide, in the last resort, whether the compact made 
 by them be violated ; and, consequently, that, as the parties to 
 it, they must themselves [that is the States] decide, in the last 
 resort, such questions as may be of sufficient magnitude to 
 require their interposition." 
 
 " The States " are referred to through the report. 
 He further remarks : — 
 
 " But the resolution has done more than guard against mis- 
 construction, by expressly referring to cases of a deliberate, 
 palpable, and dangerous nature. It specifies the object of the 
 interposition, which it contemplates to be solely that of arrest- 
 ing the progress of the evil of usurpation, and of maintaining 
 the authorities, rights, and liberties appertaining to the States, 
 as parties to the Constitution." 
 
 Now we find, by the examination of this subject, 
 that Mr. Madison, in his report, explains it, and 
 repudiates the idea that a State, as a party to the 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 87 
 
 compact, has a right to judge of an infraction of the 
 Constitution or any other grievance, and, upon its 
 own volition, withdraw from the Confederacy. I 
 will here read a letter of Mr. Madison to Nicholas 
 P. Trist, in explanation of this very proposition : — 
 
 "Montpelier, December 23, 1832. 
 
 " Dear Sir: I have received yours of the 19th, inclosing 
 some South Carolina papers. There are in one of them some 
 interesting views of the doctrine of secession, among which is 
 one that had occurred to me, and which for the first time I 
 have seen in print, namely : that if one State can at will with- 
 draw from the others, the others can withdraw from her, and 
 turn her, nolentem volentem, out of the Union. 
 
 " Until of late there is not a State that would have abhorred 
 such a doctrine more than South Carolina, or more dreaded 
 an application of it to herself. The same may be said of the 
 doctrine of nullification, which she now preaches as the only 
 doctrine by which the Union can be saved. 
 
 " I partake of the wonder that the men you name should 
 view secession in the light mentioned. The essential differ- 
 ence between a free government and a government not free 
 is, that the former is founded in compact, the parties to which 
 are mutually and equally bound by it. Neither of them, there- 
 fore, can have a greater right to break off from the bargain 
 than the other or others have to hold him to it ; and certainly 
 there is nothing in the Virginia Resolutions of 1798 adverse to 
 this principle, which is that of common sense and common 
 justice. 
 
 " The fallacy which draws a different conclusion from them 
 lies in confounding a single party with the parties to the con- 
 stitutional compact of the United States. The latter, having < 
 made the compact, may do what they will with it. The 
 former, as one of the parties, owes fidelity to it till released by ' 
 consent or absolved by an intolerable abuse of the power 
 
88 THE SPEECHES 
 
 created. In the Virginia Resolations and report the plural 
 number (States) is in every instance used whenever reference 
 is made to the authority which presided over the Govern- 
 ment." 
 
 He says the plural is used ; that " States " is the 
 word that is used ; and when we turn to the resolu- 
 tion we find it just as Mr. Madison represents it, 
 thereby excluding the idea that a State can sepa- 
 rately and alone determine the question, and have 
 the right to secede from the Union. 
 
 "As I am now known to have drawn those documents, I 
 may say, as I do with a distinct recollection, that it was inten- 
 tional. It was in fact required by the course of reasoning 
 employed on the occasion. The Kentucky Resolutions, being 
 less guarded, have been more easily perverted. The pretext 
 for the liberty taken with those of Virginia is tne word 
 ' respective ' prefixed to the ' rights,' &c, to be secured within 
 the States. Could the abuse of the expression have been 
 foreseen or suspected, the form of it would doubtless have been 
 varied. But what can be more consistent with common sense 
 than that all having the rights, &c, should unite in contend- 
 ing for the security of them to each ? 
 
 " It is remarkable how closely the nullifiers, who make the 
 name of Mr. Jefferson the pedestal for their colossal heresy, 
 shut their eyes and lips whenever his authority is ever so 
 clearly and emphatically against them. You have noticed 
 what he says in his letters to Monroe and Carrington (pp. 43 
 and 203, vol. 2) with respect to the power of the old Congress 
 to coerce delinquent States ; and his reason for preferring for 
 the purpose a naval to a military force ; and, moreover, his 
 remark that it was not necessary to find a right to coerce in 
 the Federal articles, that being inherent in the nature of a 
 compact. It is high time that the claim to secede at will 
 should be. put down by the public opinion, and I am glad 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 89 
 
 to see the task commenced by. one who understands the sub- 
 ject. 
 
 " I know nothing of what is passing at Richmond more than 
 what is seen in the newspapers. You were right in your fore- 
 sight of the effect of passages in the late proclamation. They 
 have proven a leaven for much fermentation there, and cre- 
 ated an alarm against the danger of consolidation balancing 
 that of disunion. 
 
 « With cordial salutations, JAMES MADISON. 
 
 " Nicholas P. Trist." 
 
 I have another letter of Mr. Madison, written in 
 1833, sustaining and carrying out the same interpre- 
 tation of the resolutions of 1798 and 1799. I 
 desire to read some extracts from that letter. Mr. 
 Madison says : — 
 
 " Much use has been made of the term ' respective ' in the 
 third resolution of Virginia, which asserts the right of the 
 States, in cases of sufficient magnitude, to interpose ' for main- 
 taining within their respective limits the authorities,' &c, apper- 
 taining to them ; the term ' respective ' being construed to 
 mean a constitutional right in each State, separately, to decide 
 on and resist by force encroachments within its limits. A 
 foresight or apprehension ef the misconstruction might easily 
 have guarded against it. But, to say nothing of the distinction 
 between ordinary and extreme cases, it is observable that in 
 this, as in other instances throughout the resolutions, the 
 plural number (States) is used in referring to them ; that a 
 concurrence and cooperation of all might well be contemplated 
 in interpositions for effecting the objects within reach; and 
 that the language of the closing resolution corresponds with 
 this view of the third. The course of reasoning in the report 
 on the resolutions required the distinction between a State and 
 the States. 
 
90 THE SPEECHES 
 
 " It surely does not follow, from the fact of the States, or 
 rather the people embodied in them, having, as parties to the 
 constitutional compact, no tribunal above them, that, in con- 
 troverted meanings of the compact, a minority of the parties 
 can rightfully decide against the majority, still less that a single 
 party can decide against the rest, and as little that it can at 
 will withdraw itself altogether from its compact with the rest. 
 
 " The characteristic distiuction between free governments 
 and governments not free, is that the former are founded on 
 compact, not between the government and those for whom it 
 acts, but among the parties creating the government. Each 
 of these being equal, neither can have more right to say that 
 the contact has been violated and dissolved than every other 
 has to deny the fact, and to insist on the execution of the 
 bargain. An inference from the doctrine that a single State 
 has a right to secede at will from the rest, is that the rest 
 would have an equal right to secede from it ; in other words 
 to turn it, against its will, out of its union with them. Such a 
 doctrine would not, till of late, have been palatable anywhere, 
 and nowhere less so than where it is now most contended 
 for." 
 
 When these letters are put together they are 
 clear and conclusive. Take the resolutions ; take 
 the report ; take Mr. Madison's expositions of them 
 in 1832 and 1833 ; his letter to Mr. Trist ; his 
 letter to Mr. Webster ; his letter to Mr. Rives ; 
 and when all are summed up, this doctrine of a 
 State, either assuming her highest political attitude 
 or otherwise, having the right, of her own will, to 
 dissolve all connection with this Confederacy, is an 
 absurdity, and contrary to the plain intent and 
 meaning of the Constitution of the United States. 
 I hold that the Constitution of the United States 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 91 
 
 makes no provision, as said by the President of the 
 United States, for its own destruction. It makes no 
 provision for breaking up the Government, and no 
 State has the constitutional right to secede and 
 withdraw from the Union. 
 
 In July, 1788, when the Constitution of the 
 United States was before the convention of New 
 York for ratification, Mr. Madison was in the city 
 of New York. Mr. Hamilton, who was in the con- 
 vention, wrote a letter to Mr. Madison to know if 
 New York could be admitted into the Union, with 
 certain reservations or conditions. One of those 
 reservations or conditions was, as Mr. Hamilton 
 says in his letter, that they should have the privi- 
 lege of receding within five or seven years if certain 
 alterations and amendments were not made to the 
 Constitution of the United States.. Mr. Madison, 
 in reply to that letter, makes, use of the following 
 emphatic language, which still further corroborates 
 and carries out the idea that the Constitution makes 
 no provision for breaking up the Government, and 
 that no State has a right to secede. Mr. Madison 
 says : — 
 
 "New York, Sunday Evening. 
 " My dear Sir : Yours of yesterday is this instant come 
 to hand, and I have but a few minutes to answer it. I am 
 sorry that your situation obliges you to listen to propositions of 
 the nature you describe. My opinion is, that a reservation of 
 a right to withdraw if amendments be not decided on under 
 the form of the Constitution within a certain time, is a con- 
 ditional ratification ; that it does not make New York a mem- 
 
92 THE SPEECHES 
 
 ber of the new Union, and consequently that she could not be 
 received on that plan. Compacts must be reciprocal — this 
 principle would not in such a case be preserved. The Con- 
 stitution requires an adoption in toto and forever" 
 
 This is the language of James Madison. 
 
 " It has been so adopted by the other States. An adoption 
 for a limited time would be as defective as an adoption of some 
 of the articles only. In short, any condition whatever must 
 vitiate the ratification. What the new Congress, by virtue of 
 the power to admit new States, may be able and disposed to 
 do in such case, I do not inquire, as I suppose that is not the 
 material point at present. I have not a moment to add more 
 than my fervent wishes for your success and happiness. The 
 idea of reserving a right to withdraw was started at Richmond, 
 and considered as a conditional ratification, which was itself 
 abandoned as worse than a rejection. 
 
 " Yours, JAMES MADISON, Jr." 
 
 I know it is claimed, and I see it stated in some 
 of the newspapers, that Virginia and some of the 
 other States made a reservation, upon the ratification 
 of the Constitution, that certain conditions were an- 
 nexed ; that they came in upon certain conditions, 
 and therefore they had a right, in consequence of 
 those conditions, to do this or the other thing. 
 When we examine the journal of the convention, 
 we find that no mention is made of any reservation 
 on the ratification of the Constitution by the State 
 of Virginia. We find that Mr. Madison says, in 
 his letter to Mr. Hamilton, that this idea was first 
 mooted at Richmond, and was abandoned as worse 
 than a rejection. His letter was written, after the 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 93 
 
 ratification of the Constitution of the United States 
 by the State of Virginia : hence he spoke with a 
 knowledge of the fact that no reservation was made ; 
 but if it had been made by one of the parties, and 
 not sanctioned by the other parties to the compact, 
 what would it have amounted to? Then we see 
 that Mr. Madison repudiates the doctrine that a 
 State has the right to secede. We see that his res- 
 olutions admit of no such construction. We see 
 that Mr. Madison, in his letter to Mr. Hamilton, 
 puts the interpretation that this Constitution was 
 adopted in toto and forever, without reservation and 
 without condition. 
 
 I know that the inquiry may be made, how is a 
 State, then, to have redress ? There is but one 
 way, and . that is expressed by the people of Ten- 
 nessee. You have entered into this compact ; it 
 was mutual ; it was reciprocal ; and you of your 
 own volition have no right to withdraw and break 
 the compact, without the consent of the other 
 parties. What remedy, then, has the State ? It 
 has a remedy that remains and abides with every 
 people upon the face of the earth. When griev- 
 ances are without a remedy, or without redress, when 
 oppression becomes intolerable, they have the great, 
 the inherent right of revolution. 
 
 Sir, if the doctrine of secession is to be carried out 
 upon the mere whim of a State, this Government is 
 at an end. I am as much opposed to a strong, or 
 what may be called by some a consolidated Govern- 
 
94 THE SPEECHES 
 
 ment, as it is possible for a man to be ; but while I 
 am greatly opposed to that, I want a Government 
 strong enough to preserve its own existence ; that 
 will not fall to pieces by its own weight or when- 
 ever a little dissatisfaction takes place in one of its 
 members. If the States have the right to secede at 
 will and pleasure, for real or imaginary evils or 
 oppressions, I repeat again, this Government is at an 
 end ; it is not stronger than a rope of sand ; its own 
 weight will crumble it to pieces, and it cannot exist. 
 Notwithstanding this doctrine may suit some who 
 are engaged in this perilous and impending crisis 
 that is now upon us, duty to my country, duty to my 
 State, and duty to my kind, require me to avow a 
 doctrine that I believe will result in the preservation 
 of the Government, and to repudiate one that I be- 
 lieve will result in its overthrow, and the consequent 
 disasters to the people of the United States. 
 
 If a State can secede at will and pleasure, and 
 this doctrine is maintained, why, I ask, on the other 
 hand, as argued by Mr. Madison in one of his let- 
 ters, cannot a majority of the States combine and 
 reject a State out of the Confederacy? Have a 
 majority of these States, under the compact that they 
 have made with each other, the right to combine and 
 reject any one of the States from the Confederacy ? 
 They have no such right ; the compact is reciprocal. 
 It was ratified without reservation or condition, and 
 it was ratified " in toto and forever " ; such is the 
 language of James Madison ; and there is but one 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 95 
 
 way to get out of it without the consent of the 
 parties, and that is, by revolution. 
 
 I know that some touch the subject with trem- 
 bling and fear. They say, here is a State that, per- 
 haps by this time, has seceded, or if not, she is on 
 the road to secession, and we must touch this subject 
 very delicately ; and that if the State secedes, con- 
 ceding the power of the Constitution to her to 
 secede, you must talk very delicately upon the sub- 
 ject of coercion. I do not believe the Federal 
 Government has the power to coerce a State ; for by 
 the eleventh amendment of the Constitution of the 
 United States it is expressly provided that you can- 
 not even put one of the States of this Confederacy 
 before one of the courts of the country as a party. 
 As a State, the Federal Government has no power 
 to coerce it ; but it is a member of the compact to 
 which it agreed in common with the other States, 
 and this Government has the right to pass laws, and 
 to enforce those laws upon individuals within the 
 limits of each State. While the one proposition is 
 clear, the other is equally so. This Government 
 can, by the Constitution of the country and by the 
 laws enacted in conformity with the Constitution, 
 operate upon individuals, and has the right and the 
 power, not to coerce a State, but to enforce and 
 execute the law upon individuals within the limits 
 of a State. 
 
 I know that the term, "to coerce a State," is 
 used in an ad captandum manner. It is a sover- 
 
96 THE SPEECHES 
 
 eignty that is to be crushed ! How is a State in the 
 Union ? What is her connection with it ? All the 
 connection she has with the other States is that 
 which is agreed upon in the compact between the 
 States. I do not know whether you may consider 
 it in the Union or out of the Union, or whether you 
 simply consider it a connection or a disconnection 
 with the other States ; but to the extent that a State ] 
 nullifies or sets aside any law or any provision of the 
 Constitution, to that extent it has dissolved its con- 
 nection, and no more. I think the States that have 
 passed their personal-liberty bills, in violation of the 
 Constitution of the United States, coming in conflict 
 with the fugitive-slave law, to that extent have dis- 
 solved their connection, and to that extent it is revo- 
 lution. But because some of the free States have 
 passed laws violative of the Constitution ; because 
 they have, to some extent, dissolved their connection 
 with this Government, does that justify us of the 
 South in following that bad example ? Because 
 they have passed personal-liberty bills, and have, 
 to that extent, violated the compact which is recip- 
 rocal,, shall we turn round, on the other hand, 
 and violate the Constitution by coercing them to 
 a compliance with it ? Will we do so ? 
 
 Then I come back to the starting-point : let us 
 stand in the Union and upon the Constitution ; and 
 if anybody is to leave this Union, or violate its 
 guaranties, it shall be those who have taken the 
 initiative, and passed their personal-liberty bills. I 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 97 
 
 am in the Union, and intend to stay in it. I intend 
 to hold on to the Union, and the guaranties under 
 which this Union has grown ; and I do not intend 
 to be driven from it, nor out of it, by their uncon- 
 stitutional enactments. 
 
 Then, Mr. President, suppose, for instance, that a 
 fugitive is arrested in the State of Vermont to-mor- 
 row, and under the personal-liberty bill of that State, 
 or the law — I do not remember its precise title 
 now — which prevents, or is intended to prevent, 
 the faithful execution of the fugitive-slave law, Ver- 
 mont undertakes to rescue him, and prevent the 
 enforcement of the law : what is it ? It is nulli- 
 fication ; it is resistance to the laws of the United 
 States made in conformity with the Constitution ; 
 it is rebellion ; and it is the duty of the President of 
 the United States to enforce the law, at all hazards 
 and to the last extremity. And, if the Federal 
 Government fails or refuses to execute the laws 
 made in conformity with the Constitution, and those 
 States persist in their violation and let those uncon- 
 stitutional acts remain upon their statute-books, and 
 carry them into practice ; if the Government, on 
 the one hand, fails to execute the laws of the United 
 States, and those States, by their enactments, violate 
 them on the other, the Government is at an end, 
 and the parties are all released from the compact. 
 
 Mr. Collamer explained that the Vermont leg- 
 islation, to which allusion had been made, was an- 
 terior to the passage of the fugitive -slave law; and, 
 
98 THE SPEECHES 
 
 besides, the laws of Vermont were referred to a 
 board of revision, by which, as well as by the courts 
 of that State, no enactment would be sanctioned 
 that was in conflict with the Constitution of the 
 United States. 
 
 Mr. Johnson continued : I do not think the 
 honorable Senator's explanation is entirely satisfac- 
 tory, inasmuch as, though one law was anterior, 
 another was passed in 1858. The Senator is a 
 lawyer ; he has presided in the courts of his State ; 
 and he has been a long time in the councils of the 
 country ; and therefore I had reason to expect a 
 direct answer. 
 
 I think it will be determined by the courts and 
 by the judgment of the country, that the acts passed 
 in 1850 and 1858 by the Legislature of Vermont are 
 a violation, a gross, palpable violation of the Con- 
 stitution of the United States. It is clear and con- 
 clusive to my mind, that a State passing an uncon- 
 stitutional act intended to impede or to prevent the 
 execution of a law passed by the Congress of the 
 United States which is constitutional, is thereby 
 placed, so far as the initiative is concerned, in a state 
 of rebellion. It is an open act of nullification. I 
 am not aware that there has been any attempt in 
 Vermont to wrest any persons out of the hands 
 of the officers of the United States, or to imprison 
 or to fine any person under the operation of this 
 law; but the passage of such an act is to initiate 
 rebellion. I think it comes in conflict directly with 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 99 
 
 the spirit and letter of the Constitution of the United 
 States, and to that extent is an act of nullification, 
 and places the State in open rebellion to the United 
 States. 
 
 I have stated that there is no power conferred 
 upon the Congress of the United States, by the Con- 
 stitution, to coerce a State in its sovereign capacity; 
 that there is no power on the part of the Congress 
 of the United States even to bring a State into the 
 supreme tribunal of the country. You cannot put 
 a State at the bar of the Supreme Court of the 
 United States. The Congress of the United States 
 has the power to pass laws to operate upon indi- 
 viduals within the limits of a State, by which all 
 the functions of this Government can be executed 
 and carried out ; and if Vermont, either by an act 
 of secession, which I take to be unconstitutional, or 
 without having first seceded from the Union of the 
 States by open force, in conformity with the laws of 
 the State, should resist or attempt to resist the exe- 
 cution of the laws of the United States, it would be 
 a practical rebellion, an overt act ; and this Govern- 
 ment has the authority under the Constitution to 
 enforce the laws of the United States, and it has the 
 authority to call to its aid such means as are deemed 
 necessary and proper for the execution of the laws, 
 even if it were to lead to the calling out of the 
 militia, or calling into service the Army and Navy 
 of the United States to execute the laws. This 
 principle applies to every State placing herself in an 
 
100 THE SPEECHES 
 
 attitude of opposition to the execution of the laws of 
 the United States. 
 
 I do not think it necessary, in order to preserve 
 this Union, or to keep a State within its sphere, that 
 the Congress of the United States should have the 
 power to coerce a State. All that is necessary is 
 for the Government to have the power to execute 
 and to carry out all the powers conferred upon it 
 by the Constitution, whether they apply to the State 
 or otherwise. This, I think, the Government clearly 
 has the powerto do ; and so long as the Government 
 executes all the laws in good faith, denying the right 
 of a State constitutionally to secede, so long the 
 State is in the Union, and subject to all the pro- 
 visions of the Constitution and the laws passed in 
 conformity with it. For example : the power is 
 conferred on the Federal Government to carry the 
 mails through the several States ; to establish post- 
 offices and post-roads ; to establish courts in the re- 
 spective States ; to lay and collect taxes, and so on. 
 The various powers are enumerated, and each and 
 every one of these powers the Federal Government 
 has the constitutional authority to execute within 
 the limits of the States. It is not an invasion of a 
 State for • the Federal Government to execute its 
 laws, to take care of its public property, and to en- 
 force the collection of its revenue ; but if, in the 
 execution of the laws ; if, in the enforcement of the 
 Constitution, it meets with resistance, it is the duty 
 of the Government, and it has the authority, to put 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 101 
 
 down resistance, and effectually to execute the laws 
 as contemplated by the Constitution of the country. 
 But this is a diversion from the line of my argu- 
 ment. I was going on to show that, according to 
 the opinions of the fathers, not only of the country 
 but of the Constitution itself, no State, of its own 
 volition, has the right to withdraw from the Con- 
 federacy after having entered into the compact. I 
 have referred to the last letter Mr. Madison wrote 
 upon this subject, — at least it is the last one that 
 I have been able to find, — in which he summed up 
 this subject in a conclusive and masterly manner. 
 In his letter to Mr. Webster of March 15,1833, 
 upon the receipt of Mr. Webster's speech, after the 
 excitement had subsided to some extent and the 
 country had taken its stand, Mr. Madison said : — 
 
 " The Constitution of the United . States being established 
 by a competent authority, by that of the sovereign people of the 
 several States who were parties to it, it remains only to in- 
 quire what the Constitution is ; and here it speaks for itself. 
 It organizes a Government into the usual legislative, execu- 
 tive, and judiciary departments ; invests it with specified 
 powers, leaving others to the parties to the Constitution. It 
 makes the Government, like other governments, to operate 
 directly on the peopl* ; places at its command the needful 
 physical means of executing its powers ; and finally proclaims 
 its supremacy, and that of the laws made in pursuance of it, 
 over the constitutions and laws of the States, the powers of the 
 Government being exercised, as in other elective and respon- 
 sible governments, under the control of its constituents, people, 
 and the legislatures of the States, and subject to the revolu- 
 tionary rights of the people in extreme cases. 
 9* 
 
102 THE SPEECHES 
 
 " Such is the Constitution of the United States de jure and 
 de facto ; and the name, whatever it be, that may be given to 
 it, can make it nothing more or less than what it is." 
 
 This is clear and conclusive, so far as Mr. Madi- 
 son goes on the subject. I have already shown that 
 in 1789, in making his report upon the Virginia 
 Resolutions, he gave the true interpretation to those 
 resolutions, and explained what was meant by the 
 word " respective" before "States." In his letter, 
 in 1832, to Mr Rives, and in his letter of 1832 to 
 Mr. Trist, having had time to reflect on the opera- 
 tion of the various provisions of the Constitution 
 upon the country, in the decline of life, when he had 
 seen the experiment fairly made, when his mind was 
 matured upon every single point and provision in 
 the Constitution, he, at that late period, sums up the 
 doctrine and comes to the conclusion that I am 
 contending for on the present occasion. 
 
 In addition to this, Mr. Jefferson, who prior to 
 the formation of the Constitution was in. Paris, 
 writing letters on the subject of the formation of a 
 stable Government here, saw the great defect in 
 the Federal head under the old Articles of Confed- 
 eration, and he pointed with the, unerring finger of 
 philosophy to what is now in the Constitution, as 
 what was wanting in the old Articles of Confedera- 
 tion. Mr. Jefferson, in his letter to Colonel Monroe, 
 dated Paris, August 11, 1786, speaks thus : — 
 
 " There never will be money in the treasury till the Con- 
 federacy shows its teeth. The States must see the rod ; per- 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 103 
 
 haps it must be felt by some one of them. I am persuaded all 
 of them would rejoice to see every one obliged to furnish its 
 contributions. It is not the difficulty of furnishing them which 
 beggars the treasury, but the fear that others will not furnish 
 as much. Every rational citizen must wish to see an effective 
 instrument of coercion, and should fear to see it on any other 
 element than the water." 
 
 Here Mr. Jefferson, seeing the difficulty, that 
 under the old Articles of Confederation the Federal 
 Government had not the power to execute its laws, 
 that it could not collect revenue, points to what 
 should be in the Constitution of the United States 
 when formed. Mr. Jefferson, upon the same idea 
 which was in his mind, and which was afterwards 
 embodied in the Constitution, said, in a letter to E. 
 Carrington, dated Paris, August 4, 1787 : — 
 
 " I confess I do not go as far in the reforms thought neces- 
 sary, as some of my correspondents in America ; but if the 
 convention should adopt such propositions, I shall suppose them 
 necessary. My general plan would be, to make the States 
 one as to everything connected with foreign nations, and sev- 
 eral as to everything purely domestic. But, with all the imper- 
 fections of our present Government, it is without comparison 
 the best existing, or that ever did exist. Its greatest defect 
 is the imperfect manner in which matters of commerce have 
 been provided for. It has been so often said, as to be gener- 
 ally believed, that Congress have no power by the Confedera- 
 tion to enforce anything — for example, contributions of 
 money. It was not necessary to give them that power ex- 
 pressly ; they have it by the law of nature. When two parties 
 make a compact, there results to each a power of compelling 
 the other to execute it." 
 
 Even if it was not expressed in the Constitution, 
 
104 THE SPEECHES 
 
 the power to preserve itself and maintain its au- 
 thority would be possessed by the Federal Govern- 
 ment upon the great principle that it must have the 
 power to preserve its own existence. But we find 
 that, in plain and express terms, this authority is 
 delegated. The very powers that Mr. Jefferson 
 pointed out as being wanting in the old Govern- 
 ment, under the Articles of Confederation, are 
 granted by the Constitution of the United States 
 to the present Government by express delegation. 
 Congress has the power to lay and collect taxes ; 
 Congress has the power to pass laws to restore 
 fugitives from labor escaping from one State into 
 another ; Congress has the power to establish post- 
 offices and post-roads; Congress has the power to 
 establish courts in the different States ; and having 
 these powers, it has the authority to do everything 
 necessary to sustain the collection of the revenue, 
 the enforcement of the judicial system, and the 
 carrying of the mails. Because Congress, having 
 the power, undertakes to execute its laws, it will 
 not do to say that the Government is placed in the 
 position of an aggressor. Not so. It is only act- 
 ing within the scope of the Constitution, and in 
 compliance with its delegated powers. But a State 
 that resists the exercise of those powers becomes 
 the aggressor, and places itself in a rebellious or 
 nullifying attitude. It is the duty of this Govern- 
 ment to execute its laws in good faith. When the 
 Federal Government shall fail to execute all the 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 105 
 
 laws that are made in strict conformity with the 
 Constitution, when our sister States shall pass laws 
 violative of that Constitution, and obstruct the laws 
 of Congress passed in conformity with it, then, and 
 not till then, will this Government have failed to 
 accomplish the great objects of its creation. Then 
 it will be at an end, and all the parties to the com- 
 pact will be released. 
 
 But I wish to go a little further into the author- 
 ities as to the power of a State to secede from the 
 Union, and to quote an opinion of Judge Marshall, 
 given at a very early day. I know it is very com- 
 mon to denounce him as a Federalist, but I care 
 not where the truth comes from ; wherever a sound 
 argument may be found to sustain a proposition that 
 is right in itself, I am willing to adopt it ; and I 
 have put myself to the trouble to hunt up these 
 unquestionable authorities on this subject, knowing 
 that they would have more influence before the 
 country, and before my constituents, than anything 
 that I could say. Though I am not a lawyer, 
 though I have not made the law my study and my 
 pursuit, I claim to have some little common sense 
 and understanding as to the application of general 
 principles. I find that Judge Marshall, in speaking 
 on the question of the right of a State upon its own 
 volition to go out of the Confederacy, in the case 
 of Cohens vs. Virginia, said : — 
 
 " It is very true, that whenever hostility to the existing 
 system " — that is, the system of our Government — "shall 
 
106 THE SPEECHES 
 
 become universal, it will be also irresistible. The people 
 made the Constitution, and the people can unmake it." 
 
 I care not whether he speaks here of the people 
 in the aggregate or not. The application of the 
 principle is just as clear, whether you say the 
 people, through the States, made the Constitution, 
 or leave out the qualifying words "through the 
 States." 
 
 "It is the creature of their will, and lives only by their 
 will. But this supreme and irresistible power to make and 
 unmake resides only in the whole body of the people; not 
 in any subdivision of them. The attempt of any of the 
 parts to exercise it is usurpation, and ought to be repelled by 
 those to whom the people have delegated their power of repel- 
 ling it." l 
 
 Now, whether you apply that, in a general sense, 
 to the people in the aggregate, or to the States oc- 
 cupying the same relation to the Federal Govern- 
 ment that the people do to the States, the principle 
 is just the same ; and if you speak of States ratify- 
 in ce and making the Constitution of the United 
 States, one State — one of the community that 
 made the Constitution — has no right, without the 
 consent of the other States, to withdraw from the 
 compact, and set the Constitution at naught. It is 
 the principle that I seek ; and the principle applies 
 as well to a community of States as it does to a 
 community of individuals. Admitting that this 
 Federal Government was made by a community 
 
 i Wheaton's Eejwrts, Vol. VI. p. 389. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 107 
 
 of States, can one of that community of States, of 
 its own will, without the consent of the rest, where 
 the compact is reciprocal, set it aside, and withdraw 
 itself from the operation of the Government? I 
 have given you the opinion of Judge Marshall, one 
 of the most distinguished jurists that ever presided 
 in this country, though he is called by some a Fed- 
 eralist. His mind was clear ; he lived in that day 
 when the Constitution should be understood, and 
 when it was understood — in the days of Madison 
 and Jefferson; and this is his opinion upon that 
 subject, as far back as 1821. 
 
 In this connection, I would call the attention of 
 the Senate to General Jackson's views upon this 
 subject; and I would also call their attention to 
 Mr. Webster's views, if it were necessary, for he 
 is conceded, by some at least, to be one of the most 
 able expounders of the Constitution of the United 
 States. General Jackson, though not celebrated 
 for his legal attainments, was celebrated for his 
 sagacity, his strong common sense, his great intui- 
 tive power of reaching correct conclusions, and 
 understanding correct principles. In 1833, Gen- 
 eral Jackson, in his proclamation, takes identically 
 the same ground ; and declares, first, that a State 
 has no power of itself to nullify a law of Congress 
 within its limits ; and next, that, notwithstanding 
 a State may claim to have seceded, it has no con- 
 stitutional power to withdraw itself from the Union 
 of the States, and thereby set at naught the laws 
 
108 THE SPEECHES 
 
 and the Constitution. He argues this question 
 forcibly and clearly; and comes to the unerring 
 conclusion, according to my judgment, that no 
 State has the constitutional power to withdraw it- 
 self from this Confederacy without the consent of 
 the other States ; and it may do good to reproduce 
 his views on the subject. He says, in his famous 
 proclamation, speaking of the nullification ordinance 
 of South Carolina : — 
 
 u And whereas the said ordinance prescribes to the people 
 of South Carolina a course of conduct in direct violation of 
 their duty as. citizens of the United States, contrary to the 
 laws of their country, subversive of its Constitution, and 
 having for its object the destruction of the Union, — that 
 Union which, coeval with our political existence, led our 
 fathers, without any other ties to unite them than those of 
 patriotism and a common cause, through a sanguinary strug- 
 gle to a glorious independence, — that sacred Union, hitherto 
 inviolate, which, perfected by our happy Constitution, has 
 brought us, by the favor of Heaven, to a state of prosperity 
 at home, and high consideration abroad, rarely, if ever, 
 equalled in the history of nations. To preserve this bond of 
 our political existence from destruction; to maintain invio- 
 late this state of national honor and prosperity, and to justify 
 the confidence my fellow-citizens have reposed in me, I, 
 Andrew Jackson, President of the United States, have 
 thought proper to issue this my proclamation, stating my 
 views of the Constitution and the laws applicable to the 
 measures adopted by the convention of South Carolina, and 
 to the reasons they have put forth to sustain them, declaring 
 the course which duty will require me to pursue, and, appeal- 
 ing to the understanding and patriotism of the people, warn 
 them of the consequences that must inevitably result from 
 an observance of the dictates of the convention." 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 109 
 
 He argues the question at length : — 
 
 " This right to secede is deduced from the nature of the 
 Constitution, which, they say, is a compact between sov- 
 ereign States, who have preserved their whole sovereignty, 
 and therefore are subject to no superior; that because they 
 made the compact they can break it when, in their opinion, 
 it has been departed from by the other States. Fallacious 
 as this course of reasoning is, it enlists State pride, and 
 finds advocates in the honest prejudices of those who have 
 not studied the nature of our Government sufficiently to see 
 the radical error on which it rests." 
 
 " The people of the United States formed the Constitu- 
 tion, acting through the State Legislatures in making the 
 compact, to meet and discuss its provisions, and acting in 
 separate conventions when they ratified those provisions ; 
 but the terms used in its construction show it to be a Gov- 
 ernment in which the people of all the States collectively 
 are represented. We are one people in the choice of the 
 President and Vice-President. Hence the States have no 
 other agency than to direct the mode in which the votes 
 shall be given. The candidates having the majority of all 
 the votes are chosen. The electors of a majority of the 
 States may have given their votes for one candidate, and 
 yet another may be chosen. The people, then, and not the 
 States, are represented in the executive branch." 
 
 " The Constitution of the United States, then, forms a 
 Government, not a league ; and whether it be formed by 
 compact between the States, or in any other manner, its 
 character is the same. It is a Government in which all the 
 people are represented; which operates directly on the 
 people individually, not upon the States — they retained all 
 the power they did not grant. But each State having ex- 
 pressly parted with so many powers as to constitute, jointly 
 with the other States, a single nation, cannot, from that 
 10 
 
110 THE SPEECHES 
 
 period, possess any right to secede; because such secession 
 does not break a league but destroys the unity of a nation ; 
 and any injury to that unity is not only a breach, which 
 would result from the contravention of a compact, but it is 
 an offence against the whole Union. To say that any State 
 may, at pleasure, secede from the Union, is to say that the 
 United States are not a nation ; because it would be a sole- 
 cism to contend that any part of a nation might dissolve its 
 connection with the other parts, to their injury or ruin, 
 without committing any offence. Secession, like any other 
 revolutionary act, may be morally justified by the extremity 
 of oppression ; but to call it a constitutional right, is con- 
 founding the meaning of terms, and can only be done 
 through gross error, or to deceive those who are willing to 
 assert a right but would pause before they made a revolu- 
 tion, or incurred the penalties consequent on a failure. 
 
 "Because the Union was formed by compact, it is said 
 the parties to that compact may, when they feel themselves 
 aggrieved, depart from it; but it is precisely because it is 
 a compact that they cannot. A compact is an agreement 
 or binding obligation. It may by its terms have a sanction 
 or penalty for its breach, or it may not. If it contains no 
 sanction, it may be broken, with no other consequence than 
 moral guilt; if it have a sanction, then the breach insures 
 the designated or implied penalty. A league between in- 
 dependent nations, generally, has no sanction other than a 
 moral one; or if it should contain a penalty, as there is no 
 common superior, it cannot be enforced. A Government, 
 on the contrary, always has a sanction expressed or implied ; 
 and, in our case, it is both necessarily implied and expressly 
 given. An attempt, by force of arms, to destroy a Govern- 
 ment, is an offence by whatever means the constitutional 
 compact may have been formed, and such Government has 
 the right, by the law of self-defence, to pass acts for punish- 
 ing the offender, unless that right is modified, restrained, or 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. Ill 
 
 resumed by the constitutional act. In our system, although 
 it is modified in the case of treason, yet authority is expressly 
 given to pass all laws necessary to carry its powers into effect, 
 and under this grant, provision has been made for punishing 
 acts which obstruct the due administration of the laws." . . . 
 "It treats, as we have seen, on the alleged undivided sover- 
 eignty of the States, and on their having formed, in this 
 sovereign capacity, a compact which is called the Consti- 
 tution, from which, because they made it, they have the 
 right to secede. Both of these positions are erroneous, and 
 some of the arguments to prove them so have been antici- 
 pated. 
 
 " The States, severally, have not retained their entire 
 sovereignty. It has been shown that in becoming parts of 
 a nation, not members of a league, they surrendered many 
 of their essential parts of sovereignty. The right to make 
 treaties, declare war, levy taxes, exercise exclusive judi- 
 cial and legislative powers, were all of them functions of 
 sovereign power. The States, then, for all these purposes, 
 were no longer sovereign. The allegiance of their citizens 
 was transferred, in the first instance, to the Government of 
 the United States : they became American citizens, and 
 owed obedience to the Constitution of the United States, 
 and to laws made in conformity with the powers it vested 
 in Congress. This last position has not been, and cannot 
 be, denied. How, then, can that State be said to be sov- 
 ereign and independent whose citizens owe obedience to 
 laws not made by it, and whose magistrates are sworn to 
 disregard those laws when they come in conflict with those 
 passed by another? What shows conclusively that the 
 States cannot be said to have reserved an undivided sov- 
 ereignty is, that they expressly ceded the right to punish 
 treason, not treason against their separate power, but trea- 
 son against the United States. Treason is an offence against 
 sovereignty, and sovereignty must reside with the power to 
 
112 THE SPEECHES 
 
 punish it. But the reserved rights of the States are not 
 less sacred because they have, for their common interest, 
 made the General Government the depository of those 
 
 powers." 
 
 " So obvious are the reasons which forbid this secession, 
 that it is necessary only to allude to them. The Union was 
 formed for the benefit of all. It was produced by mutual 
 sacrifices of interest and opinions. Can these sacrifices be 
 recalled ? Can the States, who magnanimously surrendered 
 their title to the territories of the West, recall the grant ? 
 Will the inhabitants of the inland States agree to pay the 
 duties that may be imposed without their assent by those 
 on the Atlantic or the Gulf for their own benefit? Shall 
 there be a free port in one State, and onerous duties in 
 another ? No man believes that any right exists in a single 
 State to involve all the others in these and countless other 
 evils, contrary to the engagement solemnly made. Every 
 one must see that the other States, in self-defence, must 
 oppose it at all hazards." 
 
 Having travelled thus far, the question arises, 
 in what sense are we to construe the Constitution 
 of the United States ? I assume what is assumed 
 in one of Mr. Madison's letters, that the Consti- 
 tution was formed for perpetuity ; that it never 
 was intended to be broken up. It was commenced, 
 it is true, as an experiment ; but the founders of 
 the Constitution intended that this experiment 
 should go on ; and by way of making it perpetual, 
 they provided for its amendment. They provided 
 that this instrument could be amended and im- 
 proved, from time to time, as the changing cir- 
 cumstances, as the changing pursuits, as the 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 113 
 
 changing notions of men might require ; but they 
 made no provision whatever for its destruction. 
 The old Articles of Confederation were formed for 
 the purpose of making " a perpetual union." In 
 1787, when the convention concluded their delib- 
 erations and adopted the Constitution, what do 
 they say in the very preamble of that Constitu- 
 tion ? Having in their mind the idea that was 
 shadowed forth in the old Articles of Confedera- 
 tion, that the Union was to be perpetual, they 
 say, at the commencement, that it is to make " a 
 more perfect union " than the union under the old 
 Articles of Confederation, which they called " per- 
 petual." 
 
 What furthermore do we find ? The Constitu- 
 tion of the United States contains a provision 
 that it is to be submitted to the States respec- 
 tively for their ratification ; but on nine States rati- 
 fying it, it shall be the Constitution for them. In 
 that way the Government was created ; and in 
 that way provision was made to perfect it. What 
 more do we find ? The Constitution, as I have 
 just remarked, provides for its own amendment, 
 its improvement, its perpetuation, by pointing out 
 and by prescribing the mode and manner in which 
 improvements shall be made. That still preserves 
 the idea that it is to be perpetual. We find, in 
 addition, a provision that Congress shall have power 
 to admit new States. 
 
 Hence, in travelling along through the instra- 
 10* 
 
114 THE SPEECHES 
 
 ment, we find how the Government is created, how 
 it is to be perpetuated, and how it may be enlarged 
 in reference to the number of States constituting 
 the Confederacy ; but do we find any provision 
 for winding it up, except on that great inherent 
 principle that it may be wound up by the States 
 — not by a State, but by the States which brought 
 it into existence — and by no other means ? That 
 is a means of taking down the Government that 
 the Constitution could not provide for. It is above 
 the Constitution ; it is beyond any provision that 
 can be made by mortal man. 
 
 Now, to expose the absurdity of the pretension 
 that there is a right to secede, let me press this 
 argument a little further. The Constitution has 
 been formed ; it has been made perfect, or, in other 
 words, means have been provided by which it can 
 be made perfect. It was intended to be perpetual. 
 In reference to the execution of the laws under it, 
 what do we find? As early as 1795, Congress 
 passed an excise law, taxing distilleries throughout 
 the country, and what were called the whiskey boys 
 of Pennsylvania resisted the law. The Govern- 
 ment wanted means. It taxed distilleries. The 
 people of Pennsylvania resisted it. What is the 
 difference between a portion of the people resist- 
 ing a constitutional law, and all of the people of a 
 State doing so ? But because you can apply the 
 term coercion in one case to a State, and in the 
 other call it simply the execution of the law against 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 115 
 
 individuals, you say there is a great distinction ! 
 We do not assume the power to coerce a State, 
 but we assume that Congress has power to lay and 
 collect taxes, and Congress has the right to enforce 
 that law when obstructions and impediments are 
 opposed to its enforcement. The people of Penn- 
 sylvania did object ; they did resist and oppose the 
 legal authorities of the country. Was that law 
 enforced ? Was it called coercion at that day to 
 enforce it ? Suppose all the people of the State 
 of Pennsylvania had resisted ; would not the law 
 have applied with just the same force, and would 
 it not have been just as constitutional to execute it 
 against all the people of the State, as it was to 
 execute it upon a part of their citizens ? 
 
 George Washington, in his annual message to 
 the Congress of the United States, referred to the 
 subject ; and it will be seen what George Washing- 
 ton considered to be his duty in the execution of 
 the laws of the United States upon the citizens 
 of the States : — 
 
 " Thus the painful alternative could not be discarded. I 
 ordered the militia to march, after once more admonishing 
 the insurgents, in my proclamation of the 25th of Septem- 
 ber last. 
 
 " It was a task too difficult, to ascertain with precision the 
 lowest degree of force competent to the quelling of the insur- 
 rection. From a respect, indeed, to economy, and the ease 
 of my fellow-citizens belonging to the militia, it would have 
 gratified me to accomplish such an estimate. My very reluc- 
 tance to ascribe too much importance to the opposition, had 
 
116 THE SPEECHES 
 
 its extent been accurately seen, would have been a decided 
 inducement to the smallest efficient numbers. In this un- 
 certainty, therefore, I put in motion fifteen thousand men, as 
 being an army -which, according to all human calculation, 
 would be prompt and adequate in every view, and might, 
 perhaps, by rendering resistance desperate, prevent the effu- 
 sion of blood. Quotas had been assigned to the States of 
 New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Marylandf and Virginia ; the 
 Governor of Pennsylvania having declared, on this occasion, 
 an opinion which justified a requisition to the other States. 
 
 " As commander-in-chief of the militia, when called into 
 the actual service of the United States, I have visited the 
 places of general rendezvous, to obtain more exact informa- 
 tion, and to direct a plan for ulterior movements. Had there 
 been room for persuasion that the laws were secure from ob- 
 struction ; that the civil magistrate was able to bring to justice 
 such of the most culpable as have not embraced the proffered 
 terms of amnesty, and may be deemed fit objects of example ; 
 that the friends to peace and good government were not in 
 need of that aid and countenance which they ought always 
 to receive, and, T trust, ever will receive, against the vicious 
 and turbulent; I should have caught with avidity the op- 
 portunity of restoring the militia to their families and homes. 
 But succeeding intelligence has tended to manifest the neces- 
 sity of what has been done ; it being now confessed by those 
 who were not inclined to exaggerate the ill conduct of the 
 insurgents, that their malevolence was not pointed merely to 
 a particular law, but that a spirit inimical to all order has 
 actuated many of the offenders. If the state of things had 
 afforded reason for the continuance of my presence with 
 the army, it would not have been withholden. But every 
 appearance assuring such an issue as will redound to the rep- 
 utation and strength of the United States, I have judged it 
 most proper to resume my duties at the seat of Government, 
 leaving the chief command with the Governor of Virginia." . . . 
 
 " While there is cause to lament that occurrences of this 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 117 
 
 mature should have disgraced the name or interrupted the 
 tranquillity of any part of our community, or should have 
 diverted to a new application any portion of the public re- 
 sources, there are not wanting real and substantial consolations 
 for the misfortune. It has demonstrated that our prosperity 
 rests on solid foundations, by furnishing an additional proof 
 that my fellow-citizens understand the true principles of gov- 
 ernment and liberty ; that they feel their inseparable union ; 
 that, notwithstanding all the devices which have been used 
 to sway them from their interest and duty, they are now as 
 ready to maintain the authority of the laws against licentious 
 invasions as they were to defend their rights against usurpa- 
 tion. It has been a spectacle, displaying to the highest ad- 
 vantage the value of republican government, to behold the 
 most and the least wealthy of our citizens standing in the same 
 ranks as private soldiers, preeminently distinguished by being 
 the army of the Constitution, undeterred by a march of three 
 hundred miles over rugged mountains, by the approach of an 
 inclement season, or by any other discouragement. Nor ought 
 I to omit to acknowledge the efficacious and patriotic coopera- 
 tion which I have experienced from the Chief Magistrates of 
 the States to which my requisitions have been addressed." * 
 
 President Washington thought there was power 
 in this Government to execute its laws ; he con- 
 sidered the militia the army of the Constitution ; 
 and he refers to this Union as being inseparable. 
 This is the way that the laws were executed by the 
 Father of his Country, the man who sat as president 
 of the convention that made the Constitution. Here 
 was resistance interposed — opposition to the exe- 
 cution of the laws ; and George Washington, then 
 President of the United States, went in person at 
 
 1 American State Papers^ Miscellaneous, Vol. I. p. 85. 
 
118 THE SPEECHES 
 
 the head of the militia ; and it showed his sagacity, 
 his correct comprehension of men, and the effect 
 that an immediate movement of that kind would 
 have upon them. He ordered fifteen thousand of 
 his countrymen to the scene of action, and went 
 there in person, and stayed there till he was satis- 
 fled that the insurrection was quelled. That is the 
 manner in which George Washington put down 
 rebellion. That is the manner in which he exe- 
 cuted the laws. 
 
 Here, then, we find General Washington exe- 
 cuting the law, in 1795, against a portion of the 
 citizens of Pennsylvania who rebelled ; and, I re- 
 peat the question, where is the difference between 
 executing the law upon a part and upon the whole? 
 Suppose the whole of Pennsylvania had rebelled 
 and resisted the excise law ; had refused to pay 
 taxes on distilleries ; was it not as competent and 
 as constitutional for General Washington to have 
 executed the law against the whole as against a 
 part ? Is there any difference ? Governmental 
 affairs must be practical as well as our own do- 
 mestic affairs. You may make nice metaphysical 
 distinctions between the practical operations of 
 Government and its theory ; you may refine upon 
 what is a State, and point out a difference between 
 a State and a portion of a State ; but what is it 
 when you reduce it to practical operation, and 
 square it by common sense ? 
 
 In 1832, resistance was interposed to laws of 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 119 
 
 the United States in another State. An ordinance 
 was passed by South Carolina, assuming to act as 
 a sovereign State, to nullify a law of the United 
 States. In 1833, the distinguished man who filled 
 the executive chair, who now lies in his silent 
 grave, loved and respected for his virtue, his honor, 
 his integrity, his patriotism, his undoubted courage, 
 and his devotion to his kind, with an eye single to 
 the promotion of his country's best interests, issued 
 the proclamation, extracts from which I have already 
 presented. He was sworn to support the Consti- 
 tution, and to see that the laws were faithfully 
 executed ; and he fulfilled the obligation. He 
 took all the steps necessary to secure the execution 
 of the law, and he would have executed it by the 
 power of the Government if the point of time had 
 arrived when it was necessary to resort to power. 
 We can see that he acted upon principles similar 
 to those acted upon by General Washington. He 
 took the precaution of ordering a force there 
 sufficient for the purpose of enabling him to say 
 effectually to the rebellious, and those who were 
 interposing opposition to the execution of the laws, 
 " The laws which we made according to the Con- 
 stitution, the laws that provide for the collection 
 of the revenue to sustain this Government, must be 
 enforced, and the revenue must be collected. It is 
 a part of the compact ; it is a part of the engage- 
 ment you have undertaken to perform, and you of 
 your own will have no power or authority to set 
 
120 THE SPEECHES 
 
 it aside." The duties were collected ; the law was 
 enforced ; and the Government went on. In his 
 proclamation he made a powerful appeal. He told 
 them what would be done ; and it would have been 
 done, as certain as God rules on high, if the time 
 had arrived which made it necessary. 
 
 Then we see where General Washington stood, 
 and where General Jackson stood. Now, how, 
 does the present case stand ? The time has come 
 when men should speak out. Duties are mine ; 
 consequences are God's. I intend to discharge 
 my duty, and I intend to avow my understanding 
 of the Constitution and the laws of the country. 
 Have we no authority or power to execute the 
 laws in the State of South Carolina as well as in 
 Vermont and Pennsylvania ? I think we have. 
 As I before said, although a State may, by an ordi- 
 nance, or by a resolve, or by an act of any other 
 kind, declare that they absolve their citizens from all 
 allegiance to this Government, it does not release 
 them from the compact. The compact is reciprocal ; 
 and they, in coming into it, undertook to perform 
 certain duties and abide by the laws made in con- 
 formity with the compact. Now, sir, what is the 
 Government to do in South Carolina ? If South 
 Carolina undertakes to drive the Federal courts out 
 of that State, the Federal Government has the 
 right to hold those courts there. She may attempt 
 to exclude the mails, yet the Federal Government 
 has the right to establish post-offices and post-roads 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 121 
 
 and to carry the mails there. She may resist the 
 collection of revenue at Charleston, or any other 
 point that the Government has provided for its 
 collection ; but the Government has the right to col- 
 lect it and to enforce the law. She may undertake 
 to take possession of the property belonging to the 
 Government which was originally ceded by the 
 State, but the Federal Government has the right 
 to provide the means for retaining possession of that 
 property. If she makes an advance either to dis- 
 possess the Government of that which it has pur- 
 chased, or to resist the execution of the revenue 
 laws, or of our judicial system, or the carrying of 
 the mails, or the exercise of any other power con- 
 ferred on the Federal Government, she puts herself 
 in the wrong, and it will be the duty of the Gov- 
 ernment to see that the laws are faithfully exe- 
 cuted. By reference to the records, it will be 
 seen that, on 
 
 "December 19, 1805, South Carolina granted all the right, 
 title, and claim of the State to all the lands reserved for Fort 
 Moultrie, on Sullivan's Island, not exceeding five acres, with 
 all the forts, fortifications, &c, thereon; canal, &c. ; the high 
 lands, and part of the marsh, belonging to Fort Johnson, not 
 exceeding twenty acres ; the land on which Fort Pinckney is 
 • built, and three acres around it ; a portion of the sandbank on 
 the southeasternmost point of Charleston, not exceeding two 
 acres ; not exceeding four acres for a battery, or fort, &c, on 
 Blythe's Point, at the mouth of Sampit River ; Mustard Island, 
 in Beaufort River, opposite Paris's Island ; not exceeding seven 
 acres of land on St. Helena Island, for a principal fort ; the 
 whole on condition that the United States should, within three 
 11 
 
122 THE SPEECHES 
 
 years, repair forts, &c. ; the United States to compensate indi- 
 viduals for property ; the lands, &c., to be free from taxes to 
 the State." 
 
 Here is a clear deed of cession. The Federal 
 Government has complied with all the conditions, 
 and has, in its own right, the land on which these 
 forts are constructed. The conditions of the ces- 
 sion have been complied with ; and the Government 
 has had possession from that period to the present 
 time. There are its forts ; there is its arsenal ; 
 there are its dock-yards ; there is the property of 
 the Government ; and now, under the Constitution, 
 and under the laws made in pursuance thereof, has 
 South Carolina the authority and the right to expel 
 the Federal Government from its own property that 
 has been given to it by her own act, and of which it 
 is now in possession ? By resisting* the execution 
 of the laws, by attempting to dispossess the Fed- 
 eral Government, does she not put herself in the 
 wrong ? Does she not violate the laws of the United 
 States ? Does she not violate the Constitution ? 
 Does she not put herself, within the meaning and 
 purview of the Constitution, in the attitude of levy-, 
 ing war against the United States ? The Constitu- 
 tion defines and declares what is treason. Let us 
 talk about things by their right names. I know 
 that some hotspur or madcap may declare that these 
 are not times for a government of law ; that we are 
 in a revolution. I know that Patrick Henry once 
 said, " If this be treason, make the most of it." If 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 123 
 
 anything can be treason in the scope and purview 
 of the Constitution, is not levying war upon the 
 United States treason ? Is not an attempt to take 
 its property treason ? Is not an attempt to expel 
 its soldiers treason ? Is not an attempt to resist the 
 collection of the revenue, or to expel your mails, or 
 to drive your courts from her borders, treason ? It 
 is treason, and nothing but treason ; and if one 
 State, upon its own volition, can go out of this Con- 
 federacy without regard to the effect it is to have 
 upon the remaining parties to the compact, what is 
 your Government worth ? What will it come to ? 
 In what will it end ? It is no Government at all 
 upon such a construction. 
 
 But it is declared and assumed that, if a State 
 secedes, she is no longer a member of the Union, 
 and that, therefore, the laws and the Constitution 
 of the United States are no longer operative within 
 her limits, and she is not guilty if she violates them. 
 This is a matter of opinion. I have tried to show 
 what this doctrine of secession is, and there is but 
 one concurring and unerring conclusion reached by 
 all the great and distinguished men of the country, 
 from the origin of the Government down to the 
 present time. Madison, who is called the Father 
 of the Constitution, denies the doctrine. Washing- 
 ton, who was the Father of his Country, denies the 
 doctrine. Jefferson, Jackson, Clay, and Webster, 
 all deny the doctrine ; and yet all at once it is dis- 
 covered and ascertained that a State, of its own 
 
124 THE SPEECHES 
 
 volition, can go out of this Confederacy, without 
 regard to consequences, without regard to the in- 
 jury and woe that may be inflicted on the remain- 
 ing members from the act ! 
 
 Suppose this doctrine to be true, Mr. President, 
 that a State can withdraw from this Confederacy ; 
 and suppose South Carolina has seceded, and is 
 now out of the Confederacy : in what an attitude 
 does she place herself? There might be circum- 
 stances under which the States ratifying 'the com- 
 pact might tolerate the secession of a State, she tak- 
 ing the consequences of the act. But there might 
 be other circumstances under which " the States 
 could not allow one to secede. Why do I say so ? 
 Some suppose — and it is a well-founded supposi- 
 tion — that by the secession of a State all the re- 
 maining States might be involved in disastrous con- 
 sequences ; they might be involved in war ; and by 
 the secession of one State, the existence of the re- 
 maining States might be involved. Then, without 
 regard to the Constitution, dare the other States 
 permit one to secede when it endangers and involves 
 all the remaining States? The question arises in 
 this connection, whether the States are in a condi- 
 tion to tolerate or will tolerate the secession of 
 South Carolina. That is a matter to be determined 
 by the circumstances ; that is a matter to be deter- 
 mined by the emergency ; that is a matter to be 
 determined when it comes up. It is a question 
 which must be left open to be determined by the 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 125 
 
 surrounding circumstances, when the occasion 
 arises. 
 
 But conceding, for argument's sake, the doctrine 
 of secession, and admitting that the State of South 
 Carolina is now upon your coast, a foreign Power, 
 absolved from all connection with the Federal Gov- 
 ernment, out of the Union : what then ? There 
 was a doctrine inculcated in 1823, by Mr. Monroe, 
 that this Government, keeping in view the safety of 
 the people and the existence of our institutions, 
 would permit no European Power to plant any 
 more colonies on this continent. Now, suppose that 
 South Carolina is outside of the Confederacy, and 
 this Government is in possession of the fact that she 
 is forming an alliance with a foreign Power — with 
 France, with England, with Russia, with Austria, 
 or with all of the principal Powers of Europe ; that 
 there is to be a great naval station established there ; 
 an immense rendezvous for their army, with a view 
 to ulterior objects, with a view of making advances 
 upon the rest of these States : let me ask the Senate, 
 (et me ask the country, if they dare permit it ? 
 Under and in compliance with the great law of 
 celf-preservation, we dare not let her do it ; and if 
 she were a sovereign Poyer to-day, outside of the 
 Confederacy, and were forming an alliance that we 
 deemed inimical to our institutions and the exist- 
 ence of our Government, we should have a right to 
 conquer and hold her as a province, — a term which 
 is used with so much scorn. 
 11* 
 
126 THE SPEECHES 
 
 Mr. President, I have referred to the manner in 
 which this Government was formed. I have re- 
 ferred to the provision of the Constitution which 
 provides for the admission of new States. Now, let 
 me ask, can any one believe that, in the creation 
 of this Government, its founders intended that it 
 should have the power to acquire territory and form 
 it into States, and then permit them to go out of 
 the Union ? Let us take a case. How long has 
 it been since your armies were in Mexico ? How 
 long since your brave men were exposed to the 
 diseases, the privations, the sufferings, which are in- 
 cident to a campaign of that kind ? How long since 
 they were bearing your eagles in a foreign land, 
 many of them falling at the point of the bayonet, 
 consigned to their long, narrow home, with no wind- 
 ing-sheet but their blankets saturated with their 
 blood ? J3ow many victories did they win ? How 
 many laurels did they acquire ? How many trophies 
 did they bring back ? The country is full of them. 
 What did it cost you ? One hundred and twenty 
 million dollars. What did you pay for the country 
 you acquired, besides? Fifteen million dollars. 
 Peace was made ; territory was acquired ; and, in 
 a few years, from that territory California erected 
 herself into a free and independent State, and, 
 under the provisions of the Constitution, we ad- 
 mitted her as a member of this Confederacy. After 
 having expended 1120,000,000 in the war; after 
 having lost many of our bravest and most gallant 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 127 
 
 men ; after having paid -$15,000,000 to Mexico for 
 the territory, and admitted it into the Union as a 
 State, now that the people of California have got 
 into the Confederacy and can stand alone, according 
 to this modern doctrine, your Government was just 
 made to let them in, and then to let them step out. 
 Is not the conclusion illogical ? I s it not absurd 
 to say, that, now that California is in, she, on her 
 own volition, — without regard to the consideration 
 paid for her, without regard to the policy which 
 dictated her acquisition by the United Staies, — can 
 walk out and bid you defiance ? Is it not an ab- 
 surdity, if you take the reason and object of Gov- 
 ernment ? 
 
 But we need not stop here ; let us go to Texas. 
 Texas was engaged in a revolution with Mexico. 
 She succeeded in the assertion and establishment of 
 her independence ; and she became a sovereign and 
 independent Power outside of this Union. She ap- 
 plied for admission, and she was admitted into this 
 family of States. After she was in, she was op- 
 pressed by the debts of her war which resulted in 
 her separation from Mexico ; she was harassed by 
 the Indians upon her border ; and in 1850, by way 
 of relief to Texas, what did we do ? There- was an 
 extent of territory that lies north, if my memory 
 serves me right, embracing what is now called the 
 Territory of New Mexico. Texas had it not in her 
 power to protect the citizens that were there. It 
 was a dead limb, paralyzed, lifeless. The Federal 
 
128 THE SPEECHES 
 
 Government came along as «a kind physician, saying, 
 " We will take this dead limb from your body, and 
 vitalize it, by giving protection to the people, and 
 incorporating it into a territorial government ; and, 
 in addition to that, we will give you $ 10,000,000, 
 and you may retain your own public lands " ; and 
 the other States were -taxed in common to pay the 
 $10,000,000. Now, after all this is done, Texas, 
 forsooth, upon her own volition, is to say, " I will 
 walk out of this Union ! " Were there no other 
 parties to that compact ? We are told the compact 
 is reciprocal. Did we take in California, did we 
 take in Texas, just to benefit them ? No ; but to 
 add to this great family of States ; and it is apparent, 
 from the fact of their coming in, that the compact is 
 reciprocal ; and having entered into the compact, 
 they have no right to withdraw without the consent 
 of the remaining States. 
 
 Again : take the case of Louisiana. What did we 
 pay for her in 1803, and for what was she wanted ? 
 Just to get Louisiana into the Confederacy ! Just 
 for the benefit of that particular locality ! Was not 
 the mighty West looked to ? Was is not to secure 
 the free navigation of the Mississippi River, the 
 mouth of which was then in possession of France, 
 shortly before of Spain, passing about between those 
 two Powers ? Yes, the navigation of that river was 
 wanted. Simply for Louisiana ? No, but for all the 
 States. The United States paid 115,000,000, and 
 France ceded the country to the United States. It 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 129 
 
 remained in a territorial condition for a while, sus- 
 tained and protected by the strong arm of the Fed- 
 eral Government. We acquired the territory and 
 the navigation of the river ; and the money was 
 paid for the benefit of all the States, and not of Lou- 
 isiana exclusively. And now that this great valley 
 is filled up ; now that the navigation of the Missis- 
 sippi is one hundred times more important than it 
 was then ; now, after the United States have paid 
 the money, have acquired the title to Louisiana, 
 and have incorporated her into the Confederacy, 
 it is proposed that she shall go out of the Union ! 
 In 1815, when her shores were invaded ; when her 
 city was about to be sacked ; when her booty and 
 her beauty were about to fall .a prey to British ag- 
 gression, the brave men of Tennessee, and of Ken- 
 tucky, and of the* surrounding States, rushed into 
 her borders and upon her shores, and, under the 
 lead of their own gallant Jackson, drove the invad- 
 ing forces away. And now, after all this ; after the 
 money has been paid ; after the free navigation of 
 the river has been obtained, — not for the benefit of 
 Louisiana alone, but for her in common with all the 
 States, — Louisiana says to the other States, " We 
 will go out of this Confederacy ; we do not care if 
 you did fight our battles ; we do not care if you did 
 acquire the free navigation of this river from France ; 
 we will go out if we think proper, and constitute 
 ourselves an independent Power, and bid defiance 
 to the other States." It is an absurdity ; it is a con- 
 
130 THE SPEECHES 
 
 tradiction ; it is illogical ; it is not deducible from 
 the structure of the Government itself. 
 
 It may be that, at this moment, there is not a 
 citizen in the State of Louisiana who would think 
 of obstructing the free navigation of the river ; but 
 are not nations controlled by their interests in vary- 
 ing circumstances ? It strikes me so ; and here- 
 after, when a conflict of interest arises ; when dif- 
 ficulty may spring up between two separate Powers, 
 Louisiana, having the control of the mouth of the 
 river, might feel disposed to tax our citizens going 
 down there. It is a power that I am not willing to 
 concede to be exercised at the discretion of any au- 
 thority outside of this Government. So sensitive 
 have been the people of my State upon the free 
 navigation of that river, that as far back as 1796, 
 now sixty-four years ago, in their Bill of Rights, 
 before they passed under the jurisdiction of the 
 United States, they declared, — 
 
 " That an equal participation of the free navigation of the 
 Mississippi is one of the inherent rights of the citizens of this 
 State ; it cannot, therefore, be conceded to any prince, poten- 
 tate, Power, person, or persons whatever." 
 
 This shows the estimate that tlte people fixed on 
 this stream sixty-four years ago ; and now we are 
 told, if Louisiana does go out, it is not her intention 
 at this time to tax the people above. Who can tell 
 what may be the intention of Louisiana hereafter ? 
 Are we willing to place the rights, the travel, and 
 the commerce of our citizens at the discretion of 
 
OF ANDKEW JOHNSON. 131 
 
 any Power outside of this Government ? I will 
 not. 
 
 How long has it been since Florida lay on our 
 coasts, an annoyance to us ? And now she has got 
 entirely feverish about being an independent and 
 separate Government, while she has not as many 
 qualified voters as there are in one congressional 
 district of any other State. What condition did 
 Florida occupy in 1811 ? She was in the possession 
 of Spain. What did the United States think about 
 having adjacent territory outside of their jurisdic- 
 tion ? Let us turn to the authorities, and see what 
 proposition they were willing to act upon. I find, 
 in the statutes of the United States, this joint reso- 
 lution : — 
 
 " Taking into view the peculiar situation of Spain, and of 
 her American provinces, and considering the influence which 
 the destiny of the territory adjoining the Southern border of 
 the United States may have upon their security, tranquillity, 
 and commerce : Therefore, 
 
 " Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
 the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the 
 United States, under the peculiar circumstances of the exist- 
 ing crisis, cannot, without serious inquietude, see any part of 
 the said territory pass into the hands of any foreign Power ; 
 and that a due regard to their own safety compels them to 
 provide, under certain contingencies, for the temporary occupa- 
 tion of the said territory. They, at the same time, declare 
 that the said territory shall, in their hands, remain subject to 
 future negotiation." 
 
 What principle is set forth there ? Florida was 
 in the possession of Spain. English spies were har- 
 
132 THE SPEECHES 
 
 bored in her territory. Spain was inimical to the 
 United States ; and in view of the great principle 
 of self-preservation, the Congress of the United 
 States passed a resolution declaring that if Spain 
 attempted to transfer Florida into the hands of any 
 other Power, the United States would take posses- 
 sion of it. Yet Congress were gracious and con- 
 descending enough to say that it should remain 
 open to future negotiation. That is to say, " Here- 
 after, if we can make a negotiation that will suit 
 us, we will make it ; if we do not, we will keep the 
 territory " ; that is all. There was the territory 
 lying upon our border, outside of the jurisdiction 
 of the United States ; and we declared, by an act 
 of Congress, that no foreign Power should pos- 
 sess it. 
 
 We went still further and appropriated 1100,000, 
 and authorized the President to enter and take pos- 
 session of it with the means placed in his hands. 
 After wards, we negotiated with Spain, and gave 
 $6,000,000 for the territory ; and we established a 
 territorial government for it. .What next? We 
 undertook to drive out the Seminole Indians, and 
 we had a war in which this Government lost more 
 than it lost in all the other wars it was engaged in ; 
 and we paid the sum of $25,000,000 to get the 
 Seminoles out of the swamps, so that the territory 
 could be inhabited by white men. We paid for it, 
 we took possession of it ; and I remember, when I 
 was in the other House, and Florida was knocking 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 133 
 
 at the door for admission, how extremely anxious 
 her then able Delegate was to be admitted. He 
 now sits before me. 1 I remember how important 
 he thought it was then to come under the protect- 
 ing wing of the United States as one of the stars of 
 our Confederacy. But now the territory is paid 
 for, England is driven out, $25,000,000 have been 
 expended ; and they want no longer the protection 
 of this Government, but will go out without con- 
 sulting the other States, without reference to the 
 effect upon the remaining parties to the compact. 
 Where will she go ? Will she attach herself to Spain 
 again ? Will she pass back under the jurisdiction 
 of the Seminoles ? After having been nurtured 
 and protected and fostered by all these States, now, 
 without regard to them, is she to be allowed, at "her 
 own volition, to withdraw from the Union ? I say 
 she has no constitutional right to do it ; and when she 
 does it, it is an act of aggression. If she succeeds, 
 it will only be a successful revolution. If she does 
 not succeed, she must take the penalties and terrors 
 of the law. 
 
 But, sir, there is another question that suggests 
 itself in this connection. Kansas, during the last 
 Congress, applied for admission into this Union. 
 She assumed to be a State, and the difficulty in the 
 way was a provision in her constitution, and the 
 manner of its adoption. We did not let Kansas in. 
 We did not question her being a State ; but on ac- 
 
 i Mr. Yulee. 
 12 
 
134 THE SPEECHES 
 
 count of the manner of forming her constitution and 
 its provisions, we kept Kansas out. What is Kan- 
 sas now ? Is she a State, or is she a Territory ? 
 Does she revert back to her territorial condition of 
 pupilage ? Or, having been a State, and having 
 applied for admission and been refused, is she stand- 
 ing out a State ? You hold her as a Territory ; you 
 hold her as a province. You prescribe the mode of 
 electing the members of her Legislature, and pay 
 them out of your own treasury. Yes, she is a 
 province controlled by Federal authority, and her 
 laws are made in conformity with the acts of Con- 
 gress. Is she not a Territory ? I think she is. 
 
 Suppose the State of California withdraws from 
 the Union. We admitted her. She was territory 
 acquired by the United States, by our blood and our 
 treasure. Now, suppose she withdraws from the 
 Confederacy : does she pass back into a territorial 
 condition, remain a dependency upon the Federal 
 Government, or does she stand out as a separate 
 government ? Let me take Louisiana, for which we 
 paid 115,000,000. That was a Territory for a 
 number of years — yes, a province. It is only an- 
 other name for a province. It is a possession held 
 under the jurisdiction of the United States. We 
 admitted Louisiana into the Union as a State. Sup- 
 pose we had refused to admit her : would she not 
 still have remained a Territory ? Would she not 
 have remained under the protection of the United 
 States ? But now, if she has the power to with- 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 135 
 
 draw from the Union, does she not pass back into 
 the condition in which she was before we admitted 
 her into the Union ? In what condition does she 
 place herself? When those States which were at 
 first Territories cease their connection with this 
 Government, do they pass back into the territorial 
 condition ? When Florida is going out, when Louis- 
 iana is going out, and these other States that were 
 originally Territories go out of the Union, in what 
 condition do they place themselves ? Are they Ter- 
 ritories or States ? Are they merely on probation 
 to become members of this Confederacy, or are they 
 States outside of the Confederacy? 
 
 I have referred to the acts of Congress for ac- 
 quiring Florida as setting forth a principle. Let me 
 read another of those acts : — 
 
 " An Act to enable the President of the Unite* States, under 
 certain contingencies, to take possession of the country 
 lying east of the river Perdido, and south of the State of 
 Georgia and the Mississippi Territory, and for other pur- 
 
 " Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives 
 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That 
 the President of the United States be, and he is hereby, 
 authorized to take possession of and occupy all or any part of 
 the territory lying east of the river Perdido, and south of the 
 State of Georgia and the Mississippi Territory, in case an 
 arrangement has been or shall be made with the local authori- 
 ties of the said territory for the delivering up the possession of 
 the. same, or any part thereof, to the United States, or in the 
 event of an attempt to occupy the said territory or any part 
 thereof by any foreign Government ; and he may, for the 
 
136 THE SPEECHES 
 
 purpose of taking possession and occupying the territory afore- 
 said, in order to maintain therein the authority of the United 
 States, employ any part of the army and navy of the United 
 States which he may deem necessary." ' 
 
 What is the principle avowed here ? That from 
 the geographical relations of this territory to the 
 United States, from its importance to the safety and 
 security of the institutions of the United States, we 
 authorized the President to expend $ 100,000 to get 
 a foothold there, and especially to take possession of 
 it if it were likely to pass to any foreign Power. 
 "We see the doctrine and principle there established 
 and acted upon by our Government. 
 
 This principle was again avowed by distinguished 
 men at Ostend. A paper was drawn up there by 
 Mr. Buchanan, Mr. Soule of Louisiana, and Mr. 
 Mason of Virginia, our ministers to the three prin- 
 cipal Courts #n Europe. They met at Ostend and 
 drew up a paper in which they laid down certain 
 doctrines in strict conformity with the act of Con- 
 gress that I have just read. They say in that paper, 
 signed by James Buchanan, J. Y. Mason, and Pierre 
 Soule : — 
 
 " Then, 1. It must be clear to every reflecting mind, that, 
 from the peculiarity of its geographical position, and the con- 
 siderations attendant on it, Cuba is as necessary to the North 
 American Republic as any of its present members, and that it 
 belongs naturally to that great family of States of which the 
 Union is the providential nursery. 
 
 " From its locality it commands the mouth of the Mississippi, 
 and the immense and annually increasing trade which must 
 6eek this avenue to the ocean. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 137 
 
 " On the numerous navigable streams, measuring an aggre- 
 gate course of some thirty thousand miles, which disembogue 
 themselves through this magnificent river into the Gulf of 
 Mexico, the increase of the population within the last ten 
 years amounts to more than that of the entire Union at the time 
 Louisiana was annexed to it. 
 
 " The natural and main outlet to the products of this entire 
 population, the highway of their direct intercourse with the 
 Atlantic and Pacific States, can never be secure, but must 
 ever be endangered while Cuba is a dependency of a distant 
 power in whose possession it has proved to be a source of con- 
 stant annoyance and embarrassment to their interests." .... 
 
 " The system of immigration and labor lately organized 
 within its limits, and the tyranny and oppression which 
 characterize its immediate rulers, threaten an insurrection at 
 any moment which may result in direful consequences to the 
 American people. 
 
 " Cuba has thus become to us an unceasing danger, and a 
 permanent cause of anxiety and alarm." 
 
 " Self-preservation is the first law of nature, with States as 
 well as with individuals. All nations have, at different periods, 
 acted upon this maxim. Although it has been made the pre- 
 text for committing flagrant injustice, as in the partition of 
 Poland, and other similar cases which history records, yet the 
 principle, itself, though often abused, has always been recog- 
 nized." " Our past history forbids 
 
 that we should acquire the Island of Cuba without the consent 
 of Spain, unless justified by the great law of self-preservation. 
 We must, in any event, preserve our own conscious rectitude, 
 and our own self-respect." 
 
 Mark you, we are never to acquire Cuba unless 
 it is necessary to our self-preservation. 
 
 " While pursuing this course we can afford to disregard the 
 censures of the world, to which we have been so often and so 
 unjustly exposed. 
 
 12* 
 
138 THE SPEECHES 
 
 " After we shall have offered Spain a price for Cuba far 
 beyond its present value, and this shall have been refused, it 
 will then be time to consider the question does Cuba, in the 
 possession of Spain, seriously endanger our internal peace and 
 the existence of our cherished Union ? 
 
 " Should this question be answered in the affirmative, then, 
 by every law, human and divine, we shall be justified in 
 wresting it from Spain, if we possess the power ; and this upon 
 the very same principle that would justify an individual in 
 tearing down the burning house of his neighbor, if there were 
 no other means of preventing the flames from destroying his 
 own home." 
 
 Now, this is all pretty sound doctrine. I am for 
 all of it. 
 
 " Under such circumstances we ought neither to count the 
 cost nor regard the odds which Spain might enlist against us. 
 We forbear to enter into the question, whether the present 
 condition of the island would justify such a measure ? We 
 should, however, be recreant to our duty, be unworthy of our 
 gallant forefathers, and commit base treason against our 
 posterity, sliould we permit Cuba to be Africanized and 
 become a second St. Domingo, with all its attendant horrors 
 to the white race, and suffer the flames to extend to our own 
 neighboring shore, seriously to endanger or actually to consume 
 the fair fabric of our Union." 
 
 We find in tins document, signed by our three 
 ministers, and approved by the American people, the 
 doctrine laid clown clearly that if the United States 
 believed that Cuba was to be transferred by Spain to 
 England, or to France, or to some other Power 
 inimical to the United States, the safety of the 
 American people, the safety of our institutions, the 
 existence of the Government, being imperilled, we 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 139 
 
 should have a right, without regard to money or 
 blood, to acquire it. 
 
 Where does this carry us ? We find that this 
 doctrine was not only laid down, but practised, in 
 the case of Florida. Suppose Louisiana was now 
 out of the Confederacy, holding the key to the Gulf, 
 the outlet to the commerce of the great West : under 
 the doctrine laid down by these ministers, and prac- 
 tised by the Congress of the United States, would 
 not this Government have the right, in obedience to 
 the great principle of self-preservation, and for the 
 safety of our institutions, to seize it and pass it under 
 the jurisdiction of the United States, and hold it as 
 a province subject to the laws of the United States ? 
 I say it would. The same principle will apply to 
 Florida. The same principle would apply to South 
 Carolina. I regret that she occupies the position 
 that she has assumed, but I am arguing a principle, 
 and do not refer to her out of any disrespect. If 
 South Carolina were outside of the Confederacy, an 
 independent Power, having no connection with the 
 United States, and our institutions were likely to be 
 endangered, and the existence of the Government im- 
 perilled by her remaining a separate and independent 
 Power, or by her forming associations and alliances 
 with some foreign Power, I say we should have a 
 right, on the principle laid down by Mr. Mason, Mr. 
 Buchanan, and Mr. Soule, and upon the principle 
 practised by the Congress of the United States in 
 the case of Florida, to seize her, pass her under the 
 
140 THE SPEECHES 
 
 jurisdiction of the United States, and hold her as a 
 province. 
 
 Mr. President, I have spoken of the possibility of 
 a State standing in the position of South Carolina 
 making alliances with a foreign Power. What do 
 we see now ? Ex-Governor Manning, of that State, 
 in a speech made not long since at Columbia, made 
 these declarations : — 
 
 " Cotton is king, and would enable us in peace to rule the 
 nations of the world, or successfully to encounter them in war. 
 The millions in France and England engaged in its manufac- 
 ture, are an effectual guarantee of the friendship of those 
 nations. If necessary, their armies wouH stand to guard its 
 uninterrupted and peaceful cultivation, and their men-of-war 
 would line our coasts to guard it in its transit from our ports." 
 
 Ah ! are we prepared, in the face of doctrines 
 like these, to permit a State that has been a member 
 of our Confederacy to go out, and erect herself into 
 an independent Power, when she points to the time 
 when she will become a dependant of Great Britain, 
 or when she will want the protection of France ? 
 What is the doctrine laid down by Mr. Buchanan 
 and Mr. Mason and Mr. Soule ? If Cuba is to pass 
 into the hands of an unfriendly Power, or any Power 
 inimical to the United States, we have a right to 
 seize and to hold her. Where is the difference be- 
 tween the two cases ? 
 
 If South Carolina is outside of the Confederacy 
 as an independent Power, disconnected from this 
 Government, and we find her forming alliances to 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 141 
 
 protect hor, I ask what becomes of that great 
 principle, the law of self-preservation ? Does it not 
 apply with equal force ? We are told, upon pretty 
 high authority, that Great Britain is operating in 
 the United States ; that she is exerting a powerful 
 influence. I find that, in a paper issued from the 
 executive office, Little Rock, Arkansas, and ad- 
 dressed to the militia of the State of Arkansas, the 
 following language is used : — 
 
 "It is my opinion, that the settled and secret policy of the 
 British Government is to disturb the domestic tranquillity of 
 the United States ; that its object is to break up and destroy 
 our Government, get rid of a powerful rival, extend the area 
 of the British dominions on this Continent, and become the 
 chief and controlling Power in America." 
 
 I will not read it all. He gives many reasons 
 why it is so. He says : — 
 
 u I believe that such a conspiracy exists against our Federal 
 Government, and that, if all the secret facts and transactions 
 connected with it, and the names of the secret agents and 
 emissaries of the British Government, distributed throughout 
 the United States, could be ascertained, well authenticated, 
 and made public, the patriotic people of the United States 
 would be filled with astonishment ; and having discovered the 
 real author and instigator of the mischief, all discord between 
 the free States and the slave States would at once be allayed, if 
 not entirely cease, and that then they would become fraternally 
 and more firmly united ; and that the united indignation of 
 the patriotic citizens of the whole Union against the British 
 Government and its agents and emissaries would be so great 
 that war would be declared against the British Government in 
 less than twelve months." 
 
142 THE SPEECHES 
 
 The Governor of the State of Arkansas says, 
 that if all the secret workings of Great Britain in 
 this country could be ascertained, war would be 
 declared in less than twelve months against the Gov- 
 ernment of Great Britain. What further does he 
 say : — 
 
 " Entertaining these opinions, I deem it my duty to the 
 people of the State of Arkansas, to warn them to go to work 
 in earnest and make permanent and thorough preparations, so 
 that they may at all times be ready to protect themselves and 
 our State against evils which I believe the British Government 
 intends shall not be temporary and trifling, but continuous and 
 aggravated, ' irrepressible ' and terrible." 
 
 This is signed by " Elias N. Conway, Governor 
 of the State of Arkansas, and commander-in-chief 
 of the army of said State, and of the militia 
 thereof." But ex-Governor Manning, of South 
 Carolina, declares that cotton is king, and that the 
 armies of Great Britain, and the fleets of France, 
 and their men-of-war, would protect them : the one 
 in the peaceful production of cotton, and the other 
 in its exportation to the ports of the world. What 
 sort ' of times are we falling on ? Where are we 
 going ? Are these the threats that we are to be met 
 with ? Is the United States to be told by one of the 
 States attempting to absolve itself from its allegiance, 
 without authority, and in fact in violation of the 
 Constitution of the United States, that, being dis- 
 connected with the Confederacy, it will, upon our 
 coast, form an alliance with France and with Eng- 
 land, which will protect her more securely than the 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 143 
 
 protection which she now receives from the United 
 States ? The question recurs, have we not an exist- 
 ence, have we not institutions, to preserve ; and, in 
 compliance w T ith the great law of self-preservation, 
 can we permit one of these States to take the protec- 
 tion of a foreign Power that is inimical and dancer- 
 ous to the peaceful relations of this Government? 
 I do not believe that we can. I repeat, for fear it 
 may be misunderstood, that there are. certain cir- 
 cumstances and conditions under which the remain- 
 ing States, parties to the compact, might tolerate the 
 secession of one State ; and there are other circum- 
 stances and other conditions under which they dare 
 not do it, in view of the great principle of self-preser- 
 vation of which I have been speaking. When any 
 State takes such an attitude, what will be our course 
 of policy ? The case must be determined by the 
 existing circumstances at the time. 
 
 But it is expected and said by some that South 
 Carolina, in making this movement, intends to carry 
 the other States along with her ; that they will be 
 drawn into it. Now, Mr. President, is that the way 
 for one sister, for one rebellious State, to talk to 
 others ? Is that the language in which they should 
 be addressed ? I ask my friend from California to 
 read an extract from the message of Governor Gist, 
 of South Carolina.- He will do me a favor by so 
 doing ; and then we shall see the basis upon which 
 we stand, and the attitude in which we are to be 
 placed. Not only is South Carolina to go out of 
 
144 THE SPEECHES 
 
 the Union in violation of the Constitution, impeding 
 and resisting the execution of the laws, but the 
 other States are to be dragged along with her, and 
 we are all to be involved in one common ruin. 
 
 Mr. Latham read the following extract from the 
 message of Governor Gist to the Legislature of 
 South Carolina : — 
 
 " The introduction of slaves from other States which may 
 not become members of the Southern Confederacy, and par- 
 ticularly the border States, should be prohibited by legislative 
 enactment ; and by this means they will be brought to see that 
 their safety depends upon a withdrawal from their enemies and 
 an union with their friends and natural allies. If they should 
 continue their union with the non-slaveholding States, let them 
 keep their slave property in their own borders, and the only 
 alternative left them will be emancipation by their own act, or 
 by the action of their own confederates. We cannot consent 
 to relieve them from their embarrassing situation by permit- 
 ting them to realize the money value for their slaves by selling 
 them to us, and thus prepare them, without any loss of prop- 
 erty, to accommodate themselves to the Northern free-soil idea. 
 But should they unite their destiny with us, and become stars 
 in the Southern galaxy, — members of a great Southern Con- 
 federation, — we will receive them with open arms and an 
 enthusiastic greeting." 
 
 " All hope, therefore, of concerted action by a Southern 
 convention being lost, there is but one course left for §outh 
 Carolina to pursue consistent with her honor, interest, and 
 safety, and that is, to look neither to the right or the left, but 
 go straight forward to the consummation of her purpose. It is 
 too late now to receive propositions for a conference ; and the 
 State would be wanting in self-respect, after having deliber- 
 ately decided on her own course, to entertain any proposition 
 looking to a continuance of the present Union. We can get 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 145 
 
 no better or safer guaranty than the present Constitution ; 
 and that has proved impotent to protect us against the fanat- 
 icism of the North. The institution of slavery must be under 
 the exclusive control of those directly interested in its preser- 
 vation, and not left to the mercy of those that believe it to be 
 their duty to destroy it." 
 
 Mr. Johnson continued : — If my friend will read 
 an extract from the speech of Mr. Keitt of South 
 Carolina, it will show the determination and policy 
 to be pursued. It is done with all respect to him ; 
 for he is a man upon whom I look as a perfect 
 and entire gentleman, from all my acquaintance 
 with him ; but I merely want to quote from his 
 speech to get at the policy they wish to pursue » 
 
 Mr. Latham read as follows : — 
 
 " Kon. L. M. Keitt was serenaded at Columbia on Monday 
 evening ; and in response to the compliment he spoke at con- 
 siderable length in favor of separate State action. He said 
 South Carolina could not take one step backward now without 
 receiving the curses of posterity. South Carolina, single and 
 alone, was bound to go out of this accursed Union : he would 
 take her out if but three men went with him, and if slaves 
 took her back it would be to her graveyard. Mr. Buchanan 
 was pledged to secession, and he meant to hold him to it. The 
 policy of the State should be prudent and bold. His advice 
 was, move on, side by side. He requested union and harmony 
 among those embarked in the same great cause ; but yield not 
 a day too long, and when the time comes let it come speedily. 
 Take your destinies in your own hands, and shatter this ac- 
 cursed Union. South Carolina could do it alone. But if she 
 could not, she could at least throw her arms around the pillars 
 of the Constitution, and involve all the States in a common ruin. 
 Mr. Keitt was greatly applauded throughout his address." 
 13 
 
146 THE SPEECHES 
 
 Mr. Johnson continued: — Mr. President, I have 
 referred to these, extracts to show the policy intended 
 to be pursued hy our seceding sister. What is the 
 first threat thrown out ? It is an intimidation to 
 the border States, alluding especially, I suppose, to 
 Virginia, Maryland, Kentucky, and Missouri. They 
 constitute the first tier of the border slave States. 
 The next tier would be North Carolina and Ten- 
 nessee and Arkansas. We in the South have com- 
 plained of and condemned the position assumed by 
 the Abolitionists. We have complained that their 
 intention is to hem slavery in, so that, like the scor- 
 pion when surrounded by fire, if it did not die from 
 the intense heat of the scorching flames, it would 
 perish from its own poisonous sting. Now, our 
 sister, without consulting her sisters, without caring 
 for their interest or their consent, says that she 
 will move forward ; that she will destroy the Gov- 
 ernment under which we have lived, and that 
 hereafter, when she forms a government or a con- 
 stitution, unless the border States come in, she will 
 pass laws prohibiting the importation of slaves into 
 her State from those States, and thereby obstruct 
 the slave-trade among the States, and throw the 
 institution back upon the border States, so that 
 they will be compelled to emancipate their slaves 
 upon the principle laid down by the Abolition party. 
 That is the rod held over us ! 
 
 I tell our sisters in the South that so far as Ten- 
 nessee is concerned, she will not be dragged into 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 147 
 
 a Southern or any other confederacy until she 
 lias had time to consider ; and then she will go 
 when she believes it to be her interest, and not 
 before. I tell our Northern friends, who are re- 
 sisting the execution of the laws made in con- 
 formity with the Constitution, that we will not be 
 driven on the other hand into their confederacy, 
 and we will not go into it unless it suits us, and 
 they give us such guaranties as we deem right 
 and proper. We say to you of the South, we are 
 not to be frightened and coerced. Oh, when one 
 talks about coercing a State, how maddening and 
 insulting to the State ; but when you want to 
 bring the other States to terms, how easy to point 
 out a means by which to coerce them ! But, sir, 
 we do not intend to be coerced. 
 
 We are told that certain States will go out and 
 tear this accursed Constitution into fragments, and 
 drag the pillars of this mighty edifice down upon 
 us, and involve us all in one common ruin. Will 
 the border States submit to such a threat? No. 
 But if they do not come into the movement, the 
 pillars of this stupendous fabric of human free- 
 dom and greatness and goodness are to be pulled 
 down, and all will be involved in one common 
 ruin. Such is the threatening language used. 
 u You shall come into our confederacy, or we will 
 coerce you to the emancipation of your slaves." 
 That is the language which is held towards us. 
 
 There are many ideas afloat about this threat- 
 
148 THE SPEECHES 
 
 ened dissolution, and it is time to speak out. The 
 question arises, in reference to the protection and 
 preservation of the institution of slavery, whether 
 dissolution is a remedy or will give to it protection. 
 I avow here, to-day, that if I were an Abolition- 
 ist, and wanted to accomplish the overthrow and 
 abolition of the institution of slavery in the South- 
 ern States, the first step that I would take would 
 be to break the bonds of this Union, and dissolve 
 this Government. I believe the continuance of 
 slavery depends upon the preservation of this 
 Union, and a compliance with all the guaranties 
 of the Constitution. I believe an interference 
 with it will break up the Union ; and I believe a 
 dissolution of the Union will, in the end, though 
 it may be some time to come, overthrow the insti- 
 tution of slavery. Hence we find so many in the 
 North who desire the dissolution of these States as 
 the most certain and direct and effectual means of 
 overthrowing the institution of slavery. 
 
 What protection would it be to us to dissolve 
 this Union ? What protection would it be to us 
 to convert this nation into two hostile Powers, the 
 one warring with the other ? Whose property is 
 at stake ? Whose interest is endangered ? Is it 
 not the property of the border States ? Suppose 
 Canada were moved down upon our border, and 
 the two separated sections, then different nations, 
 were hostile : what would the institution of slavery 
 be worth on the border? Every man who has 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 149 
 
 common sense will see that the institution would 
 take up its march and retreat, as certainly and as 
 unerringly as general laws can operate. Yes ; it 
 would commence to retreat the very moment this 
 Union was divided into two hostile Powers, and 
 you made the line between the slaveholding and 
 non-slaveholding States the line of division. 
 
 Then, what remedy do we get for the institution 
 of slavery ? Must we keep up a standing army ? 
 Must we keep up forts bristling with arms along 
 the whole border ? This is a question to be con- 
 sidered, one that involves the future ; and no step 
 should be taken without mature reflection. Be- 
 fore this Union is dissolved and broken up, we in 
 Tennessee, as one of the slave States, want to be 
 consulted ; we want to know what protection we 
 are to have ; whether we are simply to be made 
 outposts and guards to protect the property of 
 others, at the same time that we sacrifice and lose 
 our own. We want to understand this question. 
 
 Again : if there is one division of the States, 
 will there not be more than one ? I heard a Sen- 
 ator say, the other day, that he would rather see 
 this Government separated into thirty-three frac- 
 tional parts than to see it consolidated ; but when 
 you once begin to divide, when the first division 
 is made, who can tell when the next will be made ? 
 When these States are all turned loose, and a dif- 
 ferent condition of things is presented, with com- 
 plex and abstruse interests to be considered and 
 
 13* 
 
150 THE SPEECHES 
 
 weighed and understood, what combinations may 
 take place no one can tell. I am opposed to the 
 consolidation of government, and I am as much 
 for the reserved rights of States as any one ; but, 
 rather than see this Union divided into thirty- 
 three petty governments, with a little prince in 
 one, a potentate in another, a little aristocracy in 
 a third, a little democracy in a fourth, and a re- 
 public somewhere else ; a citizen not being able 
 to pass from one State to another without a pass- 
 port or a commission from his government ; with 
 quarrelling and warring amongst the little petty 
 powers, which would result in anarchy ; I would 
 rather see this Government to-day — I proclaim it 
 here in my place — converted into a consolidated 
 government. It would be better for the Ameri- 
 can people; it would be better for our kind; it 
 would be better for humanity ; better for Chris- 
 tianity ; better for all that tends to elevate and en- 
 noble man, than breaking up this splendid, this 
 magnificent, this stupendous fabric of human gov- 
 ernment, the most perfect that the world ever saw, 
 and which has succeeded thus far without a par- 
 allel in the history of the world. 
 
 When you come to break up and turn loose the 
 different elements, there is no telling what com- 
 binations may take place in the future. It may 
 occur, for instance, to the Middle States that they 
 will not get so good a government by going a 
 little further South as by remaining where we are. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 151 
 
 It may occur to North Carolina, to Tennessee, to 
 Kentucky, to Virginia, to Maryland, to Missouri — 
 and perhaps Illinois might fall in, too — that, by 
 erecting themselves into a central, independent 
 republic, disconnected either with the North or 
 the South, they could stand as a peace-maker — 
 could stand as a great breakwater, resisting the 
 heated and surging waves of the South, and the 
 fanatical Abolitionism of the North. They might 
 think that they could stand there and lift them- 
 selves up above the two extremes, with the sin- 
 cere hope that the time would arrive when the 
 extremes would come together, and reunite once 
 more, and we could reconstruct this greatest and 
 best Government the world has ever seen. Or it 
 might so turn out, our institution of slavery being 
 exposed upon the northern line, that by looking 
 to Pennsylvania, to New York, and to some of 
 the other States, instead of having them as hos- 
 tile Powers upon our frontiers, they might come 
 to this central republic, and give us such consti- 
 tutional guaranties, and such assurances that they 
 would be executed, that it might be to our interest 
 to form an alliance with them, and have a pro- 
 tection on our frontier. 
 
 I throw these out as considerations. There will 
 be various projects and various combinations made. 
 Memphis is now connected with Norfolk, in the 
 Old Dominion ; Memphis is connected with Balti- 
 more within two days. Here is a coast that lets 
 
152 THE SPEECHES 
 
 us out to the commerce of the world. When we 
 look around in the four States of Tennessee, Ken- 
 tucky, Virginia, and Maryland, there are things 
 about which our memories, our attachments, and 
 our associations linger with pride and with pleas- 
 ure. Go down into the Old Dominion ; there is 
 the place where, in 1781, Cornwallis surrendered 
 his sword to the immortal Washington. In the 
 bosom of her soil are deposited her greatest and 
 best sons. Move along in that trail, and there we 
 find Jefferson and Madison and Monroe, and a 
 lono; list of worthies. 
 
 We come next to old North Carolina, my native 
 State, God bless her ! She is my mother. Though 
 she was not my cherishing mother, to use the lan- 
 guage of the classics, she is the mother whom I 
 love, and I cling to her with undying affection, as 
 a son should cling to an affectionate mother. We 
 find Macon, who was associated with our early 
 history, deposited in her soil. Go to King's Moun- 
 tain, on her borders, and you there find the place 
 on which the battle was fought that turned the 
 tide of the Revolution. Yes, within her borders 
 the signal battle was fouo-ht that turned the tide 
 which resulted in the surrender of Cornwallis at 
 Yorktown, in the Old Dominion. 
 
 Travel on a little further, and we get back to 
 Tennessee. I shall be as modest as I can in refer- 
 ence to her, but she has some associations that 
 make her dear to the people of the United States. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 153 
 
 In Tennessee we have our own illustrious Jackson. 
 There he sleeps — that Jackson who issued his 
 proclamation in 1833, and saved this Government. 
 We have our Polk and our Grundy, and a long 
 list of others who are worthy of remembrance. 
 
 And who lie in Kentucky? Your Hardings, 
 your Boones, your Roanes, your Clays, are among 
 the dead; your Crittenden among the living. 
 All are identified and associated with the history 
 of the country. 
 
 Maryland has her Carroll of Carrollton, and a 
 long list of worthies, who are embalmed in the 
 hearts of the American people. And you are 
 talking about breaking up this Republic, with this 
 cluster of associations, these ties of affection, around 
 you. May we not expect that some means may 
 be devised by which it can be held together ? 
 
 Here, too, in the centre of the Republic, is the 
 seat of Government, which was founded by Wash- 
 ington, and bears his immortal name. Who dare 
 appropriate it exclusively ? It is within the bor- 
 ders of the States I have enumerated, in whose 
 limits are found the graves of Washington, of 
 Jackson, of Polk, of Clay. From them is it sup- 
 posed that we will be torn away? No, sir; we 
 will cherish these endearing associations with the 
 hope, if this Republic shall be broken, that we 
 may speak words of peace and reconciliation to 
 a distracted, a divided, I may add, a maddened 
 people. Angry waves may be lashed into fury 
 
154 THE SPEECHES 
 
 on the one hand ; on the other blustering winds 
 may rage ; but we stand immovable upon our 
 basis, as on our own native mountains — presenting 
 their craggy brows, their unexplored caverns, their 
 summits " rock-ribbed, and ancient as the sun," — 
 we stand speaking peace, association, and concert 
 to a distracted Republic. 
 
 But, Mr. President, will it not be well, before 
 we break up this great Government, to inquire 
 what kind of a government this new government 
 in the South is to be, with which we are threatened 
 unless we involve our destinies with this rash and 
 precipitate movement? What intimation is there 
 in reference to its character ? Before my State 
 and those States of which I have been speaking, 
 go into a Southern or Northern confederacy, ought 
 they not to have some idea of the kind of gov- 
 ernment that is to be formed? What are the in- 
 timations in the South in reference to the for- 
 mation of a new government? The language of 
 some speakers is that they want a Southern gov- 
 ernment obliterating all State lines — a government 
 of consolidation. It is alarming and distressing 
 to entertain the proposition here. What ruin 
 and disaster would follow, if we are to have a 
 consolidated government here ! But the idea is 
 afloat and current in the South that a Southern 
 government is to be established, in the language 
 of some of the speakers in the State of Georgia, 
 " obliterating all State lines." Is that the kind 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 155 
 
 of entertainment to which the people are to be 
 invited ? Is that the kind of government under 
 which we are to pass ; and are we to be forced to 
 emancipate our slaves unless we go into it ? An- 
 other suggestion in reference to a Southern govern- 
 ment is, that we shall have a Southern Confederacy 
 of great strength and power, with a constitutional 
 provision preventing any State from changing its 
 domestic institutions without the consent of three- 
 fourths, or some great number to be fixed upon. 
 Is that the kind of government under which we 
 want to pass ? I avow here, that, so far as I am 
 concerned, I will never enter, with my consent, 
 any government, North or South, less republi- 
 can, less democratic, than the one under which 
 we now live. 
 
 Where are we drifting ? What kind of breakers 
 are ahead? Have we a glimpse through the fog 
 that envelops the rock on which the vessel of 
 state is drifting ? Should we not consider ma- 
 turely, in giving up this old Government, what 
 kind of government is to succeed it? Ought we 
 not to have time to think? Are we not entitled 
 to respect and consideration ? In one of the lead- 
 ing Georgia papers we find some queer sugges- 
 tions ; and, as the miners would say, these may 
 be considered as mere surface-indications, that 
 develop what is below. We ought to know the 
 kind of government that is to be established. 
 When we read the allusions made in various 
 
156 THE SPEECHES 
 
 papers, and by various speakers, we find that 
 there is one party who are willing to give up this 
 form of government ; to change its character ; and, 
 in fact, to pass under a monarchical form of gov- 
 ernment. I hope that my friend will read the 
 extracts which I will hand him. 
 
 Mr. Latham read the following extracts : — 
 
 " If the Federal system is a failure, the question may well 
 be asked, is not the whole republican system a failure? Very 
 many wise, thinking men say so. We formed the Federal 
 Government because the separate States, it was thought, 
 were not strong enough to stand alone, and because they 
 were likely to prove disadvantageous, if not dangerous, 
 each to the other, in their distinct organization, and with 
 their varying interests. When we break up, will the dis- 
 advantages and dangers of separate States be such as to 
 require the formation of a new confederacy of those which 
 are, at present, supposed to be homogeneous ? If we do 
 form a new confederacy, when the old is gone, it would 
 seem to be neither wise, prudent, nor statesmanlike to frame 
 it after the pattern of the old. New safeguards and guar- 
 anties must necessarily be required, and none but a heed- 
 less maniac would seek to avoid looking this matter squarely 
 in the face. 
 
 "It is true that we might make a constitution for the 
 fifteen Southern States, which would secure the rights of all, 
 at present, from harm, or, at least, which would require a 
 clear violation of its letter, so plain that the world could 
 discern it, when unconstitutional action was consummated. 
 But then, in the course of years, as men changed, times 
 changed, interests changed, business changed, productions 
 changed, a violation of the spirit might occur, which would 
 not be clearly a violation of the letter. It may be said that 
 the constitution might provide for its own change as times 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 157 
 
 changed. Well, that was the design when our present Con- 
 stitution was formed, and, still, we say, it was a failure. 
 How more carefully could a new one be arranged ? Men 
 will say that we of the South are one, and that we shall get 
 along well enough. But they who say it know neither his- 
 tory nor human nature. When the Union was formed, 
 twelve of the thirteen States were slaveholding ; and if the 
 cotton-gin had not been invented there would not probably 
 to-day have been an African slave in North America. 
 
 "But how about the State organizations? This is an 
 important consideration, for whether we consult with the 
 other Southern States or not, it is certain that each State 
 must act for itself, in the first instance. When any State 
 goes out of the present Federal Union, it then becomes a 
 foreign Power as to all the other States, as well as to the 
 world. Whether it will unite again with any of the States, 
 or stand alone, is for it to determine. The new confederacy 
 must then be made by those States which desire it ; and 
 if Georgia, or any other State, does not find the proposed 
 terms of federation agreeable, she can maintain her own 
 separate form of government, or at least try it. Well, 
 what form of government shall we have ? This is more 
 easily asked than answered. 
 
 " Some of the wisest and best citizens propose a hered- 
 itary constitutional monarchy; but, however good 
 that may be in itself, the most important point to discover is, 
 whether or not the people are prepared for it. It is thought, 
 again, by others, that we shall be able to go on for a gener- 
 ation or two, in a new confederacy, with additional safe- 
 guards ; such, for instance, as an Executive for life, a vastly 
 restricted suffrage, Senators elected for life, or for a long 
 period, say twenty-one years, and the most popular branch of 
 the assembly elected for seven years, the judiciary absolutely 
 independent, and for life, or good behavior. The frequency 
 of elections, and the universality of suffrage, with the attend- 
 ant arousing of the people's passions, and the necessary 
 14 
 
158 THE SPEECHES 
 
 sequence of demagogues being elevated to high station, are 
 thought by many to be the great causes of trouble among us. 
 
 "We throw out these suggestions that the people may 
 think of them, and act as their interests require. Our own 
 opinion is, that the South might be the greatest nation on 
 the earth, and might maintain, on the basis of African 
 slavery, not only a splendid government, but a secure re- 
 publican government. But still our fears are that through 
 anarchy we shall reach the despotism of military chieftains, 
 and finally be raised again to a monarchy." 1 
 
 "Let us Reason Together. — Permit a humble indi- 
 vidual to lay before you a few thoughts that are burnt into 
 his heart of hearts by their very truth. 
 
 " The first great thought is this : The institution known as 
 the l Federal Government,' established by the people of the 
 United States of America, is a failure. This is a fact which 
 cannot be gainsayed. It has never been in the power of the 
 'Federal Government' to enforce all its own laws within its 
 own territory ; it has, therefore, been measurably a failure 
 from the beginning ; but its first convincing evidence of weak- 
 ness was in allowing one branch of its organization to pass 
 an unconstitutional law (the Missouri Compromise). Its next 
 evidence of decrepitude was its inability to enforce a con- 
 stitutional law, (the fugitive-slave law,) the whole fabric 
 being shaken to its foundation by the only attempt of en- 
 forcement made by its chief officer (President Pierce). I 
 need not enlarge in this direction. The ' Federal Govern- 
 ment ' is a failure. 
 
 " What then ? The States, of course, revert to their 
 original position, each sovereign within itself. There can be 
 no other just conclusion. This, then, being our position, 
 the question for sober, thinking, earnest men is, what shall 
 we do for the future ? I take it for granted that no man in 
 his senses would advocate the remaining in so many petty 
 sovereignties. We should be worse than Mexicanized by 
 1 Augusta ( Georgia) Chronicle and Sentinel, Dec. 8, 1860. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 159 
 
 that process. What, then, shall we do ? In the first place, 
 I would say, let us look around and see if there is a gov- 
 ernment of an enlightened nation that has not yet proven 
 a failure, but which is now, and has ever been, productive 
 of happiness to all its law-abiding people. If such a gov- 
 ernment can be found — a government whose first and only 
 object is the good, the real good (not fancied good, an 
 ignis fatuus which I fear both our fathers and ourselves 
 have too much run alter in this country) of all its people, — 
 if such a government exists, let us examine it carefully ; if % 
 it has apparent errors, (as what human institution has not ?) 
 let us avoid them. Its beneficial arrangements let us adopt. 
 Let us not be turned aside by its name, nor be lured by its 
 pretensions. Try it by its works, and adopt or condemn it 
 by its fruits. No more experiments. ' I speak as to wise 
 men; judge ye what I say.' 
 
 " I am one of a few who ever dared to think that republi- 
 canism was a failure from its inception, and I have never 
 shrunk from giving my opinion when it was worth while. 
 I have never wished to see this Union disrupted ; but if it 
 must be, then I raise my voice for a return to a 
 
 "CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCHY." i 
 
 " Columbia, South Carolina, December 5, 1860. 
 "Yesterday the debate in the House of Representatives 
 was unusually warm. The parties arrayed against each 
 other in the matter of organizing an army, and the manner 
 of appointing the commanding officers, used scathing lan- 
 guage, and debate ran high throughout the session. So far 
 as I am able to judge, both the opposing parties are led on 
 by bitter prejudices. The Joint Military Committee, with 
 two or three exceptions, have pertinaciously clung to the 
 idea that a standing army of paid volunteers, to be raised 
 at once, to have the power of choosing their officers, up to 
 captain, and to require all above to be appointed by the 
 i Columbus (Georgia) Times. 
 
160 THE SPEECHES 
 
 Governor, is the organization for the times. Mr. Cunning- 
 ham, of the House, who is put forward by the committee 
 to take all the responsibility of extreme sentiments, has 
 openly avowed his hatred of democracy in the camp. He 
 considered the common soldier as incapable of an elective 
 choice. He and others of his party wage a bitter war 
 against democracy, and indicate an utter want of faith in 
 the ability of the people to make proper choice in elections. 
 " The party opposed to this, the predominant party, is 
 ostensibly led in the House by Mr. McGowan of Abbeville, 
 and Mr. Moore of Anderson. These gentlemen have a 
 hard fight of it. They represent the democratic sentiments 
 of the rural districts, and are in opposition to the Charles- 
 ton clique, who are urged on by Edward Rhett, Thomas Y. 
 Simmons, and B. H. Rhett, Jr., of the ' Charleston Mercury/ 
 The tendencies of these gentlemen are all towards a dicta- 
 torship, or monarchical form of government ; at least it ap- 
 pears so to my mind, and I find myself not alone in the 
 opinion. They fight heart and soul for an increase of guber- 
 natorial power ; and one of their number, as I have already 
 stated, openly avows his desire to make the Governor a mili- 
 tary chieftain, with sovereign power." 1 
 
 Mr. Johnson continued : — Mr. President, I have 
 merely called attention to these surface indications 
 for the purpose of sustaining the assumption that 
 even the people in the Southern States ought to 
 consider what kind of government they are going 
 to pass under, before they change the present one. 
 We have been told that the present Constitution 
 would be adopted by the new confederacy, and in 
 a short time everything would be organized under 
 it. But w r e find here other indications, and we are 
 told from another quarter that another character of 
 
 1 Correspondence of the "Baltimore American." 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 161 
 
 government is preferable. We know that, North 
 and South, there is a portion of our fellow-citizens 
 who are opposed to a government based on the in- 
 telligence and will of the people. We know that 
 power is always stealing from the many to the few. 
 We know that it is always vigilant and on the alert; 
 and now that we are in a revolution, and great 
 changes are to be made, should we not, as faithful 
 sentinels, as men who are made the guardians of 
 the interests of the Government, look at these indi- 
 cations and call the attention of the country to 
 them ? Is it not better to 
 
 " bear those ills we have, 
 Than fly to others that we know not of" ? 
 
 We see, by these indications, that it is contem- 
 plated to establish a monarchy. We see it an- 
 nounced that this Government has been a failure 
 from the beginning. Now, in the midst of a revo- 
 lution, while the people are confused, while chaos 
 reigns, it is supposed by some that we can be in- 
 duced to return to a constitutional or absolute 
 monarchy. Who can tell that we may not have 
 some Louis Napoleon among us, who may be ready 
 to make a coup d'etat, and enthrone himself upon 
 the rights and upon the liberties of the people ? 
 Who can tell what kind of government may grow 
 up ? Hence the importance, in advance, of con- 
 sidering maturely and deliberately before we give up 
 the old one. 
 
 I repeat again that the people of Tennessee will 
 14* 
 
162 THE SPEECHES 
 
 never pass under another government that is less 
 republican, less democratic in all its bearings, than 
 the one under which we now live, I care not 
 whether it is formed in the North or the South. 
 We will occupy an isolated, a separate, and distinct 
 position, before we will do it. We will pass into 
 that fractional condition to which I have alluded 
 before we will pass under an absolute or a constitu- 
 tional monarchy. I do not say this is the design 
 North or South, or perhaps of any but a very small 
 portion ; but it shows that there are some who, if 
 they could find a favorable opportunity, would fix 
 the description of government I have alluded to on 
 the great mass of the people. Sir, I will stand by 
 the Constitution of the country as it is, and by all 
 its guaranties. I am not for breaking up this great 
 Confederacy. I am for holding on to it as it is, 
 with the mode and manner pointed out in the in- 
 strument for its own amendment. It was good 
 enough for Washington, for Adams, for Jefferson, 
 and for Jackson. It is good enough for us. I in- 
 tend to stand by it, and to insist on a compliance 
 with all its guaranties, North and South. 
 
 Notwithstanding we want to occupy the position 
 of a breakwater between the Northern and the South- 
 ern extremes, and bring all together if we can, I 
 tell our Northern friends that the constitutional 
 guaranties must be carried out ; for the time may 
 come when, after we have exhausted all honorable 
 and fair means, if this Government still fails to exe- 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 163 
 
 cute the laws, and protect us in our rights, it will be 
 at an end. Gentlemen of the North need not de- 
 ceive themselves in that particular ; but we intend 
 to act in the Union and under the Constitution, and 
 not out of it. We do not intend that you shall drive 
 us out of this house that was reared by the hands of 
 our fathers. It is our house. It is the constitutional 
 house. We have a right here ; and because you 
 come forward and violate the ordinances of this 
 house, I do not intend to go out ; and if you persist 
 in the violation of the ordinances of the house, we 
 intend to eject you from the building, and retain the 
 possession ourselves. We want, if we can, to stay 
 the heated, and I am compelled to say, according to 
 my judgment, the rash and precipitate action of some 
 of our Southern friends, that indicates red-hot mad- 
 ness. I want to say to those in the North, comply 
 with the Constitution and preserve its guaranties, 
 and in so doing save this glorious Union and all that 
 pertains to it. I intend to stand by the Constitu- 
 tion as it is, insisting upon a compliance with all its 
 guaranties. I intend to stand by it as the sheet- 
 anchor of the Government ; and I trust and hope, 
 though it seems to be now in the very vortex of 
 ruin, though it seems to be running between Cha- 
 rybdis and Scylla, the rock on the one hand and the 
 whirlpool on the other, that it will be preserved, and 
 will remain a beacon to guide, and an example to be 
 imitated by all the nations of the earth. Yes, I in- 
 tend to hold on to it as the chief ark of our safety, 
 
164 THE SPEECHES 
 
 as the palladium of our civil and our religious liberty. 
 I intend to cling to it as the shipwrecked mariner 
 clings to the last plank, when the night and the 
 tempest close around him. It is the last hope of 
 human freedom. Although denounced as an ex- 
 periment by some who want to see a constitutional 
 monarchy, it has been a successful experiment. I 
 trust and I hope it will be continued ; that this 
 great work may go on. 
 
 Why should we go out of the Union ? Have we 
 anything to fear ? What are we alarmed about ? 
 We say that you of the North have violated the 
 Constitution, that you have trampled under foot its 
 guaranties ; but we intend to go to you in a proper 
 way, and ask you to redress the wrong, and to 
 comply with the Constitution. We believe the time 
 will come when you will do it, and we do not intend 
 to break up the Government until the fact is ascer- 
 tained that you will not do it. What is the com- 
 plaint ; what is the grievance that presses on our 
 sister, South Carolina, now ? Is it that she wants to 
 carry slavery into the Territories ; that she wants 
 protection to slavery there ? How long has it been 
 since, upon this very floor, her own Senators voted 
 that it was not necessary to make a statute now for 
 the protection of slavery in the Territories ? No 
 longer ago than the last session. They declared, in 
 the resolutions adopted by the Senate, that when it 
 was necessary they had the power to do it ; but that 
 it was not necessary then. Are you going out for 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 165 
 
 a grievance that has not occurred, and which your 
 own Senators then said had not occurred? Is it 
 because you want to carry slaves to the Territories ? 
 You were told that you had all the protection 
 needed ; that the courts had decided in your behalf, 
 under the Constitution ; and that, under the de- 
 cisions of the courts, the law must be executed. 
 
 We voted for the passage of resolutions that Con 
 gress had the power to protect slavery, and that Con- 
 gress ought to protect slavery when necessary and 
 wherever protection was needed. Was there not a 
 majority on this floor for it ; and if it was necessary 
 then, could we not have passed a bill for that pur- 
 pose without passing a resolution saying that it 
 should be protected wherever necessary? I was 
 here ; I know what the substance of the proposition 
 was ; and the whole of it was simply to declare the 
 principle, that we had the power, and that it was the 
 duty of Congress, to protect slavery when necessary, 
 in the Territories or wherever else protection was 
 needed. Was it necessary then? If it was, we had 
 the power, and why did we not pass the law ? 
 
 The Journal of the Senate records that on the 
 25th of May last, 
 
 " On motion by Mr. Brown, to amend the resolution by 
 striking out all after the word ' resolved,' and in lieu thereof 
 inserting : 
 
 " That, experience having already shown that the Constitu- 
 tion and the common law, unaided by statutory enactments, 
 do not afford adequate and sufficient protection to slave prop- 
 erty ; some of the Territories having failed, others having 
 
166 THE SPEECHES 
 
 refused, to pass such enactments, it has become the duty of 
 Congress to interpose and pass such laws as will afford to 
 slave property in the Territories that protection which is given 
 to other kinds of property. 
 
 " It was determined in the negative — yeas 3, nays 42. 
 
 " On motion by Mr. Brown, the yeas and nays being 
 desired by one fifth of the Senators present. Those who voted 
 in the affirmative are : 
 
 " Messrs. Brown, Johnson of Arkansas, and Mallory. 
 
 " Those who voted in the negative are : 
 
 " Messrs. Benjamin, Bigler, Bragg, Bright, Chesnut, Clark, 
 Clay, Clingman, Crittenden, Davis, Dixon, Doolittle, Fitz- 
 patrick, Foot, Foster, Green, Grimes, Gwin, Hamlin, Harlan, 
 Hemphill, Hunter, Iverson, Johnson of Tennessee, Lane, 
 Latham, Mason, Nicholson, Pearce, Polk, Powell, Pugh, Rice, 
 Sebastian, Slidell, Ten Eyck, Thomson, Toombs, Trumbull, 
 Wigfall, Wilson, and Yulee." 
 
 I say, therefore, that the want of protection to 
 slavery in the Territories cannot be considered a 
 grievance now. That is not the reason why she is 
 going out, and going to break up "the Confederacy. 
 What is it, then ? Is there any issue between South 
 Carolina and the Federal Government? Has the 
 Federal Government failed to comply with, and to 
 carry out, the obligations that it owes to South 
 Carolina? In what has the Federal Government 
 failed ? In what has it neglected the interests of 
 South Carolina? What law has it undertaken to 
 enforce upon South Carolina that is unconstitutional 
 and oppressive? 
 
 If there are grievances, wdiy cannot we all go to- 
 gether, and write them down, and point them out 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 167 
 
 to our Northern friends after we have agreed on 
 what those grievances are, and say, " Here is what 
 we demand ; here our wrongs are enumerated ; upon 
 these terms we have agreed ; and now, after we have 
 given you a reasonable time to consider these ad- 
 ditional guaranties in order to protect ourselves 
 against these wrongs, if you refuse them, then, hav- 
 ing made an honorable effort, having exhausted all 
 other means, we may declare the association to be 
 broken up, and we may go into an act of revolu- 
 tion." We can then say to them, " You have re- 
 fused to give us guaranties that we think are needed 
 for the protection of our institutions and for the pro- 
 tection of our other interests." When they do this, 
 I will go as far as he who goes the furthest. 
 
 I tell them here to-day, if they do not do it, Ten- 
 nessee will be found standing as firm and unyielding 
 in her demands for those guaranties, in the way a 
 State should stand, as any other State in this Con- 
 federacy. She is not quite so belligerent now. She 
 is not making quite so much noise. She is not as 
 blustering as Sempronius was in the council in Ad- 
 dison's play of " Cato," who declared that his " voice 
 was still for war." There was another character 
 there, Lucius, who was called upon to state what 
 his opinions were ; and he replied that he must con- 
 fess his thoughts were turned on peace ; but when 
 the extremity came, Lucius, who was deliberative, 
 who was calm, and whose thoughts were upon 
 peace, was found true to the interests of his country. 
 
168 THE SPEECHES 
 
 He proved himself to be a man and a soldier; 
 while the other was a traitor and a coward. We 
 will do onr duty ; we will stand upon principle, and 
 defend it to the last extremity. 
 
 We do not think, though, that we have just cause 
 for going out of the Union now. We have just 
 cause of complaint ; but we are for remaining in the 
 Union, and fighting the battle like men. We do r 
 not intend to be cowardly, and turn our backs on 
 our own camps. We intend to stay and fight the 
 battle here upon this consecrated ground. Why 
 should we retreat ? Because Mr. Lincoln has been 
 elected President of the United States ? Is this any 
 cause why we should retreat? Does not every man, 
 Senator or otherwise, know, that if Mr. Breckin- 
 ridge had been elected we should not be to-day 
 for dissolving the Union ? Then what is the issue ? 
 It is because we have not got our man. If we had 
 got our man, we should not have been for breaking 
 up the Union ; but as Mr. Lincoln is elected, we 
 are for breaking up the Union ! I say no. Let us 
 show ourselves men, and men of courage. 
 
 How has Mr. Lincoln been elected, and how have 
 Mr. Breckinridge and Mr. Douglas been defeated ? 
 By the ^otes of the American people, cast according 
 to the Constitution and the forms of law, though it 
 has been upon a sectional issue. It is not the first 
 time in our history that two candidates have been 
 elected from the same section of country. General 
 Jackson and Mr. Calhoun were elected on the same 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 169 
 
 ticket ; but nobody considered that cause of dissolu- 
 tion. They were from the South. I oppose the 
 sectional spirit that lias produced the election of Lin- 
 coln and Hamlin, yet it has been done according to 
 the Constitution and according to the forms of law. 
 I believe we have the power in our own hands, and 
 I am not willing to shrink from the responsibility of 
 exercising that power. 
 
 How has Lincoln been elected, and upon what 
 basis does he stand? A minority President by 
 nearly a million votes ; but had the election taken 
 place upon the plan proposed in my amendment of 
 the Constitution, by districts, he would have been 
 this day defeated. But it has been done according 
 to the Constitution and according to law. I am for 
 abiding by the Constitution ; and in abiding by it I 
 want to maintain and retain my place here, and put 
 down Mr. Lincoln and drive back his advances upon 
 Southern institutions, if he designs to make any. 
 Have we not got the brakes in our hands ? Have 
 we not got the power? We have. Let South 
 Carolina send her Senators back ; let all the Sena- 
 tors come ; and on the fourth of March next we shall 
 have a majority of six in this body against him. 
 This successful sectional candidate, who is in a mi- 
 nority of a million, or nearly so, on the popular vote, 
 cannot make his Cabinet on the fourth of March 
 next, unless this Senate will permit him. 
 
 Am I to be so great a coward as to retreat from 
 duty? I will stand here and meet the encroach- 
 
 15 
 
170 THE SPEECHES 
 
 ments upon the institutions of my country at the 
 threshold ; and as a man, as one that loves my 
 country and my constituents, I will stand here and 
 resist all encroachments and advances. Here is the 
 place to stand. Shall I desert the citadel, and let 
 the enemy come in and take possession ? No. ' Can 
 Mr. Lincoln send a foreign minister, or even a con- 
 sul, abroad, unless he receives the sanction of the 
 Senate ? Can he appoint a postmaster whose salary 
 is over a thousand dollars a year without the consent 
 of the Senate ? Shall we desert our posts, shrink 
 from our responsibilities, and permit Mr. Lincoln to 
 come with nis cohorts, as we consider them, from 
 the North, to carry off everything ? Are we so cow- 
 ardly that now that we are defeated, not conquered, 
 we shall do this ? Yes, we are defeated according 
 to the forms of law and the Constitution ; but the real 
 victory is ours, — the moral force is with us. Are 
 we agoing to desert that noble and that patriotic 
 band who have stood by us at the North, who have 
 stood by us upon principle, and upon the Constitu- 
 tion ? They stood by us and fought the battle upon 
 principle ; and now that we have been defeated, not 
 conquered, are we to turn our backs upon them and 
 leave them to their fate ? I, for one, will not. I 
 intend to stand by them. How many votes did we 
 get in the North ? We got more votes in the North 
 against Lincoln than the entire Southern States cast. 
 Are they not able and faithful allies ? They are ; 
 and now, on account of this temporary defeat, are 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 171 
 
 we to turn our backs upon them and leave them to 
 their fate ? 
 
 We find, when all the North is summed up, that 
 Mr. Lincoln's majority there is only about two hun- 
 dred thousand on the popular vote ; and when that 
 is added to the other vote cast throughout the 
 Union, he stands to-day in a minority of nearly a 
 million votes. What, then, is necessary to be done ? 
 To stand to our posts like men, and act upon 
 principle ; stand for the country ; and in four years 
 from this day, Lincoln and his administration will 
 be turned out, the worst-defeated and broken-down 
 party that ever came into power. It is an inevi- 
 table result from the combination of elements that 
 now exist. What cause, then, is there to break up 
 the Union ? What reason is there for deserting our 
 posts and destroying this greatest and best Govern- 
 ment that was ever spoken into existence ? 
 
 I voted against him ; I spoke against him; I spent 
 my money to defeat him ; — but still I love my 
 country ; I love the Constitution ; I intend to insist 
 upon its guaranties. There, and there alone, I in- 
 tend to plant myself, with the confident hope and 
 belief that if the Union remains together, in less 
 than four years the now triumphant party will be 
 overthrown. In less time, I have the hope and 
 belief that we shall unite and agree upon our griev- 
 ances here and demand their redress, not as sup- 
 pliants at the footstool of power, but as parties to a 
 great compact ; we shall say that we want additional 
 
172 THE SPEECHES 
 
 guaranties, and that they are necessary to the pres- 
 ervation of this Union ; and then, when they are 
 refused deliberately and calmly, if we cannot do bet- 
 ter, let the South go together, and let the North go 
 together, and let us have a division of this Govern- 
 ment without the shedding of blood, if such a thing 
 be possible ; let us have a division of the property ; 
 let us have a division of the Navy ; let us have a 
 division of the Army, and of the public lands. Let 
 it be done in peace, and in a spirit that should char- 
 acterize and distinguish this people. I believe we 
 can obtain all our guaranties. I believe there is 
 too much good sense, too much intelligence, too 
 much patriotism, too much capability, too much vir- 
 tue, in the great mass of people to permit this Gov- 
 ernment to be overthrown. 
 
 I have an abiding faith, I have an unshaken con- 
 fidence in man's capability to govern himself. I 
 will not give up this Government that is now called 
 an experiment, which some are prepared to abandon 
 for a constitutional monarchy. No ; I intend to 
 stand by it, and I entreat every man throughout the 
 nation, who is a patriot, and who has seen, and is 
 compelled to admit, the success of this great experi- 
 ment, to come forward, not in heat, not in fanaticism, 
 not in haste, not in precipitancy, but in deliberation, 
 in full view of all that is before us, in the spirit of 
 brotherly love and fraternal affection, and rally 
 around the altar of our common country, and lay 
 the Constitution upon it as our last libation, and 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 173 
 
 swear by our God and all that is sacred and 
 holy, that the Constitution shall be saved, and the 
 Union preserved. Yes, in the language of the de- 
 parted Jackson, let us exclaim that the Union, "the 
 Federal Union, it must be preserved." 
 
 Are we likely, when we get to ourselves, North 
 and South, to sink into brotherly love ? Are we 
 likely to be so harmonious in that condition as 
 some suppose ? I am sometimes impressed with the 
 force of Mr. Jefferson's remark, that we may as well 
 keep the North to quarrel with, for if we have 
 no North to quarrel with, we shall quarrel among 
 ourselves. We are a sort of quarrelsome, pugna- 
 cious people ; and if we cannot get a quarrel from 
 one quarter, we shall have it from another ; and I 
 would rather quarrel a little now with the North 
 than be quarrelling with ourselves. What did a 
 Senator say here in the American Senate, only a 
 few days ago, because the Governor of a Southern 
 State was refusing to convene the Legislature to 
 hasten this movement that was going on throughout 
 the South, and because he objected to that course 
 of conduct ? The question was asked if there was 
 not some Texan Brutus that would rise up and rid 
 the country of the hoary-headed traitor ! This is 
 the language that a Senator used. This is the way 
 we begin to speak of Southern Governors. Yes ; to 
 remove an obstacle in our way, we must have a 
 modern Brutus who will go to the capital of a State 
 and assassinate a Governor to accelerate the move- 
 
 15* 
 
174 THE SPEECHES 
 
 ment. If y?v are so unscrupulous in reference to 
 ourselves, and in reference to the means we are 
 willing to employ to consummate this dissolution, 
 then it does not look very much like harmony 
 among ourselves after we get out of it. 
 
 Mr. President, I have said much more than I 
 anticipated when I commenced ; and I have spoken 
 more at length than a regard for my own health 
 and strength would have allowed ; but if there is 
 any effort of mine that would preserve this Govern- 
 ment till there is time to think, till there is time to 
 consider, even if it cannot be preserved any longer; 
 if that end could be secured by making a sacrifice 
 of my existence and offering up my blood, I would 
 be willing to consent to it. Let us pause in this 
 mad career ; let us hesitate. Let us consider well 
 what we are doing before we make a movement. I 
 believe that, to a certain extent, dissolution is going 
 to take place. I say to the North, you ought to 
 come up in the spirit which should characterize 
 and control the North on this question ; and you 
 ought to give those indications of good faith that 
 will approach what the South demands. It will be 
 no sacrifice on your part. It is no suppliancy 
 on ours, but simply a demand of right. What 
 concession is there in doing right ? Then, come 
 forward. We have it in our power — yes, this 
 Congress here to-day has it in its power to save this 
 Union, even after South Carolina has gone out. 
 Will they not do it ? You can do it. Who is willing 
 
OF ANDKEW JOHNSON. 175 
 
 to take the dreadful alternative without making an 
 honorable effort to save this Government ? This 
 Congress has it in its power to-day to arrest this 
 thing, at least for a season, until there is time to 
 consider about it, until we can act discreetly and 
 prudently, and I believe arrest it altogether. 
 
 Shall we give all this up to the Vandals and the 
 Goths ? Shall we shrink from our duty, and desert 
 the Government as a sinking ship, or shall we stand 
 by it ? I, for one, will stand here until the high be- 
 hest of my constituents demands of me to desert my 
 post ; and instead of laying hold of the columns of 
 this fabric and pulling it down, though I may not be 
 much of a prop, I will stand with my shoulder sup- 
 porting the edifice as long as human effort can do it. 
 
 In saying what I have said on this occasion, Mr. 
 President, I have had in view the duty that I owe 
 to my constituents, to my children, to myself. 
 Without regard to consequences, I have taken my 
 position ; and when the tug comes, when Greek 
 shall meet Greek, and our rights are refused after 
 all honorable means have been exhausted, then it 
 is that I will perish in the last breach ; yes, in the 
 language of the patriot Emmet, " I will dispute 
 every inch of ground ; I will burn every blade of 
 grass ; and the last intrenchment of Freedom shall 
 be my grave." Then, let us stand by the Constitu- 
 tion ; and in preserving the Constitution we shall 
 save the Union ; and in saving the Union we save 
 this the greatest Government on earth. 
 
 I thank the Senate for their kind attention. 
 
176 THE SPEECHES 
 
 SPEECH ON THE STATE OF THE UNION. 
 
 delivered in the senate of the united states, february 
 5th and 6th, 1861. 
 
 The Senate having under consideration the message of 
 the President communicating resolutions of the Legislature 
 of Virginia, — 
 
 Mr. Johnson remarked : — Mr. President, on the 
 19th of December I made a speech in the Senate, 
 with reference to the present crisis, which I be- 
 lieved my duty to my State and to myself required. 
 In making that speech, my intention — and I 
 think I succeeded in it — was to establish myself 
 upon the principles of the Constitution and the 
 doctrines inculcated by Washington, Jefferson, 
 Madison, Monroe, and Jackson. Having examined 
 the positions of those distinguished fathers of the 
 Republic, and compared them with the Constitu- 
 tion, I came to the conclusion that they were 
 right ; and upon them I planted myself, and made 
 the speech to which I have referred, in vindica- 
 tion of the Union and the Constitution, and against 
 the doctrine of nullification or secession, which I 
 look upon as a great political heresy. As far back 
 as 1833, when I was a young man, before I made 
 
OF ANDREW JOHN SOX. 177 
 
 my advent into public life, when the controversy 
 arose between the Federal Government and the 
 State of South Carolina, and it became necessary 
 for Andrew Jackson, then President of the United 
 States, to issue his proclamation, exhorting that 
 people to obey the law and comply with the re- 
 quirements of the Constitution, I planted myself 
 upon the principles then announced by him. I 
 believed that the positions taken then by General 
 Jackson, and those who came to his support, were 
 the true doctrines of the Constitution, and the 
 only doctrines upon which this Government could 
 be preserved. I have been uniformly, from that 
 period to the present time, opposed to the doc- 
 trine of secession, or of nullification, which is 
 somewhat of a hermaphrodite, but approximates 
 to the doctrine of secession. I repeat, that I then 
 viewed it as a heresy and as an element which, 
 if maintained, would result in the destruction of 
 this Government. I maintain the same position 
 to-day. 
 
 I oppose this heresy for another reason : not 
 only as being destructive of the existing Govern- 
 ment, but as being destructive of all future con- 
 federacies that may be established as a consequence 
 of a disruption of the present one ; and I availed 
 myself of the former occasion on which I spoke, 
 to enter my protest against it, and to do some- 
 thing to extinguish a political heresy that ought 
 never to be incorporated upon this or any other 
 
178 THE SPEECHES 
 
 Government which may be subsequently estab- 
 lished. I look upon it as the prolific mother of 
 political sin ; as a fundamental error ; as a heresy 
 that is intolerable in contrast with the existence 
 of the Government itself. I look upon it as being 
 productive of anarchy ; and anarchy is the next 
 step to despotism. The developments that we have 
 recently seen in carrying this doctrine into practice, 
 admonish us, I think, that this will be the result. 
 But, Mr. President, since I made- that speech, 
 on the 19th of December, I have been the peculiar 
 object of attack. I have been denounced, because 
 I happened to be the first man south of Mason 
 and Dixon's line who entered a protest or made 
 an argument in the Senate against this political 
 error. From what I saw here on the evening when 
 I concluded my speech — although some may have 
 thought that it intimidated and discouraged me — I 
 was inspired with confidence ; I felt that I had 
 struck Treason a blow. I thought then, and I know 
 now, that men who were engaged in treason felt 
 the blows that I dealt out on that occasion. As I 
 have been made the peculiar object of attack, not 
 only in the Senate, but out of the Senate, my pur- 
 pose on this occasion is to meet some of these 
 attacks, and to say some things in addition to what 
 I then said against this movement. 
 
 REPLY TO MR. BENJAMIN. 
 
 Yesterday the last of the Senators who represent 
 what are called the seceding States, retired, and a 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 179 
 
 drama was enacted. The piece was well performed ; 
 the actors were perfect in their parts ; it was got 
 up to order ; I will not say that the mourning aux- 
 iliaries had been selected in advance. One of the 
 retiring Senators, in justifying the course that his 
 State had taken, made a very specious and plausible 
 argument in reference to the doctrine of secession. 
 I allude to the Senator from Louisiana. 1 He argued 
 that the sovereignty of that State had never passed 
 to the United States ; that the Government held it 
 in trust ; that no conveyance was made ; that sover- 
 eignty could not be transferred ; that out of the gra- 
 cious pleasure and good-will which the First Consul 
 of France entertained toward the American people, 
 the transfer was made of the property without con- 
 sideration, and the sovereignty was in abeyance or 
 trust, and therefore his State had violated no faith, 
 and had a right to do precisely what she has done. 
 With elaborate preparation and seeming sincerity, 
 with sweet tones, euphonious utterances, mellifluous 
 voice, and the greatest earnestness, he called our 
 attention to the treaty to sustain his assumption. 
 But when we examine the subject, Mr. President, 
 how do the facts stand ? I like fairness : I will not 
 say that the Senator, in making quotations from the 
 treaty and commenting upon them, was intentionally 
 unfair ; nor can I say that the Senator from Louis- 
 iana, with all his acumen, his habits of industry, 
 and his great research, had not read and understood 
 
 1 Mr. Benjamin. 
 
180 THE SPEECHES 
 
 all the provisions of the treaty. In doing so, I 
 should reflect upon his character ; it might be con- 
 strued as a reflection upon his want of research, 
 for which he has such a distinguished reputation. 
 The omission to read important portions of the 
 treaty I will not attribute to any intention to mis- 
 lead ; I will simply call the attention of the Senate 
 and the country to his remarks, and then to the 
 treaty. The Senator, after premising, went on to 
 say : — 
 
 " I have said that the Government assumed to act as trustee 
 or guardian of the people of the ceded province, and cove- 
 nanted to transfer to them the sovereignty thus held in trust 
 for their use and benefit, as soon as they were capable of 
 exercising it. What is the express language of the treaty ? " 
 
 He then read the third article of the treaty of 
 cession of Louisiana, which provides merely for 
 their incorporation into the United States ; their 
 protection in the enjoyment of their religion, &c. ; 
 and thus he commented on it : — 
 
 " And, sir, as if to mark the true nature of the cession in a 
 manner too significant to admit of misconstruction, the treaty 
 stipulates no price ; and the sole consideration for the con- 
 veyance, as stated on its face, is the desire to afford a strong 
 proof of the friendship of France for the United States. By 
 the terms of a separate convention stipulating the payment 
 of a sum of money, the precaution is again observed of 
 stating that the payment is to be made, not as a considera- 
 tion, or a price, or a condition precedent of the cession, but 
 it is carefully distinguished as being a consequence of the 
 cession." 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 181 
 
 Now, Mr. President, to make this matter more 
 intelligible, and better understood by the country, 
 it seems to me it would have been better to read the 
 first article of the treaty, which commences thus : — 
 
 " The President of the United States of America, and the 
 First Consul of the French Republic, in the name of the 
 French people, desiring to remove all source of misunder- 
 standing relative to objects of discussion," &c. 
 
 After reciting the other treaties pending between 
 France and the United States and Spain, they go on 
 in the first article as follows : — 
 
 u And whereas, in pursuance of the treaty, and particularly 
 the third article, the French Republic has an incontestable 
 title to the domain and to the possession of the said territory, 
 [that is, of Louisiana,] the First Consul of the French Re- 
 public, desiring to give to the United States a strong proof 
 of his friendship, doth hereby cede to the said United States, 
 in the name of the French Republic, forever and in full 
 sovereignty, the said territory, with all its rights and appur- 
 tenances, as fully and in the same manner as they have been 
 acquired by the French Republic, in virtue of the above-men- 
 tioned treaty concluded with his Catholic Majesty." 
 
 Now, sir, is there not a clear and distinct and 
 explicit conveyance of sovereignty, of property, of 
 jurisdiction, of everything that resided in the First 
 Consul of France, to the people of the United 
 States ? Clearly and distinctly the jurisdiction and 
 control of that Government were transmitted abso- 
 lutely by the treaty. Why not have read that part 
 of the treaty first ? 
 
 The second article is in these words : — 
 
 16 
 
182 THE SPEECHES 
 
 "Art. 2. In the cession made by the preceding article, are 
 included the adjacent islands belonging to Louisiana, all pub- 
 lic lots and squares, vacant lands, and all public buildings, 
 fortifications, barracks, and other edifices, which are not 
 private property. The archives, papers, and documents rela- 
 tive to the domain and sovereignty of Louisiana and its de- 
 pendencies, will be left in the possession of the commissaries 
 of the United States, and copies will be afterwards given in 
 due form to the magistrates and municipal officers of such of 
 the said papers and documents as may be necessary to them." 
 
 We see, then, in the first article, that property 
 and sovereignty were all conveyed together, in 
 clear and distinct terms. If there was a power 
 residing anywhere to control the people and the 
 property of Louisiana, it was in the First Consul of 
 France, who conveyed absolutely the sovereignty 
 and right of property to the people of the United 
 States. Then we come to the third article, which 
 the Senator read yesterday : — 
 
 11 Art. 3. The inhabitants of the ceded territory shall be 
 incorporated in the Union of the United States, and admitted 
 as soon as possible, according to the principles of the Federal 
 Constitution, to the enjoyment of all the rights, advantages, 
 and immunities of citizens of the United States ; and, in the 
 mean time, they shall be maintained and protected in the free 
 enjoyment of their liberty, property, and the religion which 
 they profess." 
 
 There is some order in that ; one thing fits the 
 other. There is the conveyance of sovereignty 
 and property. There is a minute enumeration in 
 the second article ; and in the third article it is 
 provided that as soon as possible, according to the 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 183 
 
 principles of the Federal Constitution, they shall be 
 incorporated into the Union, and protected in the 
 enjoyment of the religion which they may profess. 
 We see, then, how the thing stands. Have not 
 all these things been complied with ? But, by way 
 of exonerating Louisiana from censure for her 
 recent act of attempted secession, it is urged that, 
 when this treaty was made, there was no consider- 
 ation ; but that, out of the good-will that the First * 
 Consul had towards the American people, the sov- 
 ereignty was given to us in trust ; that we took 
 the property in trust ; that we took everything in 
 trust. Sir, the Federal Government took the prop- 
 erty, and the sovereignty with it, in trust for all the 
 States. The retiring Senator's speech — whether 
 it was intended or not, I do not undertake to say — 
 is calculated to make the false impression that some 
 time afterwards, perhaps in some other treaty remote 
 from that, some money was paid by the United 
 States to France, out of the good-will that this 
 Government had towards them. And yet, sir, on 
 the same day — the 30th of April, 1803 — on 
 which the other treaty w T as made and signed, the 
 following convention between the United States of 
 America and the French Republic was made : — 
 
 " The President of the United States of America, and the 
 First Consul of the French Republic, in the name of the 
 French people, in consequence of the treaty of cession of 
 Louisiana, which has been signed this day, wishing to reg- 
 ulate definitely everything which has relation to the said 
 cession," &c. 
 
184 THE SPEECHES 
 
 This, be it observed, was made on the same day, 
 and was, perhaps, written out before the other treaty- 
 was signed. And what does the first article say ? 
 It says expressly : — 
 
 "Art. 1. The Government of the United States engages 
 to pay to the French Government, in the manner specified in 
 the following article, the sum of sixty million francs, indepen- 
 dent of the sum which shall be fixed by another convention, 
 for the payment of debts due by France to the citizens of 
 the United States." 
 
 "What becomes of the specious plea that we took 
 it simply in trust, and that no consideration was 
 paid ? Turn over to the American State Papers ; 
 look at Mr. Livingston's letters, upon which these 
 treaties were predicated ; read his correspondence 
 with Mr. Madison, who was Secretary of State ; and 
 you will find that France demanded the sum of 
 100,000,000f. independent of what they owed the 
 citizens of the United States ; but after long negotia- 
 tions, the First Consul of the French concluded to 
 take 60,000,000f. ; and the first two articles of the 
 treaty which I have read are based upon the 
 60,000,0Q0f. paid by this Government in considera- 
 tion of the sovereignty and territory, all of which 
 was to be held in trust by the United States for all 
 the States. 
 
 This was given to us out of the pure good-will 
 that Napoleon at that time had towards the United 
 States ! Sir, he had great hate for Great Britain ; 
 and by the promptings of that hate he was disposed 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 185 
 
 to cede this territory to some other Power. He 
 feared that Great Britain, whose navy was superior 
 to his own, would take it. He desired to obtain 
 money to carry on his wars and sustain his Govern- 
 ment. These considerations, and not love or par- 
 tiality or friendship for the United States, led him 
 to make the cession. Then what becomes of the 
 Senator's special pleading? From the Senator's 
 remarks, it may have been concluded that we got 
 it as a gratuity. But after examining the State 
 Papers and the correspondence, and looking at the 
 tedious and labored negotiation previous to the 
 making of the treaty, it is clear that at the time 
 the first treaty was made, on the very same day, 
 the consideration was fixed ; and yet the Senators 
 tell us that at some other time a treaty was made 
 not referring to any amount of money agreed to 
 be paid at this particular time, and that therefore 
 they are excusable and justifiable in going out of 
 the Confederacy of these States. 
 
 And then an appeal was made. It was a very 
 affecting scene. Louisiana was gone ; and what 
 was the reason ? Great oppression and great wrong. 
 She could not get her rights in the Union, and con- 
 sequently she has sought them out of it. What 
 are the wrongs of Louisiana ? What was the cause 
 for all the sympathy expressed on the one hand, and 
 the tears shed on the other ? Louisiana was pre- 
 sented to the country in a most pathetic and sym- 
 pathetic attitude. Her wrongs were without num- 
 
 16* 
 
186 THE SPEECHES 
 
 ber ; their enormity was almost without estimate ; 
 they could scarcely be fathomed by human sym- 
 pathy. It was not unlike the oration of Mark 
 Antony over the dead body of Ca3sar. Weeping 
 friends grouped picturesquely in the foreground ; 
 the bloody robe, the ghastly wounds, were conjured 
 to the imagination ; and who was there that did 
 not expect to hear the exclamation, " If you have 
 tears, prepare to shed them now " ? 
 
 Sir, what are the great wrongs that have been 
 inflicted upon Louisiana ? Prior to 1803 Louisiana 
 was transferred from Spain to France, and from 
 France back to Spain, — both property and sover- 
 eignty, — almost with the same facility as a chattel 
 from one person to another. On the 80th of April, 
 1803, when this treaty was made, what was the 
 condition of Louisiana? It was then a province 
 of the First Consul of France, subject to be dis- 
 posed of at his discretion. The United States came 
 forward and paid to the First Consul of France 
 60,000,000f. for the territory. The treaty was 
 made ; the territory was transferred ; and in 1806, 
 in express compliance with the treaty, as soon as 
 practicable, according to the terms of the Federal 
 Constitution, Louisiana was admitted into the Union 
 as a State. We bought her ; we paid for her ; 
 we admitted her into the Union upon terms of 
 equality with the other States. Was there any 
 oppression, any great wrong, any grievance in that ? 
 
 In 1815 — war having been declared in 1812 — 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 187 
 
 Louisiana was attacked ; the city of New Orleans 
 was about to be sacked and laid prostrate in the 
 dust ; " Beauty and Booty " were the watchwords. 
 She was oppressed then, was she not ? Kentucky, 
 your own gallant State, sir, (and, thank God ! she 
 is standing erect now,) and Tennessee, (which, as I 
 honestly believe, will ever stand by her side in this 
 struggle for the Constitution and the Union,) in 
 conjunction with the other States, met Packenham 
 and his myrmidons upon the plains of New Orleans, 
 and there dealt out death and desolation to her in- 
 vading foe. What soil did we invade ? What city 
 did we propose to sack ? Whose property did we 
 propose to destroy ? Was not Louisiana there gal- 
 lantly, nobly, bravely, and patriotically defended, by 
 the people of the United States, from the inroads and 
 from the sacking of a British foe ? Is that defence 
 one of her oppressions ? Is that one of the great 
 wrongs that have been inflicted upon Louisiana ? 
 What more has been done by this Government ? 
 How much protection has she received upon her 
 sugar ? In order to give that protection, the poorest 
 man throughout the United States is taxed for every 
 spoonful that he uses to sweeten his coffee. How 
 many millions, under the operation of a protection 
 upon sugar, have been contributed to the wealth and 
 prosperity of Louisiana since she has been in this 
 Confederacy ? Estimate them. Is this another of 
 her wrongs ? Is this another of her grievances ? Is 
 this another of the oppressions that the United States 
 have inflicted upon Louisiana ? 
 
188 THE SPEECHES 
 
 Sum them all up, and what are the wrongs, what 
 the grievances which justify Louisiana in taking leave 
 of the United States ? We have defended her soil 
 and her citizens ; we have paid the price asked for 
 her by the French Government ; she has been 
 protected in the production of her sugar, and in the 
 enjoyment of every right that a sovereign State 
 could ask at the hands of the Federal Govern- 
 ment. And how has she treated the United States ? 
 What is her position ? Upon her own volition, 
 without consultation with her sister States, without 
 even consulting with Tennessee and Kentucky, 
 who defended her when she was in peril, she proposes 
 to secede from the Union. She does more: in vio- 
 lation of the Constitution of the United States, in 
 despite of the plighted faith that exists between all 
 the States, she takes our arsenals, our forts, our 
 custom-house, our mint, with about a million dollars. 
 Gracious God ! to what are we coming ? Is it thus 
 that the Constitution of the United States is to be 
 violated ? Forts, arsenals, custom-houses, and prop- 
 erty belonging to all the people of all the States, 
 have been ruthlessly seized, and their undisturbed 
 possession is the sum total of the great wrongs that 
 have been inflicted upon Louisiana by the United 
 States ! 
 
 Mr. President, when I look at the conduct of 
 some of the States, I am reminded of the fable of 
 King Log and the frogs. They got tired of the 
 log that lay in their midst, upon which they could 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 189 
 
 bask in the sun, or from winch they could dive to 
 the depth beneath, without interference. And these 
 seceding States have got tired of the Federal Gov- 
 ernment, which has been so profitable to them, and 
 loathe the blessings which they enjoy. Seemingly, 
 its inability to take care of itself created their op- 
 position to it. It seems, the inability of the United 
 States to defend and take care of its own property 
 has been an invitation to them to take possession 
 of it ; and, like the frogs, they seek a substitute for 
 their log. They prayed to Jupiter, the supreme 
 deity, to send them another king ; and he answered 
 their prayer by sending them a stork, who soon de- 
 voured his subject frogs. There are storks, too, in 
 the seceding States. South Carolina has her stork 
 king, and so has Louisiana. In the heavy appropria- 
 tions they are making to maintain armies, and in all 
 their preparations for war, for which there is no 
 cause, they will find they have brought down storks 
 upon them that will devour them. 
 
 What do we find, Mr. President, since this move- 
 ment commenced ? In about forty-six days, since 
 the first State went out until the last one disap- 
 peared, — the 26th of January, — they have taken 
 from the United States, this harmless old ruler, six- 
 teen forts and one thousand and ninety-two guns, 
 without any resistance, amounting to $5,513,000. 
 They are very much alarmed at the power of this 
 Government. Thus the Government oppresses 
 them, — thus this Government oppresses Louisiana, 
 
190 THE SPEECHES 
 
 pertinaciously persisting in allowing those States to 
 take all the guns, all the forts, all the arsenals, all 
 the dock-yards, all the custom-houses, and all the 
 mints. Thus they are so cruelly oppressed. Is it 
 not a farce ? Is it not the greatest outrage and the 
 greatest folly that was ever consummated since man 
 was spoken into existence ? But these are the 
 grievances of Louisiana. I shall say nothing against 
 Louisiana. Tennessee and Kentucky have given 
 demonstrations most noticeable, that when she 
 needed friends, when she needed aid, they were at 
 her bidding. 
 
 But with Louisiana there was another very im- 
 portant acquisition. We acquired the exclusive and 
 entire control of the navigation of the Mississippi 
 River. We find that Louisiana, in her ordinance 
 of secession, makes the negative declaration that 
 she has the control of the navigation of that great 
 stream, by stating that the navigation of the river 
 shall be free to those States that remain on friendly 
 terms with her, with the proviso that moderate con- 
 tributions are to be levied to defray such expenses 
 as they may deem expedient from time to time. 
 That is the substance of it. Sir, look at the facts. 
 All the States, through their Federal Government, 
 treated for Louisiana. The treaty was made. All 
 the States, by the contribution of their money, paid 
 for Louisiana and the navigation of the Mississippi 
 River. Where, and from what source, does Louisi- 
 ana now derive the power or the authority to secede 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 191 
 
 from this Union and set up exclusive control of the 
 navigation of that great stream which is owned by 
 all the States, which was paid for by the money of 
 all the States, and upon whose borders the blood of 
 many citizens of the States has been shed ? 
 
 This is one of the aggrieved, the oppressed States ! 
 Mr. President, is it not apparent that these griev- 
 ances and oppressions are mere pretences ? A large 
 portion of the South (and that portion of it I am 
 willing to stand by to the very last extremity) be- 
 lieve that aggressions have been made upon them 
 by the other States, in reference to the institution of 
 slavery. A large portion of the South believe that 
 something ought to be done in the shape of what 
 has been offered by the distinguished Senator from 
 Kentucky, or something very similar. They think 
 and feel that that ought to be done. But, sir, there 
 is another portion who do not care for those prop- 
 ositions to bring about reconciliation, but who, on 
 the contrary, have been alarmed lest something 
 should be done to reconcile and satisfy the public 
 mind, before this diabolical work of secession could 
 be consummated. Yes, sir, they have been afraid ; 
 and the occasion has been used to justify and to car- 
 ry into practice a doctrine which will be not only 
 the destruction of this Government, but the destruc- 
 tion of all other governments that may be origi- 
 nated embracing the same principle. Why not, 
 then, meet it like men ? We know there is a 
 portion of the South who are for secession, who 
 
192 THE SPEECHES 
 
 are for breaking up this Government, without regard 
 to slavery or anything else, as I shall show before 
 I have done. 
 
 The Senator from Louisiana, 1 in a speech that 
 he made some days since, took occasion to al- 
 lude to some authority that I had introduced from 
 General Washington, the first President who ex- 
 ecuted the laws of the United States against armed 
 resistance ; and it occurred to him that, by way 
 of giving his argument force, it was necessary to 
 remark that I was not a lawyer, and that there- 
 fore I had not examined the subject with that 
 minuteness and with that care and familiarity that I 
 should have done ; and hence that I had introduced 
 authority which had no application to the question 
 under consideration. The proof that he gave to 
 show that I had not examined the subject carefully 
 was contained in the very extract that I had quoted, 
 and which he said declared that General Washing- 
 ton had been informed by the marshal that he could 
 not execute the laws ; and from the fact of the 
 marshal being incapable of executing them, General 
 Washington was called upon to employ the means, 
 under the Constitution and the laws, which were 
 necessary to their enforcement. It may have been 
 necessary for the distinguished Senator to inform 
 the Senate and the country that I was not a lawyer ; 
 but it was not necessary to inform anybody that 
 read his speech and had the slightest information or 
 
 1 Mr. Benjamin. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 193 
 
 sagacity, that he was a lawyer, and that he was 
 making a lawyer's speech upon the case before him ; 
 not an argument upon the great principles of the 
 Government. The speech was a complete lawyer's 
 speech, the authorities were summed up simply to 
 make out the case on his side ; and he left out all 
 those that would disprove his position. 
 
 That Senator yesterday seemed to be very serious 
 in regard to the practical operation of the doctrine 
 of secession. I felt sorry myself, somewdiat. I am 
 always reluctant to part with a gentleman with 
 whom I have been associated, and nothing had 
 transpired to disturb between us those courteous 
 relations which should always exist between persons 
 associated on this floor. I thought the scene was 
 pretty well got up, and was acted out admirably. 
 The plot was executed to the very letter. You 
 would have thought that his people in Louisiana 
 were borne down and seriously oppressed by re- 
 maining in this Union of States. Now, I have an 
 extract before me, from a speech delivered by that 
 gentleman since the election of Abraham Lincoln, 
 while the distinguished Senator was on the western 
 slope of the Rocky Mountains, at the city of San 
 Francisco. He was called upon to make an address ; 
 and I will read an extract from it, which I find in 
 the " New York Times," the editors of which paper 
 said they had the speech before them ; and I have 
 consulted a gentleman here who was in California 
 at the time, and he tells me that the report is cor- 
 
 17 
 
194 THE SPEECHES 
 
 rect. In that speech — after the Senator had 
 spoken some time with his accustomed eloquence 
 — he uttered this language : — 
 
 " Those who prate of, and strive to dissolve this glorious 
 Confederacy of States, are like those silly savages who let 
 fly their arrows at the sun in the vain hope of piercing it ! 
 And still the sun rolls on, unheeding, in its eternal pathway, 
 shedding light and animation upon all the world." 
 
 Even after Lincoln was elected, the Senator from 
 Louisiana is reported to have said, in the State of 
 California, and in the city of San Francisco, that this 
 great Union could not be destroyed. Those great 
 and intolerable oppressions, of which we have since 
 heard from him, did not seem to be flitting across his 
 vision and playing upon his mind with that vividness 
 and clearness which were displayed here yesterday. 
 He said, in California, that this great Union would 
 go on in its course, notwithstanding the puny efforts 
 of the silly savages that were letting fly their arrows 
 with the vain hope of piercing it. What has changed 
 the Senator's mind on coming from that side of the 
 continent to this ? What light has broken in upon 
 him ? Has he been struck on his way, like Paul, 
 when he was journeying from Tarsus to Damascus ? 
 Has some supernatural power disclosed to him that 
 his State and his people will be ruined if they re- 
 main in the Union ? Where do we find the dis- 
 tinguished Senator only at the last session ? On the 
 22d of May last, when he made his celebrated reply 
 to the Senator from Illinois, 1 the Senator from Louis- 
 1 Mr. Douglas. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 195 
 
 iana, alluding to the contest for the Senate between 
 Mr. Lincoln and Mr. Douglas, said : — 
 
 " In that contest, the two candidates for the Senate of the 
 United States, in the State of Illinois, went before their peo- 
 ple. They agreed to discuss the issues ; they put questions to 
 each other for answer ; and I must say here — for I must be 
 just to all — that I have been surprised, in the examination 
 that 1 made again, within the last few days, of this discussion 
 between Mr. Lincoln and Mr. Douglas, to find that, on several 
 points, Mr. Lincoln is a far more conservative man, unless 
 he has since changed his opinion, than I had supposed him 
 to be. There was no dodging on his part. Mr. Douglas 
 started with his questions. Here they are, with Mr. Lincoln's 
 answers." 
 
 The impression evidently made on the public 
 mind then, before the presidential election, was that 
 Lincoln, the rank Abolitionist now, was more con- 
 servative than Mr. Douglas ; and he said further, 
 after reading the questions put by Mr. Lincoln, and 
 his answers to them, — 
 
 " It is impossible, Mr. President, however we may differ in 
 opinion with the man, not to admire the perfect candor and 
 frankness with which the answers were given ; no equivoca- 
 tion ; no evasion." 
 
 Since that speech was made, since the Senator has 
 travelled from California to this" place, the griev- 
 ances, the oppressions of Louisiana, have become so 
 great that she is justified in going out of the Union, 
 taking into her possession the custom-house, the 
 mint, the navigation of the Mississippi River, the 
 forts, and arsenals. Where are we ? " O Con- 
 
196 THE SPEECHES 
 
 sistency, thou art a jewel much to be admired, but 
 rarely to be found.'' 
 
 Mr. President, I never do things by halves. I 
 am against this doctrine entirely. I commenced 
 making war upon it, — a war for the Constitution 
 and the Union, — and I intend to sink or swim 
 upon it. In the remarks that I made on the 
 19th of December, I discussed at some length the 
 alleged right of secession. I repudiated the whole 
 doctrine. I introduced authorities to show its un- 
 soundness, and made deductions from those author- 
 ities which have not been answered to this day; 
 but by innuendo and indirection, without reference 
 to the person who used the authorities, attempts 
 have been made to answer the speech. Let those 
 who can, answer the speech, answer the authorities, 
 answer the conclusions which have been deduced 
 from them. I was more than gratified, shortly 
 afterwards, when one of the distinguished Sena- 
 tors from Virginia 1 delivered a speech upon this 
 floor, which it was apparent to all had been studied 
 closely ; which had been digested thoroughly ; which, 
 in the language of another, had been conned and 
 set down in a note-book, and got by rote; not 
 only the sentences constructed, but the language 
 measured. In the plan which he proposed as one 
 upon which the Government can be continued and 
 administered, in his judgment, he brought his mind 
 seemingly, irresistibly, to the conclusion that this 
 doctrine of secession was a heresy. What does he 
 
 1 Mr. Hunter. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 197 
 
 say in that able, that methodical, that well-digested 
 speech? He goes over the whole ground. He 
 has been reasoning on it ; he has been examining 
 the principle of secession ; he has arrived at the 
 conclusion to which it leads ; and he is seemingly 
 involuntarily, but irresistibly, forced to admit that 
 it will not do to acknowledge this doctrine of se- 
 cession, for he says : — 
 
 " I have presented this scheme, Mr. President, as one which, 
 in my opinion, would adjust the differences between the two 
 social systems, and which would protect each from the assault 
 of the other. If this were done, so that we were made mutu- 
 ally safe, I, for one, would be willing to regulate the right 
 of secession, which I hold to be a right not given in the 
 Constitution, but resulting from the nature of the compact. 
 I would provide that before a State seceded, it should summon 
 a convention of the States in the section to which it belonged, 
 and submit to them a statement of its grievances and wrongs. 
 Should a majority of the States in such a convention decide 
 the complaint to be well founded, then the State ought to be 
 permitted to secede in peace. For, whenever a majority of 
 States in an entire section shall declare that good cause for 
 secession exists, then who can dispute that it ought to take 
 place ? Should they say, however, that no good cause ex- 
 isted, then the moral force of such a decision, on the part of the 
 confederates, of those who are bound to the complaining State 
 by identical and homogeneous interests, would prevent it from 
 prosecuting the claim any further." 
 
 Sir, I quoted the Old Dominion extensively be- 
 fore. I took the foundation of this doctrine and 
 traced it along step by step, and showed that there 
 was no such notion tolerated by the fathers of the 
 
 17* 
 
198 THE SPEECHES 
 
 Republic as the right of secession. Now, who comes 
 up to my relief? When the States are seceding, the 
 distinguished Senator from Virginia says, in so many 
 words, that he admits the error, and the force of the 
 principle that a State ought not to be permitted to 
 go out of the Confederacy^ without the consent of the 
 remaining members. He says, however, that the 
 right to secede results from the nature of the com- 
 pact. Sir, I have read Mr. Jefferson, and I am as 
 much inclined to rely on the former distinguished 
 men of the State of Virginia as I am on the latter. 
 In the old Articles of Confederation, when the 
 revenue required for the support of the Federal 
 Government was apportioned among the States, and 
 each State had to raise its portion, the great diffi- 
 culty was, that there were no means by which the 
 States could be compelled to contribute their 
 amount ; there were no means of forcing the State 
 to compliance ; and yet Mr. Jefferson, in view of 
 that very difficulty, said in 1786 : — 
 
 " It has been often said that the decisions of Congress are 
 impotent, because the Confederation provides no compulsory 
 power. But when two or more nations enter into compact, it 
 is not usual for them to say what shall be done to the party 
 who infringes it. Decency forbids this, and it is as unneces- 
 sary as indecent ; because the right of compulsion naturally 
 results to the party injured by the breach. When any one 
 Stiite in the American Union refuses obedience to the Con- 
 federation by which they have bound themselves, the rest 
 have a natural right to compel it to obedience." 
 
 The Senator from Virginia says a State has tie 
 
OF ANDHEW JOHNSON. 199 
 
 right to secede from the Union, and that it is a right 
 resulting from the nature of the compact ; but Mr. 
 Jefferson said that even under the old Articles of 
 Confederation, no State had a right to refuse obe- 
 dience to the Confederacy, and that there was a 
 right to enforce its compliance, — 
 
 <k Congress would probably exercise long patience before 
 they would recur to force ; but if the case ultimately required 
 it, they would use that recurrence. Should this case ever 
 arise, they will probably coerce by a naval force, as being 
 more easy, less dangerous to liberty, and less likely to produce 
 much bloodshed." l 
 
 When was this ? I have stated that it was under 
 the old Articles of Confederation, when there was no 
 power to compel a State even to contribute her pro- 
 portion of the revenues ; but in that view of the 
 case, Mr. Jefferson said that the injured party had 
 a right to enforce compliance with the compact from 
 the offending State, and that this was a right de- 
 ducible from the laws of nature. The present Con- 
 stitution was afterwards formed ; and to avoid this 
 difficulty in raising revenue, the power was con- 
 ferred upon the Congress of the United States " to 
 lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises," 
 and the Constitution created a direct relation be- 
 tween the citizen and the Federal Government in 
 that matter, and to that extent that relation is just 
 as direct and complete between the Federal Govern- 
 ment and the citizen as is the relation between the 
 
 1 Jefferson's Works, Vol. IX. p. 291. 
 
200 TTTE SPEECHES 
 
 State and the citizen in other matters. Hence we 
 find that, by an amendment to the Constitution of 
 the United States, the citizens cannot even make a 
 State a party to a suit, and bring her into the 
 Federal courts. They wanted to avoid the difficulty 
 of coercing a State, and the Constitution conferred 
 on the Federal Government the power to operate 
 directly upon the citizen, instead of operating on the 
 States. It being the right of the Government to 
 enforce obedience from the citizen in those matters 
 of which it has jurisdiction, the question comes up 
 as to the exercise of this right. It may not always 
 be expedient. It must depend upon discretion, as 
 was eloquently said by the Senator from Kentucky * 
 on one occasion. It is a matter of discretion, even 
 as Mr. Jetferson laid it down before this provi- 
 sion existed in the Constitution, before the Gov- 
 ernment had power to collect its revenue as it 
 now has. I know that when, on a former occa- 
 sion, I undertook to show, as I thought I did show, 
 clearly and distinctly, the difference between the 
 existence and the exercise of this power, words 
 were put into my mouth that I did not utter, and 
 positions answered which I had never assumed. 
 It was said that I took the bold ground of coercing 
 a State. I expressly disclaimed it. I stated in my 
 speech, that, by the Constitution, we could not put 
 a State into court ; but I said there were certain re- 
 lations created by the Constitution between the 
 Federal Government and the citizen, and that we 
 
 1 Mr. Crittenden. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 201 
 
 could enforce those laws against the citizen. I took 
 up the fugitive-slave law ; I took up the revenue law ; 
 I took up the judicial system ; I took up the post- 
 office system ; and I might have taken up the power 
 to coin money and to punish counterfeiters, or the 
 power to pass laws to punish mail robbers. I showed 
 that under these we had power, not to punish a 
 State, but to punish individuals as violators of the 
 law. Who will deny it ; who can deny it, that 
 acknowledges the existence of the Government ? 
 This point, I think, was settled in the decision of the 
 Supreme Court in the case of Ableman vs. Booth. 
 When the decision of the Supreme Court is in our 
 favor, we are very much for it ; but sometimes we 
 are not so well reconciled to it when it is against us. 
 In that case the court decided, — 
 
 " But, as we have already said, questions of this kind must 
 always depend upon the Constitution and laws of the United 
 States, and not of a State. The Constitution was not formed 
 merely to guard the States against danger from foreign na- 
 tions, but mainly to secure union and harmony at home ; for 
 if this object could be obtained, there would be but little 
 danger from abroad ; and to accomplish this purpose, it was 
 felt by the statesmen who framed the Constitution, and by 
 the people who adopted it, that it was necessary that many 
 of the rights of sovereignty which the States then possessed 
 should be ceded to the General Government ; and that, in 
 the sphere of action assigned to it, it should be supreme, and 
 strong enough to execute its own laws by its own tribunals, 
 without interruption from a State or from State authorities. 
 And it was evident that anything short of this would be in- 
 adequate to the main objects for which the Government was 
 
202 THE SPEECHES 
 
 established ; and that local interests, local passions or preju- 
 dices, incited and fostered by individuals for sinister purposes, 
 would lead to acts of aggression and injustice by one State 
 upon the rights of another, which would ultimately terminate 
 in violence and force, unless there was a common arbiter 
 between them, armed with power enough to protect and guard 
 the rights of all, by appropriate laws, to be carried into exe- 
 cution peacefully by its judicial tribunals." * 
 
 When the fugitive-slave law was executed in the 
 city of Boston, by the aid of military force, was 
 that understood to be coercing a State, or was it 
 simply understood to be an enforcement of the law 
 upon those who, it was assumed, had violated it ? 
 In this same decision the Supreme Court declare 
 that the fugitive-slave law, in all its details, is con- 
 stitutional, and therefore should be enforced. Who 
 is prepared to say that the decision of the court shall 
 not be carried out ? Who is prepared to say that 
 the fugitive-slave law shall not be enforced ? Do 
 you coerce a State when you simply enforce the 
 law ? If one man robs the mail and you seek to 
 arrest him, and he resists, and you employ force, do 
 you call that coercion? If a man counterfeits your 
 coin, and is arrested and convicted, and punishment 
 is resisted, cannot you execute the law ? It is true 
 that sometimes so many may become infected with 
 disobedience, outrages and violations of law may be 
 participated in by so many, that they get beyond 
 the control of the ordinary operations of law ; the 
 disaffection may swell to such proportions as to 
 
 1 Howard's Supreme Court Reports, Vol. XXI. p. 516. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 203 
 
 be too great for the Government to control ; and 
 then it becomes a matter of discretion, not a matter 
 of constitutional right. 
 
 In this connection I desire to introduce an au- 
 thority from Virginia, for I do delight in authority 
 from the Old Dominion ; and from the indications 
 that are now visible — although it is possible that 
 before the setting of the sun I may receive news 
 that will convert my present hopes and my present 
 exhilarated feelings into despair — she is going to 
 make a stand for the Union and the Constitution. 
 I delight in calling upon her for authority. The 
 doctrine that I am trying to inculcate here to-day 
 was the doctrine of Virginia in 1814 ; and I ask my 
 friend from California to read an extract which I 
 have from the " Richmond Enquirer " of the 1st of 
 November, 1814. 
 
 Mr. Latham read, as follows : — 
 
 "The True Question. — The Union is in Danger. Turn 
 to the convention of Hartford, and learn to tremble at the 
 madness of its authors. How far will those madmen advance ? 
 Though they may conceal from you the project of disunion, 
 though a few of them may have even concealed it from them- 
 selves, yet who will pretend to set bounds to the rage of dis- 
 affection ? One false step after another may lead them to 
 resistance to the laws, to a treasonable neutrality, to a war 
 against the Government of the United States. In truth, the 
 first act of resistance to the law is treason to the United 
 States. Are you ready for this state of things ? Will you 
 support the men who would plunge you into this ruin ? 
 
 " No man, no association of men, no State or set of States 
 las a right to withdraw itself from this Union, of its own 
 
204 THE SPEECHES 
 
 accord. The same power which knit us together can only 
 unknit. The same formality which forged the links of the 
 Union is necessary to dissolve it. The majority of States 
 which form the Union must consent to the withdrawal of 
 any one branch of it. Until that consent has been obtained, 
 any attempt to dissolve the Union, or obstruct the efficacy 
 of its constitutional laws, is treason — treason to all intents 
 and purposes. 
 
 " Any other doctrine, such as that which has been lately 
 held forth by the ' Federal Republican,' that any one State 
 may withdraw itself from the Union, is an abominable heresy 
 — which strips its author of every possible pretension to the 
 name or character of a Federalist. 
 
 " We call, therefore, upon the Government of the Union 
 to exert its energies, when the season shall demand it — and 
 seize the first traitor who shall spring out of the hotbed of 
 the convention of Hartford. This illustrious Union, which 
 has been cemented by the blood of our forefathers, the pride 
 of America and the wonder of the world, must not be tamely 
 sacrificed to the heated brains or the aspiring hearts of a few 
 malcontents. The Union must be saved, when any one shall 
 dare to assail it. 
 
 " Countrymen of the East ! we call upon you to keep a 
 vigilant eye upon those wretched men who would plunge 
 us into civil war and irretrievable disgrace. Whatever be 
 the temporary calamities which may assail us, let us swear, 
 upon the altar of our country, to save the Union." 
 
 Mr. Johnson continued : — Mr. President, I sub- 
 scribe most heartily to the sentiment presented by 
 the "Richmond Enquirer" of November 1, 1814. 
 Then it was declared by that high authority that 
 the Union was to be saved ; that those persons who 
 were putting themselves in opposition to the law 
 were traitors, and that their treason should be pun- 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 205 
 
 ished as such. Now, sir, what is treason ? The 
 Constitution of the United States defines it, and 
 narrows it down to a very small compass. The Con- 
 stitution declares that " treason against the United 
 States shall consist only in levying war against them, 
 or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and 
 comfort." Who are levying war upon the United 
 States ? Who are adhering to the enemies of the 
 United States, giving them aid and comfort? Does 
 it require a man to take the lantern of Diogenes, 
 and make a diligent search to find those who have 
 been engaged in levying war against the United 
 States ? Will it require any very great research or 
 observation to discover the adherents of those who 
 are making war against the United States, and giv- 
 ing them aid and comfort ? If there are any such 
 in the United States, they ought to be punished 
 according to law and the Constitution. [Applause 
 in the galleries, which was suppressed by the Pre- 
 siding officer, Mr. Fitch in the chair.] Mr. Ritchie, 
 speaking for the Old Dominion, used language that 
 was unmistakable : " The treason springing out of 
 the hot-bed of the Hartford Convention should be 
 punished." It was all right to talk about treason 
 then; it was all right to punish traitors in that 
 direction. For myself, I care not whether treason 
 be committed North or South ; he that is guilty 
 of treason deserves a traitor's fate. 
 
 But, Mr. President, when we come to examine 
 the views of some of those who have been engaged 
 in tins work, we find that the beginning of their 
 
 18 
 
206 THE SPEECHES 
 
 desire to break up the Government dates beyond, 
 and goes very far back of, any recent agitation of 
 the slavery question. There are some men who 
 want to break up this Government anyhow ; who 
 want a separation of the Union. There are some 
 who have got tired of a government by the people. 
 They fear the people. Take the State of South 
 Carolina. Although she has had Senators on this 
 floor who have acted a portion of the time with the 
 Democratic party, and sometimes with no party, 
 there is, in that State, an ancient and a fixed oppo- 
 sition to a government by the people. They have 
 an early prejudice against this thing called democ- 
 racy — a government of the people. They enter- 
 tained the idea of secession at a very early day ; it 
 is no new idea with them ; it has not arisen out of 
 the slavery question and its recent agitation. Even 
 to this day, the people, the freemen of South Caro- 
 lina, have never been permitted to vote for President 
 and Vice-President of the United States. They 
 have never enjoyed that great luxury of freemen, 
 of having a voice in the selection of their Chief 
 Magistrate. 
 
 I have before me an old volume. In the fron- 
 tispiece I find a picture of " William Moultrie, Esq., 
 late Governor of South Carolina, and Major-General 
 in the American Revolutionary War." The book is 
 entitled, " Memoirs of the American Revolution, so 
 far as it related to the States of North and South 
 Carolina and Georgia " ; and the author is William 
 Moultrie. The Articles of Confederation, it will be 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 207 
 
 remembered, were adopted July 9, 1778. South 
 Carolina was one of the members of the Confederacy 
 ■ — a party to the compact. Charleston was besieged 
 during the Revolutionary War, in 1779, by the Brit- 
 ish. The defence of the town had been kept up for 
 a considerable length of time, and at last General 
 Moultrie sent a message to the British commander, 
 desiring to know " on what terms he would be dis- 
 posed to grant a capitulation." The answer of Gen- x 
 eral Prevost was submitted to the Governor, who 
 summoned a council of war, and the result was the 
 following message to the British commander : — 
 
 Charlestown, May 12, 1779. 
 Sir : I cannot possibly agree to so dishonorable a propo- 
 sal as is contained in your favor of yesterday; but if you will 
 appoint an officer to confer on terms, I will send one to meet 
 him, at such time and place as you fix on. 
 I have the honor to be, &c, 
 
 WILLIAM MOULTRIE. 
 Brigadier-General Prevost. 
 
 This is to be found on pages 431 and 432 of Moul- 
 trie's Memoirs. On the latter page he says, — 
 
 "When the question was carried for giving up the town 
 upon a neutrality, I will not say who was for the question ; 
 but this I well remember, that Mr. John Edwards, one of 
 the Privy Council, a worthy citizen, and a very respectable 
 merchant of Charlestown, was so affected as to weep, and 
 said, ' What ! are we to give up the town at last ! ' " 
 
 He says that he endeavored to get a message 
 carried from the Governor and Council to General 
 Prevost. Those to whom he applied begged to be 
 
208 THE SPEECHES 
 
 excused ; but finally he pressed them into a com- 
 pliance. The message was, — 
 
 " To propose a neutrality during the war between Great 
 Britain and America, and the question whether the State 
 shall belong to Great Britain, or remain one of the United 
 States, be determined by the treaty of peace between those 
 two Powers." 
 
 The Governor, it seems, proposed a neutrality ; 
 proposed to withdraw from the Confederacy, to de- 
 sist from resistance to Great Britain, and leave it to 
 the two Powers, in making a treaty, to say whether 
 they should remain a colony of Great Britain or be 
 one of the United States. At this early day South 
 Carolina was ivilling to go bach and be subjected to 
 the Crown of Great Britain under King George III. 
 
 Mr. Wigfall. I ask the Senator merely to per- 
 mit me to correct him as to a fact. 
 
 Mr. Johnson. I do not yield the floor. 
 
 Mr. Wigfall. I do not intend to interrupt 
 you 
 
 Mr. Johnson. I do not yield the floor. 
 
 The Presiding Officer. 1 The Senator from 
 Tennessee is entitled to the floor. 
 
 Mr. Wigfall. The Articles of Confederation 
 were formed in 1781 ; that is all. 
 
 Mr. Johnson. I have them before me : "Articles 
 of Confederation and Perpetual Union " ; and they 
 end : " Done at Philadelphia, in the State of Penn- 
 sylvania, the 9th day of July, in the year of our 
 Lord 1778." 
 
 i Mr. Fitch. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 209 
 
 Mr. Wigfall. They were ratified in 1781. If 
 you will read history and inform yourself, you will 
 not fall into so many errors : 1781 is the time ; I 
 know it. 
 
 Mr. Johnson. I will just refer to the docu- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. Wigfall. While the Senator is looking over 
 it, I will merely observe that I made the correction 
 out of kindness to him. 
 
 Mr. Johnson. I always prefer having correct 
 ideas, and selecting my own sources of informa- 
 tion. [Laughter.] 
 
 Mr. Wigfall. The year 1781 was the time the 
 Articles of Confederation were ratified. You were 
 simply mistaken ; that is all. 
 
 Mr. Johnson. I do not accept the correction, 
 nor have I very much respect for the motive that 
 prompted it. Let that be as it may, however, it 
 does not change the great historical fact that at that 
 day, instead of holding out with the other colonies 
 who were members of the Confederacy and engaged 
 in the war, South Carolina was willing to enter into 
 an agreement of neutrality, and go back under the 
 protection of King George III. 
 
 I have another document that I wish to read 
 from ; a book called " The Remembrancer, or Im- 
 partial Repository of Public Events for the year 
 1780." In that year the people of Charleston, a 
 large number of them, in view of the difficulties then 
 upon the country, prepared an address, which I ask 
 
 18* 
 
210 the Speeches 
 
 my friend from California, who reads so much bet- 
 ter than I do, to read for me. 
 Mr. Latham read as follows : — 
 
 To their Excellencies, Sir Henry Clinton, Knight of the 
 Bath, General of his Majesty's forces, and Mariot Ar- 
 burthxot, Esq., Vice- Admiral of the Blue, his Majesty's 
 Commissioners to restore peace and good government in the 
 several colonies in rebellion in North America: 
 The humble address of divers inhabitants of Charles- 
 town : — 
 
 The inhabitants of Charlestown, by the articles of capit- 
 ulation, are declared prisoners of war on parole ; but we, 
 the underwritten, having every inducement to return to 
 our allegiance, and ardently hoping speedily to be read- 
 mitted to the character and condition of British subjects, 
 take this opportunity of tendering to your Excellencies our 
 warmest congratulations on the restoration of this capital 
 and province to their political connection with the Crown 
 and Government of Great Britain ; an event which will add 
 lustre to your Excellencies' characters, and, we trust, en- 
 title you to the most distinguishing mark of the royal favor. 
 Although the right of taxing America in Parliament excited 
 considerable ferment in the minds of the people of this 
 province, yet it may, with a religious adherence to truth, be 
 affirmed that they did not entertain the most distant thought 
 of dissolving the union that so happily subsisted between 
 them and their parent country ; and when, in the progress of 
 that fatal controversy, the doctrine of independency (which 
 originated in the more northern colonies) made its appear- 
 ance among us, our nature revolted at the idea, "and we look 
 back with the most painful regret on those convulsions that 
 gave existence to a power of subverting a constitution for 
 which we always had, and ever shall retain, the most pro- 
 found veneration, and substituting in its stead a rank de- 
 mocracy, which, however carefully digested in theory, on 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 211 
 
 being reduced into practice has exhibited a system of ty- 
 rannic domination only to be found among the uncivilized 
 part of mankind or in the history of the dark and barbarous 
 ages of antiquity. 
 
 We sincerely lament that, after the repeal of those statutes 
 which gave rise to the troubles in America, the overtures made 
 by his Majesty's Commissioners, from time to time, were not 
 regarded by our late rulers. To this fatal inattention are to 
 be attributed those calamities which have involved our country 
 in a state of misery and ruin from which, however, we trust 
 it will soon emerge, by the wisdom and clemency of his Maj- 
 esty's auspicious Government, and the influences of pruden- 
 tial laws, adapted to the nature of the evils we labor under ; 
 and that the people will be restored to those privileges, in the 
 enjoyment whereof their former felicity consisted. 
 
 Animated with these hopes, we entreat your Excellencies' 
 interposition in assuring his Majesty that we shall glory in 
 every occasion of manifesting that zeal and affection for his 
 person and Government with which gratitude can inspire 
 a free and joyful people. 
 
 Charlestown, June 5, 1 780. 
 
 [Signed by two hundred and ten of the principal inhab- 
 itants.] — The Remembrancer, Part. II. 1780, p. 84. 
 
 Mr. Johnson continued: — It will be seen, from 
 these two documents, what the early notions of the 
 people of South Carolina were. There never was, 
 and I doubt very much whether, with a large por- 
 tion of them, there ever will be, any idea of the 
 people governing themselves. They had, at that 
 early day, a great aversion to a government by the 
 people. It was repudiated ; and in the document 
 which has just been read, signed by two hundred 
 and ten citizens of Charleston, they proposed to pass 
 
212 THE SPEECHES 
 
 back under the British Government. This carries 
 out the previous proposition to remain with Great 
 Britain by treaty stipulation, and not go through 
 the Revolutionary struggle with the colonies with 
 whom they had formed a confederation. 
 
 Again : in 1833, under the pretence of resistance 
 to the operation of our revenue system and to a pro- 
 tective tariff, they endeavored to break up the Gov- 
 ernment. They were overruled then. Their pride 
 was wounded by that failure ; and their determina- 
 tion was fixed, whenever it was in their power, to 
 break up this Government and go out of the Union. 
 This feeling, I have no doubt, has existed there 
 from that period to the present time. When we 
 turn to the debates which recently took place in the 
 South Carolina Convention, we find that Mr. Maxcy 
 Gregg, Mr. Rhett, and others, said that their reason 
 for goino; out of the Union now dates as far back as 
 forty years ; some of them said thirty years, and 
 some twenty. Mr. Gregg said, in the South Caro- 
 lina Convention, on the 21st of December last, — 
 
 " If we undertake to set forth all the causes, do we not dis- 
 honor the memory of all the statesmen of South Carolina, 
 now departed, who commenced forty years ago a war against 
 the tariff and against internal improvements, saying nothing 
 of the United States Bank, and other measures, which may 
 now be regarded as obsolete." 
 
 Mr. Rhett, on the 24th of December, said, — 
 
 " The secession of South Carolina is not an event of a day. 
 It is not anything produced by Mr. Lincoln's election, or by 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 213 
 
 the non-execution of the fugitive-slave law. It has been a 
 matter which has been gathering head for thirty years." 
 
 Hence we see that there is a design with some to 
 break up this Government without reference to the 
 slavery question ; and the slavery question is by 
 them made a pretence for destroying this Union. 
 They have at length passed their ordinance of seces- 
 sion ; they assume to be out of the Union ; they 
 declare that they are no longer a member of the 
 Confederacy. Now what are the other States called 
 upon to do ? Are the other States called upon to 
 make South Carolina an exemplar ? Are those slave 
 States who believe that freemen should govern and 
 that freemen can take care of slave property, to be 
 " precipitated into a revolution " by following the 
 example of South Carolina ? Will they do it ? What 
 protection, what security will Tennessee, will Ken- 
 tucky, will Virginia, will Maryland, or any other 
 State, receive from South Carolina by following her 
 example ? What protection can she give them ? On 
 the contrary, she indulges in a threat towards them 
 — a threat that if they do not imitate her example 
 and come into a new confederacy upon her terms, 
 they are to be put under the ban, and their slave 
 property to be subjected to restraint and restriction. 
 What protection can South Carolina give Tennes- 
 3ee ? Any ? None upon the face of the earth. 
 
 Some of the men who are engaged in the work 
 of disruption and dissolution want Tennessee and 
 Kentucky and Virginia to furnish them with men 
 
214 THE SPEECHES 
 
 and money in the event of their becoming engaged 
 in a war for the conquest of Mexico. The Tennes- 
 seeans and Kentuckians and Virginians are very 
 desirable when their men and their money are 
 wanted ; but what protection does South Carolina 
 give Tennessee ? If negro property is endangered 
 in Tennessee, we have to defend it and take care of 
 it — not South Carolina, which has been an apple 
 of discord in this Confederacy from my earliest rec- 
 ollection to the present time, complaining of every- 
 thing, satisfied with nothing. I do not intend to be 
 invidious, but I have sometimes thought that it 
 would be a comfort if Massachusetts and South Car- 
 olina could be chained together as the Siamese twins, 
 separated from the continent, and taken out to some 
 remote and secluded part of the ocean, and there 
 fast anchored, to be washed by the waves, and to 
 be cooled by the winds ; and after they had been 
 kept there a sufficient length of time, the people of 
 the United States might entertain the proposition 
 of taking them back. [Laughter.] They have 
 been a source of dissatisfaction pretty much ever 
 since they entered the Union ; and some experi- 
 ment of this sort, I think, would operate benefi- 
 cially upon them ; but as they are here, we must 
 try to do the best we can with them. 
 
 REPLY TO MR. LANE. 
 
 So much, Mr. President, for South Carolina and 
 Louisiana in this struggle. I do not think they are 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 215 
 
 setting examples very worthy of imitation. But, 
 sir, the speech that I made on the 19th of Decem- 
 ber seems to have produced some little stir; and 
 among other distinguished Senators, the Senator 
 from Oregon 2 felt it his duty, late in the evening, 
 to make a reply to me. I do not see why it was 
 called for from the Senator from Oregon. I did 
 not know that I had said anything that was of- 
 fensive to him ; it was not my intention to do so ; 
 it was an inadvertence, if I did. I felt that I had 
 just come out of a campaign in which I had labored 
 hard, and in which I had expended my money and 
 my time in vindicating him and the present Vice- 
 President, who was a candidate for the Presidency, 
 from the charge of favoring secession and disunion. 
 Through the dust and heat, through the mud and 
 rain, I traversed my State, meeting the charge of 
 the Opposition that secession was at the bottom of 
 this movement ; that there W T as a fixed design and 
 plan to break up this Government ; that it started 
 at Charleston, and was consummated at Baltimore ; 
 and the charge was made that my worthy friend — 
 if I may be permitted to call him such ; I thought 
 I was his friend then — was the embodiment of dis- 
 union and secession. I met the charge. I denied 
 it. I repudiated it. I tried to convince the people 
 — and I think I did succeed in convincing some of 
 them — that the charge was untrue ; and that he 
 and Mr. Breckinridge we re the two best Union men 
 in the country. I did not see what there was in my 
 1 Mr. Lane. 
 
216 THE SPEECHES 
 
 speech that should extort reply from him, who re- 
 sided away North. I had not come in conflict with 
 anything that he had said or done. When he was 
 striking these blows at me without cause, I thought 
 it was, at least, unkind. I may not have defended 
 him to his entire satisfaction. It so turned out that 
 we were unfortunate ; we were defeated ; but I was 
 willing to stand like a man ; to stand upon the Con- 
 stitution and the Union, and, if I must fall, fall 
 decently. After I had gone through the canvass ; 
 after I had defended the Senator, and sustained him 
 with my voice and my vote, I thought it was strange 
 that he should attack me in the manner he did. I 
 felt like replying to him, on the spur of the occa- 
 sion ; but it was late in the evening, and by the 
 time he had concluded, the Senate was tired out, 
 and I declined going on. I preferred to let it pass, 
 and submit to all the wrong and injury inflicted 
 upon me. In his speech upon that occasion, the 
 Senator from Oregon made use of the following 
 
 lano-uaoe • — 
 © © 
 
 " He [alluding to myself] has spoken very handsomely of 
 the gallant conduct of that glorious band, the Northern De- 
 mocracy of the country, who, though in a minority at home, 
 have struggled for the rights of their Southern brethren — 
 for the equality and rights of all the States. I belong to 
 that portion of the people of this country ; and I will say 
 to that honorable gentleman that while they struggle for the 
 constitutional rights of the other States of the Union, as 
 they have always done, and as they will continue to do, there 
 is one thing that they will not do : they will not march under 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 217 
 
 his banner to strike down a gallant, chivalrous, and generous 
 people, contending for rights that have been refused them by 
 the other States of this Union. They will not march with 
 him under his bloody banner, or Mr. Lincoln's, to invade the 
 soil of the gallant State of South Carolina when she may 
 withdraw from a Confederacy that has refused her that 
 equality to which she is entitled, as a member of the Union, 
 under the Constitution. On the contrary, when he or any 
 other gentleman raises that banner and attempts to subjugate 
 that gallant people, instead of marching with him, we will 
 meet him there, ready to repel him and his forces. He shall 
 not bring with him the Northern Democracy to strike down 
 a people contending for rights that have been refused them 
 in a Union that ought to recognize the equality of every 
 member of the Confederacy." 
 
 I do not know that I used any argument that 
 should have caused a reply like that. Did anybody 
 hear me use the term " bloody banner"? Did any- 
 body hear me talk about marching down upon South 
 Carolina ? Did anybody hear me speak about co- 
 ercing a State ? No. 
 
 Mr. Lane. Will the Senator allow me a word ? 
 
 Mr. Johnson. I would rather go on, sir. Why, 
 then, answer positions I did not assume, or attribute 
 to me language that I did not use ? Was it in the 
 speech ? No. Why, then, use language and assign 
 a position to me which, if not intended, was cal- 
 culated to make a false impression ? What called 
 it forth ? What reason was there for it ? I saw the 
 consternation which was created. I looked at som»e 
 of their faces. I knew that I had stirred up ani- 
 mosity, and it was important that somebody from 
 19 
 
218 THE SPEECHES 
 
 another quarter should make the attack. If the 
 attack had been upon what I said or upon the posi- 
 tion I had assumed, I should have no cause to com- 
 plain ; and I do not complain now. Sir, though 
 not very old, I have lived down some men. I have 
 survived many misrepresentations. I feel that I 
 have a conscience and a heart that will lead me to 
 do it again. But when I had said nothing, when I 
 had done nothing, to be struck by him whom I have 
 vindicated, I might well have exclaimed, " That 
 was the unkindest cut of alL' , 
 Again : the Senator said, — 
 
 " If it should come unfortunately upon this country, in- 
 augurated by a tyrant, who would like to conquer and hold 
 American citizens as vassals, then I will say to that coward 
 who would do it, ' You will walk over your humble servant's 
 body first.' I shall never cooperate with any portion of this 
 country, North or South, that would strike down a people 
 contending for their rights." 
 
 I march down upon South Carolina ! Did I pro- 
 pose any such thing ? No. War is not the natural 
 element of my mind ; and, as I stated in that speech, 
 my thoughts were turned on peace, and not on war. 
 I want no strife. I want no war. In the language 
 of a denomination that is numerous in the country, 
 I may say I hate war and love peace. I belong to 
 the peace party. I thought, when I was making 
 that speech, that I was holding out the olive-branch 
 of peace. I wanted to give quiet and reconciliation 
 to a distracted and excited country. That was the 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 219 
 
 object I had in view. War, I repeat, is not the 
 natural element of my mind. I would rather wear 
 upon my garments the dinge of the shop and the 
 dust of the field, as badges of the pursuits of peace, 
 than the gaudy epaulet upon my shoulder, or a 
 sword dangling by my side, with its glittering scab- 
 bard, the insignia of strife, of war, of blood, of car- 
 nage ; sometimes of honorable and glorious war. 
 But, sir, I would rather see the people of the United 
 States at war with every other Power upon the 
 habitable globe, than to be at war with each other. 
 If blood must be shed, let it not be shed by the 
 people of these States, the one contending against 
 the other. 
 
 But the Senator went on still further in that dis- 
 cussion. Why it was necessary to follow up his 
 attack upon me, I cannot tell. Alluding to the 
 Senator from Tennessee, he said, — 
 
 " He took occasion to give an account of the action of the 
 Senate upon certain resolutions introduced here, setting forth 
 the principles that were made the issue in the late contest, 
 and that were overridden and trodden down. He called the 
 attention of the Senate to a proposition introduced by the 
 honorable Senator from Mississippi x to declare that now is 
 the time for action ; that a law ought to be passed at this 
 time protecting property in the Territories. Though it was 
 my opinion then that it would have been well to pass such 
 a law, yet that Senator knew, and so did every other one, 
 that it was impossible in this Congress to pass such a law. 
 We might have passed such a bill through this body, but it 
 could never have passed the other. Then it was our duty, 
 1 Mr. Brown. 
 
220 THE SPEECHES 
 
 as it was our privilege, to set forth the principles on which 
 this Government reposed, and which must be maintained, or 
 the Government cannot exist. They were the principles 
 upon which this great battle was fought, that resulted in 
 the election of Mr. Lincoln." 
 
 Before I take up that proposition in connection 
 with what I said before, I wish to say here that, 
 had the Senator avowed the doctrine prior to the 
 last presidential election that he avowed here in 
 reply to me, expressing his secession and disunion 
 sentiments, I give it as my opinion that he could 
 not have obtained ten thousand votes in the State 
 of Tennessee in the last election, and I think I 
 know what I say. I give that, however, simply 
 as my opinion. 
 
 But to come back to the point at which the Sen- 
 ator speaks of the resolutions introduced by the 
 Senator from Mississippi. 1 I had referred to those 
 resolutions to show that there was no occasion for 
 this immediate secession without giving the people 
 time to think or understand what was to be done. 
 I thought so then, and I think so now ; and I want 
 to show what the Senator's views were then, and 
 see what has brought about such a change upon 
 his mind since. We find that while those resolu- 
 tions were under consideration, Mr. Clingman of- 
 fered an amendment, to come in after the fourth 
 resolution, to insert the following : — 
 
 " Resolved, That the existing condition of the Territories 
 
 1 Mr. Davis. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 221 
 
 of the United States does not require the intervention of 
 Congress for the protection of property in slaves. 
 
 " On the question to agree to the amendment proposed 
 by Mr. Brown, to wit: Strike out of the amendment the 
 word ' not,' 
 
 " It was determined in the negative — yeas five, nays forty- 
 three." 
 
 Now, by striking out the word " not," it makes 
 the resolution read, — 
 
 " Resolved, That the existing condition of the Territories 
 of the United States does require the intervention of Con- 
 gress for the protection of property in slaves." 
 
 Mr. Brown of Mississippi moved to strike out 
 the word " not," thereby making it read that the 
 condition of the Territories does require the pro- 
 tection of Congress for slave property ; and upon 
 the yeas and nays being taken on that motion to 
 strike out the word " not," there were — yeas 
 five, nays forty- three. 
 
 " On motion of Mr. Clingman, 
 
 " The yeas and nays being desired by one fifth of the 
 Senators present, — 
 
 " Those who voted in the affirmative are : Messrs. Brown, 
 Clay, Iverson, Johnson of Arkansas, Yulee. 
 
 " Those who voted in the negative are : Messrs. Benjamin, 
 Bigler, Bingham, Bragg, Bright, Chandler, Chesnut, Clark, 
 Clingman, Collamer, Crittenden, Davis, Dixon, Doolittle, 
 Fitzpatrick, Foot, Green, Gwin, Hale, Hamlin, Hammond, 
 Hemphill, Hunter, Johnson of Tennessee, Kennedy, Lane, 
 Latham, Mallory, Mason, Nicholson, Pearce, Polk, Powell, 
 Pugh, Rice, Sebastian, Slidell, Ten Eyck, Toombs, Trumbull, 
 Wade, Wigfall, Wilson." 
 
 Thus, forty-three Senators recorded their vote 
 
 19* 
 
222 THE SPEECHES 
 
 during the last session of Congress that it was 
 not necessary to pass a law to protect slavery in 
 the Territories. The Senator from Oregon, in 
 connection with other Senators, under the solemn 
 sanction of an oath, declared that it was not neces- 
 sary to pass laws for the protection of slavery in 
 the Territories. What right has South Carolina 
 lost since the last session? What right has any 
 State lost since the last session of Congress? You 
 declared that it was not necessary to pass a law to 
 protect them in the enjoyment of their property in 
 the Territories ; and now, forsooth, in the short 
 space of two or three moons, you turn around and 
 tell the country that States are justified in going 
 out of the Union because Congress will not pass a 
 law to protect them in the enjoyment of their prop- 
 erty in the Territories, when you said it was not 
 necessary ! That is what I call driving the nail in. 
 [Laughter.] I will remark, as I go along, that 
 the eloquent and distinguished Senator who made 
 his valedictory here yesterday, on retiring from the 
 Senate, voted for that identical resolution. This 
 protection was not necessary then. They said it 
 was wholly unnecessary. But since that they have 
 waked up to a sense of its necessity, and resolved 
 to secede if it should not be granted. To this 
 same proposition Mr. Albert G. Brown offered an 
 amendment. Mark you, this is the 25th day of 
 May, 1860 ; and that is not long ago. 
 
 " On motion by Mr. Brown, to amend the resolution by 
 
OF ANDREW JOHx\ T SON. 223 
 
 striking out all after the word ' resolved,' and in lieu thereof, 
 inserting : " 
 
 I wish I had the whole continent here to hear 
 this paragraph : — 
 
 " That experience having already shown that the Constitu- 
 tion and the common law, unaided by statutory enactment, 
 do not afford adequate and sufficient protection to slave prop- 
 erly ; some of the Territories having failed, others having 
 refused to pass such enactments, it has become the duty of 
 Congress to interpose and pass such laws as will afford to slave 
 property in the Territories that protection which is given to 
 other kinds of property." 
 
 That is a pretty clear proposition. Upon thai, 
 Mr. Brown made an argument, showing the num- 
 ber of slaves in the Territories, and the action of 
 the Legislatures, and concluded that if the time 
 ever would arrive, it was then before Congress, 
 and they should pass a law on the subject. What 
 was the vote upon that? How does it stand? 
 We find, after an argument being made by Mr. 
 Brown, showing that the necessity did exist, ac- 
 cording to his argument, the vote upon the prop- 
 osition stood thus: The question being taken by 
 yeas and nays, it was determined in the negative — 
 yeas three, nays forty-two. 
 
 Forty-two Senators voted that you did not need 
 protection ; that slavery was not in danger. 
 
 " The yeas and nays being desired by one fifth of the 
 Senators present, — 
 
 u Those who voted in the affirmative are : Messrs. Brown, 
 Johnson of Arkansas, Mallory." 
 
224 THE SPEECHES 
 
 There were only three. Who said it was not 
 necessary ? Who declared, under the solemn sanc- 
 tion of an oath, that protection was not needed ? 
 
 " Those who voted in the negative, are : Messrs. Benja- 
 min," — 
 
 Ah ! Yes ; Benjamin ! — 
 
 "Bigler, Bragg, Bright, Chesnut, Clark, Clay, Clingraan, 
 Crittenden, Davis, Dixon, Doolittle, Fitzpatrick, Foot, 
 Foster, Green, Grimes, Gwin, Hamlin, Harlan, Hemphill, 
 Hunter," — 
 
 Hunter of Virginia, also ! — 
 " Iverson, Johnson of Tennessee, Lane." 
 
 Ah! [Laughter.] Yes, Lane of Oregon voted 
 on the 25th day of last May, that slavery did not 
 need protection in the Territories. Now he will get 
 up and tell the American people and the Senate that 
 he is for a State seceding, and for breaking up the 
 Government, because they cannot get what he swore 
 they did not need. [Laughter.] That is what I call 
 putting the nail through. [Laughter in the gal- 
 leries.] 
 
 The Presiding Officer. 1 The galleries must 
 preserve order. 
 
 Mr. Johnson continued : — Then, after voting 
 that it was not necessary to have a proposition 
 to protect slavery in the Territories, the original 
 proposition, as amended, was adopted by a vote 
 of thirty-five yeas to two nays ; thus voting all the 
 way through, even to the final action of the Senate, 
 
 * ! Mr. Fitch in the chair. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 225 
 
 that no such protection was necessary. You have 
 not got protection, your rights, your "equality"; 
 and you tell me now by your position that I have 
 done you injustice by defending you against the 
 charge that you were in favor of a dissolution of the 
 Union ! Even if you approved it, it would only 
 show that I was mistaken. I was deceived then ; 
 that was your fault ; if deceived again, the fault 
 will be mine. I assumed, on that occasion, in 
 reference to the act of ratification of the Consti- 
 tution by the State of Virginia, that so far as I 
 was capable of examining it, Virginia had made 
 no reservation, no condition, in her ratification of 
 the Constitution of the United States. I had ex 
 amined the question ; I had looked at all tli6 
 authorities that could be found upon the subject, 
 and I could find no warrant for the assertion ; but 
 still the Senator from Oregon, in his reply to me, 
 spoke with great familiarity of the proceedings of 
 that convention ratifying the Constitution, as 
 though he understood it ; and with great con- 
 fidence said it had made a reservation. I will 
 read what he said : — 
 
 " That gallant old State of Virginia, that glorious Old 
 Dominion, made a condition upon which she adopted the 
 Constitution. It became a portion of the compact. And 
 not only Virginia, but New York, made the same condition 
 when she adopted the Constitution ; and Rhode Island also." 
 
 He spoke with great confidence in this reply to 
 me. He then said : — 
 
226 THE SPEECHES 
 
 " Now, I would ask the honorable Senator from Tennessee, 
 if the time has not arrived when these States ought to resume 
 the powers conferred on a Federal Government ; or if it haa 
 not, I should like to know when the time can come." 
 
 After declaring under the solemn sanction of an 
 oath that no protection was needed, and nothing 
 else has since transpired, he wants to know when 
 the time will come, if it has not come, that they 
 will be justified in breaking up this Confederacy? 
 I saw a good deal of the confusion manifested here 
 that evening ; authorities were hunted up, para- 
 graphs marked, and leaves turned down; all, I 
 suppose, to facilitate the intended attack. Some- 
 times a man had a great deal better read and 
 understand a question for himself before he hazards 
 an opinion. I will not say that that is the case 
 with the honorable Senator, for I should proceed 
 upon the idea that he was laboring under the im- 
 pression that he understood it exactly. It is not a 
 very uncommon occurrence to be mistaken. Some- 
 times the mistake results from a want of exam- 
 ination ; sometimes from an incapacity to under- 
 stand the subject, and various other causes. So 
 it is that it occurs very frequently we labor under 
 false impressions. We find, when we come to 
 examine this subject of the ratification of the Con- 
 stitution by Virginia, that a committee was ap- 
 pointed in the convention of Virginia, and that 
 that committee reported a set of resolutions. They 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 227 
 
 reported one resolution in lieu of the preamble. 
 That resolution is as follows : — 
 
 " Resoloed, That previous to the ratification of the new 
 Constitution of Government recommended by the late Fed- 
 eral Convention, a declaration of rights, asserting and secur- 
 ing from encroachment the great principles of civil and 
 religious liberty, and the inalienable rights of the people, 
 together with amendments to the most exceptionable parts 
 of the said Constitution of Government, ought to be referred 
 by this convention to the other States in the American Con- 
 federacy for their consideration." * 
 
 Here was a proposition making conditions ; and 
 upon a vote to adopt this amendment it was voted 
 down — ayes eighty, noes eighty-eight. Then 
 what follows ? The committee reported an ordi- 
 nance adopting the Constitution of the United 
 States ; but in their ordinance they go on and 
 make a kind of preamble, or a whereas, a decla- 
 ration as to their understanding — not conditions, 
 not reservations — but a declaration of their un- 
 derstanding. What do they say ? 
 
 " We, the delegates of the people of Virginia, duly elected 
 in pursuance of a recommendation from the General As- 
 sembly, and now met in convention, having fully and freely 
 investigated and discussed the proceedings of the Federal 
 Convention, and being prepared as well as the most mature 
 deliberations hath enabled us, to decide thereon," — 
 
 Now, mark you, — 
 
 " do, in the name and in the behalf of the people of Vir- 
 ginia, declare and make known, that the powers granted 
 
 l Elliot's Dtbaies. Vol. III. p. 653. 
 
228 the Speeches 
 
 under the Constitution, being derived from the people of 
 the United States, be resumed by them whensoever the 
 same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression." 1 
 
 They declare, in behalf of Virginia, that the 
 powers of the Constitution are derived from the 
 people of the United States, to " be resumed by 
 them whenever they shall be converted to their 
 injury or oppression." Who is to resume them ? 
 The people of the United States. That idea was 
 always inculcated by James Madison. What more 
 do they say ? This is not the ratifying clause. 
 They say, — 
 
 " With these impressions," — 
 
 Not these conditions, not these reservations, — 
 
 " With these impressions, with a solemn appeal to the 
 Searcher of hearts, for the purity of our intentions, and 
 under the conviction that whatsoever imperfections may 
 exist in the Constitution ought rather to be examined in 
 the mode prescribed therein, than to bring the Union into 
 danger by delay with a hope of obtaining amendments pre- 
 vious to the ratification," 
 
 Now comes the ordinance of adoption ; and 
 what is it ? 
 
 " We, the said delegates, in the name and behalf of the 
 people of Virginia, do, by these presents, assent to and ratify 
 the Constitution, recommended on the 1 7th day of September, 
 1787, by the Federal Convention, for the Government of the 
 United States; hereby announcing to all whom it may concern 
 that the said Constitution is binding upon the said people, 
 according to an authentic copy hereunto annexed in the 
 words following." 2 
 
 l Elliot's Debates, Vol. III. p. 656. 2 Idem. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 229 
 
 Is there any reservation or condition there ? It 
 seems to me that the sight of a man would be 
 tolerably keen that could see a condition there. 
 When was this ? We find that Virginia adopted 
 that on Tuesday, June 26, 1788. When did South 
 Carolina come into the Union ? Before Virginia 
 did. If Virginia made a condition, South Caro- 
 lina was already in. How many States were in ? 
 The covenant was formed and had been ratified 
 by nine States before Virginia came into the Union. 
 The idea of Virginia appending conditions after 
 the Government was formed and the Constitution 
 ratified by nine States ! 
 
 But, to make this thing more clear, Mr. Madison, 
 while in New York, received a letter from Mr. 
 Hamilton, stating that he had some doubts as to 
 the ratification of the Constitution by New York ; 
 that they wanted some conditions, and one condi- 
 tion was, that they might have the privilege to 
 recede within five or seven years in the event cer- 
 tain amendments were not adopted to the Consti- 
 tution. I should have remarked, before passing 
 to this, that they adopted it, not wanting delay, 
 and then went in the same committee to report a 
 long list of amendments to be submitted, and some 
 of them were ratified afterwards by the different 
 States. Mr. Madison writes, in reply to Mr. Ham- 
 ilton, and tells him, if the Constitution is adopted, 
 it must be adopted in toto, without reservation or 
 condition. I am inclined to think Mr. Madison had 
 
 20 
 
230 THE SPEECHES 
 
 some idea of this ordinance. I think he understood 
 it. Here is his letter. That ordinance was adopted 
 in Virginia on June 26, 1787, and, in reply to 
 Mr. Hamilton, in the following July, Mr. Madison 
 said, — 
 
 " The idea of reserving a right to withdraw was started at 
 Richmond, and considered as a conditional ratification, which 
 was itself abandoned as worse than a rejection." 
 
 Does not that show that I have put the correct 
 interpretation upon it ? James Madison under- 
 stood it as being an abandonment. I would as 
 soon rely upon his construction of the ordinance 
 that brought Virginia into the Union as I would 
 on that of the distinguished Senator from Oregon. 
 I am inclined to think he was quite as familiar 
 with the history of that transaction and with the 
 whole subject as the Senator from Oregon, with 
 all his familiarity and astuteness on the subject. 
 So much in answer to that portion of the Sena- 
 tor's argument. We find, upon an examination, 
 as I before remarked, that nine States had ratified 
 the Constitution before Virginia came in. New 
 York, North Carolina, and Rhode Island came in 
 afterwards. Mr. Madison so understood it. The 
 fathers of the Republic so understood it. The 
 country so understand it. Common sense so un- 
 derstands it. Practicability so understands it. 
 Everything that pertains to the preservation and 
 salvation of the Government so understands it, as 
 contradistinguished from the admission of this 
 doctrine of secession. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 231 
 
 But let us progress a little further. The Gov- 
 ernment was formed ; the Constitution was rati- 
 fied ; and after the Constitution was ratified and 
 the Government in existence, there is provision 
 made, for what ? " New States may be admitted 
 by the Congress into this Union." These are 
 the words of the Constitution. Congress has the 
 power to prescribe the terms and conditions of 
 admission of a new State into the Union ; and in 
 the discretion of Congress, they are admitted upon 
 an equal footing with the other States. It being 
 an express grant to admit, I say the Federal Gov- 
 ernment can exercise incidents that are necessary 
 and proper to carry the admission of States into 
 existence upon such a basis as they believe the 
 good of the Government demands. I am not so 
 sure but the admission of a new State is placed 
 upon a different ground from that of one of the 
 original States ratifying the Constitution. As the 
 Senator seems to be so familiar with things of this 
 sort, I will refer to the act admitting the State of 
 Alabama : — 
 
 An act to enable the people of Alabama Territory to form 
 a Constitution and State Government, and for the admission 
 of such State into the Union on an equal footing with the 
 original States. (Approved March 2, 1819.) 
 
 Be it enacted, 8fc, That the inhabitants of the Territory 
 of Alabama be, and they are hereby, authorized to form for 
 themselves a Constitution and State Government, and to as- 
 sume such name as they may think proper ; and that the 
 laid Territory, when formed into a State, shall be admitted 
 
232 THE SPEECHES 
 
 into the Union upon the same footing with the original 
 States, in all respects whatever. 
 
 Here is the ordinance of Alabama accepting the 
 terms of the above act, passed 2d August, 1819 : — 
 
 " This convention, for and in behalf of the people inhab- 
 iting this State, do accept the propositions offered by the 
 act of Congress under which they are assembled; and thig 
 convention, for and in behalf of the people inhabiting this 
 
 State, do ordain, agree, and declare." 
 
 " And this ordinance is hereby declared irrevocable without 
 the consent of the United States." 
 
 This act was declared irrevocable. They agreed 
 to the conditions offered to them in the act of Con- 
 gress with reference to the public lands and other 
 subjects, and then the ordinance of coming into the 
 Union was declared irrevocable without the con- 
 sent of the United States. Congress then passed 
 an act accepting them upon the terms they im- 
 posed. That was the compact. What has been 
 done to Alabama ? What great complaint has she ? 
 Why should she leave the Union in such hot 
 haste ? 
 
 So much for that, sir. In the remarks that I 
 made when I last addressed the Senate, I referred 
 to the Constitution of the State of Tennessee, 
 which was adopted in 1796, and their Bill of Rights, 
 in which they declare that they would never sur- 
 render or give up the navigation of the Missis- 
 sippi to any people. The Senator from Oregon, 
 or that occasion, in reply to me, used the follow- 
 ing language : — 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 233 
 
 " Then he is concerned about the navigation of the Mis- 
 sissippi River. He says that the great State of Tennessee 
 and he, himself, are concerned about the navigation of that 
 river. I believe it is recognized as the law of nations, as the 
 law of all civilized nations, that a great inland sea running 
 through several Governments shall be open equally to all of 
 them ; and besides, as the honorable Senator from Louisiana 
 said, there is no man in Louisiana that would think for a 
 moment of depriving Tennessee of the right of navigating 
 that great river. No, sir, nor Kentucky either, nor Indiana, 
 nor Illinois, nor any other State whose waters flow into that 
 mighty stream. No such thing would ever be done." 
 
 That was the Senator's declaration then, that 
 nobody would question the right of those States 
 to navigate that great inland sea. He seemed to 
 show great familiarity with international law. I 
 took it for granted that he had read Grotius and 
 Wheaton upon international law, and all the other 
 authorities on the subject, for he spoke about it 
 with great familiarity, as if he understood it well. 
 How does the matter stand, sir ? Before the 
 printer's ink that impressed his speech upon the 
 paper is dry, we find an ordinance passed, as I 
 remarked before, by the State of Louisiana, de- 
 claring negatively that she has the right to control 
 the navigation of that river under her act of se- 
 cession. If the Senator had put himself to the 
 trouble, as I presume he did, or ought to have 
 done, to examine this subject, he would have found 
 that the navigation of the Mississippi River has been 
 a subject of negotiation for years upon years. He 
 would have found that the navigation of various 
 20* 
 
234 THE SPEECHES 
 
 rivers throughout the world has been the subject 
 of long, angry, and contested negotiation. While 
 upon this point, I desire to present to the Senate 
 an extract from a leading authority on this sub- 
 ject. I read from Wheaton's " Elements of Inter- 
 national Law " : — 
 
 " The territory of the State includes the lakes, seas, and 
 rivers entirely enclosed within its limits. The. rivers which 
 flow through the territory also form a part of the domain, 
 from their sources to their mouths, or as far as they flow 
 within the territory, including the bays or estuaries formed 
 by their junction with the sea. Where a navigable river 
 forms the boundary of coterminous States, the middle of the 
 channel, or thalweg, is generally taken as the line of separa- 
 tion between the two States, the presumption of law being 
 that the right of navigation is common to both ; but this pre- 
 sumption may be destroyed by actual proof of prior occupancy 
 and long undisturbed possession, giving to one of the riparian 
 proprietors the exclusive title to the entire river. 
 
 " Things of which the use is inexhaustible, such as the sea 
 and running water, cannot be so appropriated as to exclude 
 others from using these elements in any manner which does 
 not occasion a loss or inconvenience to the proprietor. This 
 is what is called an innocent use. Thus we have seen that 
 the jurisdiction possessed by one nation over sounds, straits, 
 and other arms of the sea leading through its own territory 
 to that of another, or to other seas common to all nations, 
 does not exclude others from the right of innocent passage 
 through these communications. The same principle is appli- 
 cable to rivers flowing from one State through the territory 
 of another into the sea, or into the territory of a third State. 
 The right of navigating, for commercial purposes, a river, 
 which flows through the territories of different States, is com- 
 mon to all the nations inhabiting the different parts of its 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 235 
 
 banks ; but this right of innocent passage being what the text 
 writers call an imperfect right, its exercise is necessarily modi- 
 fied by the safety and convenience of the State affected by 
 it, and can only be effectually secured by mutual convention 
 regulating the mode of its exercise. 
 
 " It seems that this right draws after it the incidental right 
 of using all the means which are necessary to the secure en- 
 joyment of the principal right itself. Thus the Roman law, 
 which considered navigable rivers as public or common prop- 
 erty, declared that the right to the use of the shores was 
 incident to that of the water ; and that the right to navigate 
 a river involved the right to moor vessels to its banks, to lade 
 and unlade cargoes, &c. The public jurists apply this prin- 
 ciple of the Roman civil law to the same case between nations, 
 and infer the right to use the adjacent land for these purposes, 
 as means necessary to the attainment of the end for which 
 the free navigation of the water is permitted." * 
 
 Now, what are we told ? That Louisiana, for 
 which we paid $15,000,000, whose battles we 
 fought, whose custom-houses, forts, arsenals, dock- 
 yards, and hospitals we built, — in the exercise of 
 the plenitude of her power, declares that she has 
 control of the Mississippi, and such States may 
 navigate that stream as are on friendly relations 
 with her, she being the judge. Is not this what 
 the docmia of secession leads us to ? We see where 
 it carries us ; we see in what it will end — litiga- 
 tion, war, and bloodshed. As I remarked before, 
 as we approach and advance in the investigation 
 of the subject, we discover its enormities more and 
 
 1 Wheaton's Elements of International Law, Part II. chap. 4, pp. 
 252-254. 
 
236 THE SPEECHES 
 
 more. I repeat, it is the prolific mother of anarchy, 
 which is the next step to despotism itself. The 
 Senator from Oregon seems not to be apprehensive 
 at all ; and yet, before his voice has done reverber- 
 ating in the Hall, we have the open declaration 
 that they intend to exercise the control of the 
 navigation of the Mississippi. Would it not have 
 been better for Louisiana 
 
 Mr. Lane. I think the Senator ought to allow 
 me to say a word. 
 
 Mr. Johnson. I do not want to be interrupted. 
 I certainly mean no discourtesy at all to the Sen- 
 ator. 
 
 Mr. Lane. I only wish to say, in the way of 
 explanation, that the people of New Orleans have 
 had police regulations by which they have collected 
 taxes to improve their wharves ever since New 
 Orleans belonged to this country. 
 
 Mr. Johnson. It is a very common thing in 
 all cities where there are wharves, either on the 
 river or ocean, to have what is commonly called a 
 wharfage tax. We understand that. The navio;a- 
 tion of the high seas and rivers is a different thing 
 from paying wharfage and a little tax to defray the 
 expense of keeping wharves and docks up. We 
 understand all about that. That is a very different 
 affair from placing batteries at this early day upon 
 the banks of that great stream. 
 
 Mr. Lane. That was against the common enemy. 
 
 Mr. Johnson. I did not know we had any ene- 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 237 
 
 mles in these States. I thought we were brothers, 
 and were entitled to carry on free trade from one 
 extremity of this Confederacy to the other. I did 
 not know that the people of Indiana and Illinois 
 and Kentucky and Tennessee, going along down 
 that river, had got to be enemies. I suppose, how- 
 ever, when we look at these things our minds change 
 and vary by varying circumstances. When we are 
 candidates for the Presidency, we feel more like 
 brothers ; but when we have made the experiment, 
 and signally failed, I suppose the enemy's line be- 
 gins just at the line where our defeat was consum- 
 mated. [Laughter and applause in the galleries.] 
 
 The Presiding Officer called to order. 
 
 •Mr. Johnson continued: — How long has it 
 been since we were prepared to go to war with the 
 most formidable Power upon earth because she 
 claimed the right of search ? We would not con- 
 cede to Great Britain the right of searching our 
 ships on the high seas ; and yet what do we now 
 see ? Batteries placed upon the banks of the Mis- 
 sissippi to enforce the right of search. Do we not 
 see where it will lead? Do we not all know in 
 what it will end ? 
 
 I have no disposition to do the Senator from 
 Oregon, or any other Senator, injustice. In this 
 connection, I will say, as I have intimated before, 
 that I thought his attack upon me unkind and 
 uncalled for. Let that be as it may, it is not my 
 disposition or my intention, on this occasion, to do 
 
238 THE SPEECHES 
 
 him injustice. I intend to do him full justice. In 
 the reply that he made to me — to which I yes- 
 terday referred — he gave the contradiction di~ 
 rect to what I stated in the presidential canvass, 
 in answer to the charge that had heen made that 
 you, Mr. President, and the Senator from Oregon, 
 were disunionists, were in favor of secession ; and 
 that you were used by what was called the seced- 
 ing or disunion party for the purpose of disrupting 
 and breaking up the Government. I met those 
 charges — because I believed they were untrue, 
 that they were not founded in fact — in various 
 places, before large assemblies, and, I thought, suc- 
 cessfully, at least to my own mind, exonerated you 
 and the candidate for the Vice-Presidency from the 
 charge. I confess it was somewhat mortifying to 
 me, after the reply which the Senator made, to 
 have to say to the people, and the country generally, 
 that I vindicated him against a charge which was 
 true ; for, when we take up his speech here in 
 reply to the remarks that I made on that occasion, 
 none of which had the slightest reference to him, 
 involving neither his position before the country, 
 nor his consistency as a legislator, we find that 
 he took bold ground, advocating and justifying se- 
 cession, arguing, in fact, that it was constitutional. 
 I felt, after that speech, that I was involved in 
 inconsistency before my people, an inconsistency in 
 which I ought not to have been involved. 
 
 But in the same speech in which the honorable 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 239 
 
 Senator involved me in these contradictions, he goes 
 on to state, — and I will do him justice by reading 
 his speech, for I do not want to misquote him, — 
 
 " But, sir, understand me; I am not a disunionist. I am 
 for the right, and I would have it in the Union ; and if it 
 cannot be obtained there, I would go out of the Union, and 
 have that out of the Union that I could not obtain in it, though 
 I was entitled to it." 
 
 Mr. President, I have called the attention of the 
 Senate to the paragraph of the Senator's speech 
 which I have just read, in which he disavows dis- 
 union sentiments ; but when you take the preceding 
 part of his speech, you find that he advocates the 
 doctrine of disunion and secession almost from the 
 beginning up to the sentence that I have read. 
 It seems to me it is paradoxical ; but that may 
 be my misfortune, not his. He may be capable of 
 reconciling the conflict, the seeming inconsistency 
 of first advocating the doctrine of dissolution, seces- 
 sion, and disunion, and then at the same time ex- 
 claiming that he is no disunionist. I do not know 
 how a Senator can be for the Union, and at the 
 same time concede the right that a State has the 
 authority to secede under the Constitution ; that it 
 is justified in seceding, and ought to secede ; that 
 when it demands rights in the Union that it can- 
 not get, it should go out of the Union to obtain 
 that which could not be obtained in it. But let all 
 that pass. I wish to do him no injustice ; therefore 
 
240 THE SPEECHES 
 
 I desired to call attention to his disclaimer of being 
 a disunionist and a secessionist. 
 
 Mr. President, the Senator, in the sentence I have 
 quoted, assumes that Soutli Carolina, for instance, 
 had the right to secede ; and he says also that Soutli 
 Carolina can obtain that out of the Union which she 
 has failed to obtain in it. Let us raise the inquiry 
 here : What is it, since she entered into this Con- 
 federacy of States, that South Carolina has desired 
 or asked at the hands of the Federal Government, 
 or demanded upon constitutional ground, that she 
 has not obtained ? What great wrong, what great 
 injury has been inflicted upon South Carolina by 
 her continuance in this Union of States ? I know 
 it is very easy, and even Senators have fallen into 
 the habit of it, -to repeat some phrases almost as a 
 chorus to a song, such as, " If we cannot get our 
 rights in the Union, we will go out of the Union 
 and obtain those rights ; that we are for the equality 
 of the States in the Union, and if we cannot get it 
 we will go out of the Union," I suppose to bring 
 about that equality. What is the point of contro- 
 versy in the public mind at this time ? Let us look 
 at the question as it is. We know that the issue 
 which has been before the country to a very great 
 extent, and which, in fact, has recently occupied the 
 consideration of the public, is the territorial ques- 
 tion. It is said that South Carolina has been re- 
 fused her rights in the Union, with reference to that 
 territorial question, and therefore she is going out 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 241 
 
 of the Union to obtain that which she cannot get 
 in it. 
 
 Now, Mr. President, when we come to examine 
 this subject, how does the matter stand ? I showed 
 yesterday, in reference to the protection of slave 
 property in the Territories of this Confederacy, that 
 South Carolina, in connection with the distinguished 
 Senator from Oregon, had voted expressly that no 
 slavery code was needed ; that no further protec- 
 tion was needed, so far as Congress was concerned. 
 They decided it here in this body. South Carolina, 
 by her own vote, on the 25th day of May last, de- 
 cided that she needed no further protection in the 
 Territories of the United States, so far as Congress 
 was concerned. The Senator from Oregon voted 
 with her. That vote seemed to be connected with 
 and predicated upon the great fact that the Supreme 
 Court of the United States had decided this ques- 
 tion ; that they had declared the Missouri Com- 
 promise — in other words, the law excluding slavery 
 north of 36° 30', and making it permissive south of 
 36° 30' — unconstitutional and void ; and, accord- 
 ing to our forms of Government, it was in fact 
 stricken from the statute-book by the decision of 
 the court. They thereby said to the country, the 
 supreme arbiter of the land, so made by the Consti- 
 tution of the United States, has decided that the 
 people have a right, without regard to the charactei 
 or description of their property, to carry it into all 
 the Territories of the United States, and that under 
 21 
 
242 THE .SPEECHES 
 
 the Constitution of the United States it is protected 
 there. It was said, the court having decided that 
 they had a right to go there with this institution of 
 slavery, and the Constitution finding it there, it was 
 recognized and protected by the Constitution of the 
 United States. 
 
 In this connection, permit me to go outside of the 
 Senate Chamber, and state what occurred in my 
 own State. There, those who were the best friends 
 of the distinguished Senator from Oregon, and who 
 are ultra upon this subject, before thousands of the 
 people of that State took the bold ground that they 
 wanted no further protection from Congress ; that 
 the Constitution of the United States and the opin- 
 ion of the Supreme Court were all the slavery code, 
 they desired ; that the question was settled ; that the 
 power was complete ; and that protection was ample. 
 
 In this connection, sir, we must recollect the de- 
 cision made by the Senate upon the resolutions intro- 
 duced by the Senator from Mississippi 1 on the 25th 
 day of May last. On that day, under the solemn 
 sanction of an oath, and all the formalities of legis- 
 lation spread upon the journals, the yeas and nays 
 being taken, we declared, after an argument on 
 the subject, that no further protection was needed 
 at that time. The Senate went on and stated, in 
 the fifth resolution — I give the substance, I do 
 not pretend to repeat the words — that if here- 
 after it should become necessary to have protection 
 
 1 Mr. Davis. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 243 
 
 of this kind, then Congress should give it ; but 
 they said it was unnecessary at that time. If South 
 Carolina and the Senator from Oregon took this 
 position then, what has transpired since that period 
 of time that now justifies a State in withdrawing 
 or seceding from this Union, on account of Congress 
 not doing that which they declared was not neces- 
 sary to be done ? 
 
 But let us take the fact as it is. South Carolina, 
 it is said, wanted protection in the Territories. I 
 have shown that she said, herself, that further pro- 
 tection was not needed ; but if it should be needed, 
 then Congress should give it. But South Carolina, 
 — the Kingdom of South Carolina, — in the plen- 
 titude of her power, and upon her own volition, 
 without consultation with the other States of this 
 Confederacy, has gone out of the Union, or assumed 
 to go out. The next inquiry is : What does South 
 Carolina now get, in the language of the distin- 
 guished Senator from Oregon, out of the Union that 
 she did not get in the Union ? Is there a man in 
 South Carolina to-day that wants to carry a single 
 slave into any Territory we have got in the United 
 States that is now unoccupied by slave property ? 
 I am almost ready to hazard the assertion that 
 there is not one. If he had not the power and the 
 right to carry his slave property into a Territory 
 while in the Union, has he obtained that right now 
 by going out of the Union ? Has anything been 
 obtained by violating the Constitution of the United 
 
244 THE SPEECHES 
 
 States, by withdrawing from the sisterhood of States, 
 that could not have been obtained in it ? Can South 
 Carolina now any more conveniently and practi- 
 cally carry slavery into the Territories than she 
 could before she went out of the Union ? Then 
 what has she obtained ? What has she got, even 
 upon the doctrine laid down by the distinguished 
 Senator from Oregon ? 
 
 But it is argued, striding over the Constitution 
 and violating that comity and faith which should 
 exist amongst the States composing this Confed- 
 eracy, that she had a right to secede ; she had a 
 right to carry slaves into the Territories ; and there- 
 fore she will secede and go out of the Union. This 
 reasoning on the part of South Carolina is about as 
 sound as that of the madman, who assumed that he 
 had dominion over the beasts of the forest, and 
 therefore that he had a rio-lit to shear a wolf. His 
 friends remonstrated with him, and, admitting his 
 right to do so, inquired of him if he had considered 
 the danger and the difficulty of the attempt. " No," 
 said the madman, " I have not considered that ; 
 that is no part of my consideration ; man has the 
 dominion over the beasts of the forest, and there- 
 fore he has a right to shear a wolf ; and as I have 
 a right to do, so I will exercise it." His friends still 
 remonstrated and expostulated, and asked him, not 
 only, " Have you considered the danger, the diffi- 
 culty, and the consequences resulting from such an 
 attempt ; but, what will the shearing be worth ?" 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 245 
 
 " But," he replied, " I have the right, and there- 
 fore I will shear a wolf." South Carolina has the 
 rijrht, according to the doctrine of the seceders and 
 disunionists of this country, to go out of the Union, 
 and therefore she will go out of the Union. 
 
 And what, Mr. President, has South Carolina 
 gained by going out ? It has been just about as 
 profitable an operation as the shearing of the wolf 
 by the madman. Can she now carry slaves into the 
 Territories ? Does she even get any division of the 
 Territories ? None ; she has lost all that. Does 
 she establish a right ? No ; but by the exercise of 
 this abstract right, as contended for by secessionists, 
 what has she got? Oppression, taxation, a reign 
 of terror over her people, as the result of their 
 rashness in the exercise of this assumed right. In 
 what condition is her people now ? They have gone 
 out of the Union to obtain their rights, to main- 
 tain their liberty, to get that out of the Union 
 which they could not get in it ! While they were 
 in the Union, they were not taxed a million and 
 some six or seven or eight hundred thousand dollars, 
 in addition to their usual expenditures, to sustain 
 standing armies and to meet other expenditures 
 which are incurred by separation. But still she 
 has the right to tax her people ; she has the right 
 to institute a reign of terror ; she has the right 
 to exclude her people from the ballot-box ; and 
 she has exercised the right, and these are the con- 
 sequences. She has got her rights ! She has gone 
 
 21* 
 
246 THE SPEECHES 
 
 out of the Union to be relieved from taxes, and 
 has increased the burdens upon her people four- 
 fold. All this is in the exercise of her right ! 
 
 Mr. President, when we examine this subject, 
 and follow it step by step, to see what is gained by 
 this movement, human reason deplores the folly 
 which it exhibits. The public mind seems to have 
 been inflamed to madness, and in its delirium it 
 overbears all restraint. To some it appears that 
 our admirable system of civil liberty is crumbling 
 to pieces ; that the temple of Liberty is upheaved ; 
 that its columns are falling, and that nothing will 
 remain but a general ruin ; and in their consterna- 
 tion too many stand back appalled, and take no 
 position for the relief of their country in the pend- 
 ing crisis. But, sir, the relation that we bear to the 
 people of the United States requires every man, 
 whether Senator or Representative, or even private 
 citizen, to come forward as a patriot and lover of his 
 country, and look at the condition of the country as 
 it is. Without regard to the consequences upon 
 myself, I have determined to meet this question, 
 and to present my views to the country in such form 
 as I believe to be right and proper. 
 
 Sir, let us look at the contest through which we 
 are passing, and consider what South Carolina, 
 and the other States who have undertaken to secede 
 from the Confederacy, have gained. What is the 
 great difficulty which has existed in the public mind? 
 We know that, practically, the territorial question 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 247 
 
 is settled. Then what is the cause for breaking up 
 this great Union of States ? Has the Union or the 
 Constitution encroached upon the rights of South 
 Carolina or any other State? Has this glorious 
 Union, that was inaugurated by the adoption of the 
 Constitution, which was framed by the patriots and 
 sages of the Revolution, harmed South Carolina or 
 any other State ? No ; it has offended none ; it has 
 protected all. What, is the difficulty? We have 
 some bad men in the South, — the truth I will 
 speak, — and we have some bad men in the North, 
 who want to dissolve this Union in order to gratify 
 their unhallowed ambition. And what do we find 
 here upon this floor and, upon the floor of the other 
 House of Congress ? Words of crimination and re- 
 crimination are heard. Bad men North say provok- 
 ing things in reference to the institutions of the 
 South, and bad men and bad-tempered men of the 
 South say provoking and insulting things in return ; 
 and so goes on a war of crimination and recrimina- 
 tion in reference to the two sections of the country, 
 and the institutions peculiar to each. They become 
 enraged and insulted, and then they are denunci- 
 atory of each other ; and what is the result ? The 
 Abolitionists, and those who entertain their senti- 
 ments, abuse men of the South, and men of the 
 South abuse them in return. They do not fight 
 each other ; but they both become offended and en- 
 raged. One is dissatisfied with the other; one is 
 insulted by the other ; and then, to seek revenge, 
 
248 THE SPEECHES 
 
 to gratify themselves, they both agree to make war 
 upon the Union that never offended or injured 
 either. Is this right ? What has this Union done ? 
 Why should these contending parties make war 
 upon it because they have insulted and aggrieved 
 each other ? This glorious Union, that was spoken 
 into existence by the fathers of the country, must be 
 made war upon to gratify these animosities. Shall 
 we, because we have said bitter things of each other 
 which have been offensive, turn upon the Govern- 
 ment, and seek its destruction, and entail all the 
 disastrous consequences upon commerce, upon agri- 
 culture, upon the industrial pursuits of the country, 
 that must result from the breaking up of a great 
 Government like this ? What is to be gained out 
 of the Union that we cannot get in it? Any- 
 thing ? I have been zealously contending for — 
 and intend to continue to contend for — every right, 
 even to the ninth part of a hair, that I feel the 
 State which I have the honor in part to represent is 
 entitled to. I do not intend to demand anything 
 but that which is right ; and I will remark, in this 
 connection, that there is a spirit in the country 
 which, if it does not exist to a very great extent in 
 this Hall, does exist in the great mass of the people 
 North and South, to do what is right ; and if the 
 question could be taken away from politicians ; if 
 it could be taken away from the Congress of the 
 United States, and referred to the great mass of the 
 intelligent voting population of the United States, 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 249 
 
 they would settle it without the slightest difficulty, 
 and bid defiance to secessionists and disunionists. 
 [Applause in the galleries.] 
 
 The Vice-Phesident. There must be many 
 persons in the galleries who have been warned again 
 and again that order must be maintained. I hope 
 not to have occasion to refer to the subject again. 
 
 Mr. Johnson. Mr. President, I have an abiding 
 confidence in the people ; and if it were so arranged 
 to-day that the great mass of the American people 
 could be assembled in an amphitheatre capacious 
 enough to contain them all, and the propositions 
 which have been presented here to preserve this 
 Union, could be reduced to a tangible shape, and 
 submitted to them, politicians being left out of view, 
 the question being submitted to the great mass of 
 the people, it being their interest to do right, they 
 being lovers of their country, having to pay all, 
 having to produce all, having to provide all, there 
 would be but one single response, " Do that which 
 will give satisfaction, ample and complete, to the 
 various and conflicting sections of this glorious Re- 
 public." 
 
 But, sir, how are we situated ? There are poli- 
 ticians here, and throughout the land, some of whom 
 want to break up the Union, to promote their own 
 personal aggrandizement ; some, on the other hand, 
 desire the Union destroyed that slavery may be ex- 
 tinguished. Then let me appeal to every patriot in 
 the land, in view of this state of things, to come for- 
 
2<~0 THE SPEECHES 
 
 ward and take the Government out of the hands of 
 the Goths and Vandals, wrest it from the Philistines, 
 save the country, and hand it down to our children 
 as it has been handed down to us. 
 
 I have already asked what is to be gained by the 
 breaking up of this Confederacy. An appeal is 
 made to the border slaveholding States to unite in 
 what is commonly styled the Gulf Confederacy. If 
 there is to be a division of this Republic, I would 
 rather see the line run anywhere than between the 
 slaveholding and the non-slaveholding States, and 
 the division made on account of a hostility, on the 
 one hand, to the institution of slavery, and a prefer- 
 ence for it, on the other; for whenever that line is 
 drawn, it is the line of civil war ; it is the line at 
 which the overthrow of slavery begins ; the line from 
 which it commences to recede. Let me ask the 
 border States, if that state of things should occur, 
 who is to protect them in the enjoyment of their 
 slave property? Will South Carolina, that has 
 gone madly out, protect them? Will Mississippi 
 and Alabama and Louisiana, still further down to- 
 wards the Gulf? Will they come to our rescue, and 
 protect us ? Shall we partake of their frenzy, 
 adopt the mistaken policy into which they have 
 fallen, and begin the work of the destruction of the 
 institution in which we are equally interested with 
 them ? I have already said that I believe the disso- 
 lution of this Union will be the commencement of 
 the overthrow and destruction of the institution of 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 251 
 
 slavery. In a Northern confederacy, or in a South- 
 ern confederacy, or in a Middle confederacy, the 
 border slaveholding States will have to take care 
 of that particular species of property by their own 
 strength, and by whatever influence they may exert 
 in the organization in which they may be placed. 
 The Gulf States cannot, they will not, protect 
 us. We shall have to protect ourselves, and per- 
 chance to protect them. As I remarked yester- 
 day, my own opinion is, that the great desire to 
 embrace the border States, as they are called, in 
 this particular and exclusive Southern confederacy, 
 which it is proposed to get up, is not that they 
 want us there out of pure good-will, but they want 
 us there as a matter of interest ; so that if they 
 are involved in war, in making acquisitions of ter- 
 ritory still further south, or war growing out of 
 any other cause, they may have a corps de reserve, 
 they may have a power behind, that can furnish 
 them men and money, — men that have the hearts 
 and the souls to fight and meet an enemy, come from 
 what quarter he may. 
 
 What have we to gain by that? The fact that 
 two taken from four leaves but two remaining, is 
 not clearer to my mind than it is that the dissolution 
 of the Union is the beginning of the destruction of 
 slavery ; and that if a division be accomplished, as 
 some desire, directly between the slaveholding and 
 the non-slaveholding States, the work will be com- 
 menced most effectually. Upon this point I pro- 
 
252 THE SPEECHES 
 
 pose to read a short extract from South Carolina 
 herself. Mr. Boyce, late a member of the other 
 House, a distinguished man, a man of talent, and I 
 believe a good man, and who, I have no doubt, in 
 his heart this day regrets most deeply and sincerely 
 the course which South Carolina has taken, said, in 
 1851, when the same issue was presented, - 
 
 " Secession, separate nationality, with all its burdens, is no 
 remedy. It is no redress for the past ; it is no security for the 
 future. It is only a magnificent sacrifice to the present, with- 
 out in any wise gaining in the future." 
 
 " For the various reasons I have stated, I object in as strong 
 terms as I can, to the secession of South Carolina. Such is 
 the intensity of my conviction on this subject, that if secession 
 should take place — of which I have no idea, for I cannot 
 believe in the existence of such a stupendous madness — I 
 shall consider the institution of slavery as doomed, and that 
 the great God, in our blindness, has made us the instruments 
 of its destruction." 
 
 He said then, that if South Carolina, in her mad- 
 ness, (but he did not believe she could,) should de- 
 termine upon secession, he would look upon it that 
 the great God had doomed the institution of slavery. 
 This is the opinion of one of the most distinguished 
 and, I conscientiously believe, best men of South 
 Carolina. 
 
 But, sir, I pass on from the paragraph of the 
 speech of the honorable Senator from Oregon to 
 which I have referred ; and as there seems to have 
 been a sort of arrangement — at least it appears so 
 to my mind — to make and keep up an attack on 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 253 
 
 me, because I agreed with Mr. Boyce of South 
 Carolina in this respect ; because I agreed with 
 many distinguished men ; and because I advanced 
 the doctrines of the fathers who formed the Re- 
 public, I shall take up these Senators in the order 
 in which I was attacked. Without being ego- 
 tistical, without being vain, when I feel that I 
 have got truth on my side, when I feel that I am 
 standing on principle, when I know that I have got 
 facts and arguments that cannot be answered, I 
 never inquire as to the difference of ability or ex- 
 perience between myself and those with whom I 
 have to contend. 
 
 REPLY TO MR. DAVIS. 
 
 The next Senator in order that made an at- 
 tack upon me on account of my previous speech 
 was the distinguished Senator from Mississippi, 1 who 
 took occasion to do so in making his valedictory 
 address to the Senate after his State had passed 
 her ordinance of secession. It has been the case 
 not only with that Senator, but with others, that 
 an attempt has been made by innuendo, by indirec- 
 tion, by some side remark, to convey the impres- 
 sion that a certain man has a tendency or bear- 
 ing towards Black Republicanism or Abolitionism. 
 Sometimes gentlemen who cannot establish such a 
 charge, are yet willing to make it, not directly, but 
 
 1 Mr. Davis. 
 
 22 
 
254 THE SPEECHES 
 
 by innuendo, to create a false impression on the 
 public mind, — 
 
 " Willing (o wound, but yet afraid to strike." 
 
 If the charge can be successfully made, why not 
 make it directly, instead of conveying it by in- 
 nuendo? The Senator from Mississippi did not at- 
 tempt to reply to my speech, did not answer my 
 arguments, did not meet my authorities, did not 
 controvert my facts ; but after reaching a certain 
 point in his own argument, he disposes of all that I 
 had said in these very few words, — 
 
 " I am here confronted with a question which I will not 
 argue. The position which I have taken necessarily brings 
 me to its consideration. Without arguing it, I will merely 
 mention it. It is the right of a State to withdraw from the 
 Union. The President says it is not a constitutional right. 
 The Senator from Ohio, 1 and his a%, the Senator from Ten- 
 nessee, argued it as no right at all." 
 
 Is that the way for a Senator, a distinguished 
 Senator, an Ajax of his peculiar sect, — for when 
 we come to examine this doctrine of secession, 
 it is only broad enough to found a sect upon ; it 
 is not comprehensive enough, it has not scope 
 enough, on which to found a great national party, — 
 to notice the arguments of others ? The Senator 
 from Mississippi would not argue the right of seces- 
 sion. I say, that if any government be organized 
 hereafter, in which this principle of secession is 
 recognized, it will result in its destruction and 
 i Mr. Wade. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 255 
 
 overthrow. But the Senator says that the Sen- 
 ator from Ohio, 1 and " his ally from Tennessee," 
 regard secession as no right at all ; and by 
 that statement the whole argument is answered. 
 What is the idea here ? Let us talk plainly, 
 though courteously and respectfully. What was 
 the idea which this remark was calculated, if not 
 intended, to convey ? I am free to say, that I 
 think it was intended, as well as calculated, to 
 convey the impression that the Senator from Ten- 
 nessee was an ally of Mr. Wade of Ohio, who 
 was a Republican ; and the whole speech of the 
 Senator from Tennessee, the authorities, the facts, 
 and the arguments, are all upturned by that single 
 allusion. Thank God, there is too much good 
 sense and intelligence in this country, to put down 
 any man by an innuendo or side remark like that. 
 But, sir, so far as the people whom I have the 
 honor in part to represent are concerned, I stand 
 above innuendoes of that kind. They have known 
 me from my boyhood up. They understand my 
 doctrines and my principles, in private and in 
 public life. They have tried me in every position 
 in which it was in their power to place a public ser- 
 vant, and they, to-day, will not say that Andrew 
 Johnson ever deceived or betrayed them. In a 
 public life of twenty-five years, they have never 
 deserted or betrayed me ; and, God willing, I will 
 never desert or betray them. The great mass of 
 i Mr. Wade. 
 
256 THE SPEECHES 
 
 the people of Tennessee know that I am for them ; 
 they know that I have advocated those great prin- 
 ciples and doctrines upon which the perpetuity of 
 this Government depends ; they know that I have 
 perilled my all, pecuniarily and physically, in vin- 
 dication of their rights and their interests. Little 
 innuendoes, thrown off in snarling moods, fall 
 harmless at my feet. 
 
 It was said that I was the ally of the Senator 
 from Ohio. I turn to the doings of the committee 
 of thirteen to show who were allies there. I do 
 not inquire what a man's antecedents have been 
 when there is a great struggle to preserve the ex 
 istence of the Government ; but my first inquiry 
 is, are you for preserving this Government? are 
 you for maintaining the Constitution upon which 
 it rests ? If Senator Wade, or Senator anybody 
 else, is willing to come up to this great work, 
 either by amending the Constitution of the United 
 States, or passing laws that w T ill preserve and per- 
 petuate this great Union, I am his ally and he is 
 mine ; and I say to every Senator, to every mem- 
 ber of the House of Representatives, to every 
 man that loves his country throughout the length 
 and breadth of this great Confederacy, if you are 
 for preserving this Union on its great and funda- 
 mental principles, I am your ally, without refer- 
 ence to your antecedents, or to what may take 
 place hereafter. I say to all such men, come for- 
 ward, and, like gallant knights, let us lock our 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 257 
 
 shields and make common cause for this slorious 
 people. If I were to indulge in a similar kind of 
 innuendo, by way of repartee, where would the 
 Senator from Mississippi find himself? In the 
 committee of thirteen, a resolution was introduced 
 by the distinguished Senator from New York * 
 — who, I must say, since this question has sprung 
 up, has given every indication of a desire for recon- 
 ciliation and for compromise, and of a disposition 
 to preserve the Government, that a man occupy- 
 ing his position could do — to this effect : — 
 
 " Resolved, That the following article be, and the same is 
 hereby, proposed and submitted as an amendment to the Con- 
 stitution of the United States, to be valid, to all intents and 
 purposes, as a part of said Constitution, when ratified by the 
 Legislatures of three fourths of the States : 
 
 " 1. No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which 
 will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish, or 
 interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions 
 thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by 
 the laws of said State." 
 
 That was a proposition which was calculated, 
 to a very great extent, to allay the apprehensions 
 and the fears that have been entertained in the 
 South in reference to the institution of slavery. 
 Why do I say so? We know what the argument 
 has been before the Southern mind. It has been : 
 first, that the Northern anti-slavery party wanted 
 to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia, as 
 an entering wedge ; next, to exclude it from the 
 
 1 Mr. Seward. 
 
258 THE SPEECHES 
 
 Territories, following up the attack upon slavery ; 
 but these points were looked upon as of minor 
 importance ; they were looked upon as outposts, 
 as the prelude to an interference with the institu- 
 tion within the States, which has been supposed 
 to be the great end and the great consideration. 
 Do you not know this to be the argument : that 
 they were merely taking these positions as enter- 
 ing wedges to an interference with the institution 
 of slavery in the States ? Such is the real ques- 
 tion, and such it will remain, the Territorial ques- 
 tion being substantially settled. What does Mr. 
 Seward, who has acquired so much notoriety by 
 his " irrepressible conflict," say ? He comes here 
 and proposes an amendment to the Constitution, 
 which puts an estoppel upon his " irrepressible 
 conflict " doctrine. He is willing to make it per- 
 petual, so that the institution cannot be interfered 
 with in the States by any future amendment of 
 the Constitution. That is Mr. Seward's measure. 
 Upon the adoption of that resolution, I believe 
 every member of the committee voted for it, save 
 two. The Senator from Mississippi 1 voted for it ; 
 Mr. Seward voted for it; and Mr. Wade of 
 Ohio voted for it. Whose ally is he? Here we 
 find Wade and Seward and Davis, and the whole 
 committee, with the exception of two, in favor of 
 amending the Constitution so that the institution 
 of slavery cannot be interfered with in the States, 
 1 Mr. Davis. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 259 
 
 making that provision irrepealable by any number 
 of States that may come into the Confederacy. 
 Who were " allies " then ? 
 
 But, Mr. President, recurring to what I said 
 yesterday, there are two parties in this country 
 that want to break up the Government. Who 
 are they ? The nullifiers proper of the South, the 
 secessionists, or clisunionists — for I use them all 
 as synonymous terms. There is a portion of them 
 who, per se, desire the disruption of the Govern- 
 ment for purposes of their own aggrandizement. 
 I do not charge upon them that they want to 
 break up the Government for the purpose of affect- 
 ing slavery ; yet I charge that the breaking up of 
 the Government would have that effect ; the result 
 would be the same. Who else is for breaking up 
 this Government? I refer to some bad men in 
 the North. There is a set of men there who are 
 called Abolitionists, and they want to break up 
 the Government. They are disunionists ; they are 
 secessionists ; they are nullifiers. Sir, the Abo- 
 litionists and the distinguished Senator from Mis- 
 sissippi and his party both stand in the same atti- 
 tude, to attain the same end, a dissolution of this 
 Union ; the one party believing that it will result 
 in their own aggrandizement South, and the other 
 believing that it will result in the overthrow of the 
 institution of slavery. Who are the disunionists 
 of the North ? Who are the " allies " of the dis- 
 tinguished Senator from Mississippi? We find 
 
260 THE SPEECHES 
 
 that a resolution was adopted at the anniversary 
 of the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society, con- 
 vened in Boston, in these words : — 
 
 " Resolved, That the one great issue before the country is 
 the dissolution of the Union, in comparison with which all 
 other issues with the slave power are as dust in the balance ; 
 therefore we give ourselves to the work of annulling this 
 covenant with death, as essential to our own innocency, and 
 the speedy and everlasting overthrow of the slave system." 
 
 This resolution was passed by the Abolition 
 anti-slavery society of Massachusetts. They think 
 a dissolution of the Union would result in the de- 
 struction of slavery, and absolve them from this 
 " covenant with death," and attest their innocency, 
 as far as the Government is concerned. On that, 
 we find that Mr. Wendell Phillips made the follow- 
 ing remarks : — 
 
 " I entirely accord with the sentiments of that last resolu- 
 tion. I think all we have to do is to prepare the public mind by 
 the daily and hourly presentation of the doctrine of disunion. 
 Events which, fortunately for us, the Government itself, and 
 other parties, are producing with unexampled rapidity, are our 
 best aid." 
 
 Again : in reply to a remark made by Mr. Gid- 
 dings, respecting the dissolution of the Union, the 
 " Boston Liberator " says : — 
 
 " Mr. Giddings says truly, that the dissolution of the Union 
 has long been held up as a scarecrow by the South ; but 
 when he adds that the friends of liberty never demanded it, 
 his statement is untrue, unless he means to confine it to his 
 political associates, who are but compromisers at last. We 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 261 
 
 demand nothing short of a dissolution, absolute and immediate. 
 The Union which was founded by our fathers was cemented by 
 the blood of the slave, and effected through his immolation." 
 
 And still further: William Lloyd Garrison, at 
 a Fourth of July celebration, at Framingham, 
 Massachusetts, declared : — 
 
 " Let us then to-day, rejecting as wild and chimerical all 
 suggestions, propositions, and contrivances for restraining 
 slavery in its present limits, while extending constitutional 
 protection to it in fifteen of the States, register our pledge 
 anew before Heaven and the world, that we will do what in 
 us lies to effect the eternal overthrow of this blood-stained 
 Union ; that thus our enslaved countrymen may find a sure 
 deliverance, and we may no longer be answerable for their 
 blood." 
 
 The Union is to be overthrown by way of get- 
 ting clear of the " great sin of slavery." Mr. 
 J. B. Swasey, on the same occasion, said : — 
 
 " In the olden times I was what was called an anti-slavery 
 Whig ; but, Mr. President, it has come to my mind, like a con- 
 viction, that it is utterly in vain to hope that we can live under 
 such a Government as this, with our professions, and with our 
 pretended love of freedom and right. Why, the thing is im- 
 possible. There cannot, in the nature of things, be any union 
 between the principles of liberty and slavery. There never 
 has been any union, except by the subjugation of the principles 
 of liberty to those of despotism. For one, sir, I believe that 
 the duty of every true man is to take the ground of secession." 
 
 Again : Wendell Phillips, in a speech at Boston 
 on the 20th of January, argued that disunion was 
 desirable, because it would abolish slavery. He 
 
262 THE SPEECHES 
 
 also argued that the North would sain by dis- 
 union, and used the following language : — 
 
 " Sacrifice everything for the Union ? God forbid ! Sac- 
 rifice everything to keep South Carolina in it ? Rather build 
 a bridge of gold, and pay her toll over it. Let her march off 
 with banners and trumpets, and we will speed the parting 
 guests. Let her not stand upon the order of her going, but 
 go at once. Give her the forts and arsenals and sub-treasuries, 
 and lend her jewels of silver and gold, and Egypt will rejoice 
 that she has departed." 
 
 He looks upon disunion as the beginning of the 
 destruction and overthrow of the institution of 
 slavery. Then, when we come to talk about 
 " allies," whose allies are these gentlemen ? Whose 
 allies are the Abolitionists of the North, if they are 
 not the allies of the secessionists and disunionists 
 of the South ? Are they not all laboring and toil- 
 ing to accomplish the same great end, the over- 
 throw of this great nation of ours ? Their object 
 is the same. They are both employing, to some 
 extent, the same means. Here is Wendell Phil- 
 lips ; here is Garrison ; here is the anti-slavery 
 society of Massachusetts ; and all, in the very 
 same point of view, the allies of the distinguished 
 Senator from Mississippi and his coadjutors ; all 
 in favor of disrupting and breaking down this 
 Union, with the view of destroying the institution 
 of slavery itself. " Allies laboring to destroy the 
 Government ! " Who else are laboring to destroy 
 it but the disunionists and secessionists of the 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 263 
 
 South, and Garrison and Phillips, and the long 
 list that might be enumerated at the North ? Here 
 they stand, presenting an unbroken front, to de- 
 stroy this glorious Union, which was made by our 
 fathers. 
 
 Mr. President, I have alluded to this subject of 
 " allies " in order to show who is engaged in this 
 unholy and nefarious work of breaking up this 
 Union. We find first the run-mad Abolitionists 
 of the North. They are secessionists ; they are 
 for disunion; they are for dissolution. When we 
 turn to the South we see the red-hot disunionists 
 and secessionists engaged in the same work. I 
 think it comes with a very bad grace from them 
 to talk about the " allies " of others who are try- 
 ing to save the Union and preserve the Constitu- 
 tion. 
 
 I went back yesterday and showed that South 
 Carolina had held this doctrine of secession at a 
 very early day, a very short time after she entered 
 into the Articles of Confederation, and after she had 
 entered the Union by which and through which 
 the independence of the country was achieved. 
 What else do we find at a very early day? Go 
 to Massachusetts during the war of 1812, and 
 the Hartford Convention, and there you will find 
 men engaged in this treasonable and unhallowed 
 work. Even in 1845, Massachusetts, in mani- 
 festing her great opposition to the annexation of 
 Texas to the United States, passed a resolution 
 
264 THE SPEECHES 
 
 resolving herself out of the Union. She seceded ; 
 she went off by her own act, because Texas was 
 admitted into the Union. Thus we find South 
 Carolina and Massachusetts taking the lead in this 
 secession movement. We find the Abolitionists 
 proper of the North shaking the right hand of 
 fellowship with the disunionists of the South in 
 this work of breaking up the Union ; and yet we 
 hear intimations here that Senators from the South 
 who are not secessionists are Black Republican 
 allies ! If I were compelled to choose either, — I 
 would not wish to be compelled to make a choice, 
 — but if I were compelled to be either, having the 
 privilege of choosing, I would rather be a black 
 Republican than a red one. I think the one is 
 much more tolerable than the other. If red repub- 
 licanism is ever to make its way into this country, 
 it is making its way in this disunion and secession 
 movement that is now going on ; for we see that 
 right along with the sentiment of secession the 
 reign of terror prevails. Everything is carried 
 away by it, while the conservative men of the 
 country are waiting for the excited tempest to pass. 
 It is now sweeping over the country. Everything 
 is carried by usurpation, and a reign of terror fol- 
 lows along in its wake. 
 
 I am charged with being " an ally " of the Sen- 
 ator from Ohio ! I, who, from my earliest infancy, 
 or from the time I first comprehended principle, 
 down to the present time, have always stood bat- 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 265 
 
 tling for the same great principles that I contend 
 for now ! My people know me ; they have tried 
 me ; and yonr little innuendoes and your little in- 
 directions will not alarm them, even if your infu- 
 riated seceding Southern men dare to intimate that 
 I am an ally of Mr. Wade. The Senator charges 
 me with being " an ally " ; while he and the leaders 
 of Abolitionism are uniting all their energies to 
 break up this glorious Union. I an ally ! Thank 
 God, I am not in alliance with Giddings, with 
 Phillips, with Garrison, and the long list of those 
 who are engaged in the work of destruction, and in 
 violating the Constitution of the United States. 
 
 So much, Mr. President, in regard to the argu- 
 ment about allies. I am every man's ally when he 
 acts upon principle. I have laid down, as the car- 
 dinal point in my political creed, that, in all ques- 
 tions that involve principle, especially where there 
 was doubt, I would pursue principle ; and in the 
 pursuit of a great principle I never could reach a 
 wrong conclusion. If, in the pursuit of principle, 
 in trying to reach a correct conclusion, I find my- 
 self by the side of another man who is pursuing the 
 same principle, or acting upon the same line of 
 policy, I extend to him my assistance, and I ask his 
 in return. 
 
 But the Senator from Mississippi, in his reply to 
 me, also said : — 
 
 " 1 was reading, a short time ago, an extract which referred 
 to the time when ' we ' — I suppose it means Tennessee — 
 23 
 
266 THE SPEECHES 
 
 would take the position which it was said to be an absurdity 
 for South Carolina to hold; and Tennessee still was put, in the 
 same speech, in the attitude of a great objector against the 
 exercise of the right of secession. Is there anything in her 
 history which thus places her ? Tennessee, born of secession, 
 rocked in the cradle of revolution, taking her position before 
 she was matured, and claiming to be a State because she had 
 violently severed her connection with North Carolina, and 
 through an act of secession and revolution claimed then to be 
 a State." 
 
 I suppose it was thought that this would be a 
 poser ; that it would be conclusive ; and as Ten- 
 nessee was " born of secession, rocked in the cradle 
 of revolution," I was estopped ; that my lips were 
 hermetically sealed, so far as related to anything I 
 could give utterance to in opposition to this heresy. 
 When we come to examine the history of that 
 subject, we find the Senator has fallen into just as 
 great an error as he did in his allusion to allies. 
 Tennessee had her birth not in secession — very far 
 from it. The State of Frankland had its origin in 
 that way. They attempted to separate themselves 
 from the State of North Carolina. When was that ? 
 In 1784. Peace was made in 1783 ; but in 1784, 
 — I read from Wheeler's " History of North Caro- 
 lina," — 
 
 "In 1784, the General Assembly, in April, at Hillsboro' 
 among other acts for the relief of the General Government, 
 ceded her western lands, and authorized her delegation in 
 Congress to execute a deed, provided Congress would accept 
 this offer within two years. 
 
 " This act, patriotic and self-sacrificing, was worthy of the 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 267 
 
 State ; and although not then accepted by Congress, was the 
 real source of the civil commotion which we are about to 
 record." 
 
 What was that civil commotion ? The pioneers 
 of that country had suffered great hardships, and 
 they viewed with suspicion this act of 1784. On 
 the 24th of August of that year, they held a con- 
 vention at Jonesboro', and resolved to send a person 
 to Congress to urge the acceptance of the offer of 
 North Carolina. But I will read from this history : 
 
 " The General Assembly of North Carolina met at Newbern 
 on the 22d October, 1784, and repealed the act of the former 
 session, in consequence of which the convention at Jonesboro' 
 broke up in confusion." 
 
 " The spirit of the people was roused. On December 4, 
 1784, a convention of five delegates from each county met at 
 Jonesboro'. John Sevier was made president of this conven- 
 tion. They formed a constitution for the State of Frankland, 
 which was to be rejected or received by another body, ' fresh 
 from the people,' to meet at Greenville in November, 1785. 
 This body met at the time and place appointed ; the constitu- 
 tion was ratified ; Langdon Carter was Speaker of the Senate ; 
 William Cage, Speaker of the House of Commons. John 
 Sevier was chosen Governor ; David Campbell, Joshua Gist, 
 and John Henderson, judges of the superior court. Other 
 officers, civil and military, were appointed. 
 
 " The General Assembly of the State of Frankland, by a 
 communication signed by both Speakers, informed Richard 
 Caswell, Esq., Governor of North Carolina, that the people of 
 the counties of Washington, Sullivan, and Greene, had de- 
 clared themselves sovereign, and independent of the State of 
 North Carolina. 
 
 " Governor Caswell was a soldier and a statesman. He was 
 
268 THE SPEECHES 
 
 not of a temper to brook such high-handed measures. Ho 
 issued, on the 25th of April, 1785, his proclamation against this 
 lawless thirst for power." 
 
 "But the State of Frankland did not heed this warning, so 
 properly expressed, and so dignified in its character and tone. 
 It proceeded to erect new counties, levy taxes, appropriate 
 money, form treaties with the Indians, and exercise all the 
 power and prerogatives of a sovereign State." 
 
 " The scarcity of money was severely felt. The salary of 
 the Governor was £200 annually ; a judge £150 ; the treasurer 
 £40 ; to be paid from the treasury. The taxes were to be 
 paid into the treasury, in the circulating medium of Frank- 
 land, such as they had, namely : good flax linen, ten hundred, 
 at three shillings and six pence per yard ; good clean beaver 
 skins, six shillings each ; racoon and fox skins, at one shilling 
 and three pence ; deer skins, six shillings ; bacon, at six pence 
 per pound ; tallow, at six pence ; good whiskey, at two shillings 
 and six pence a gallon. 
 
 " This has given rise to some humor at the expense of the 
 State of Frankland. It was referred to in debate in our 
 House of Commons, 1827, by H. C. Jones, and in Congress 
 some years ago by Hon. Daniel Webster ; which was replied to 
 by Hon. Hugh L. White. It was pleasantly stated that the 
 salaries of the Governor and judges were paid in fox-skins, 
 and the fees of the sheriff and constables in mink-skins, and 
 that the Governor, the sheriffs, and constables were compelled 
 to receive the skins at the established price. 
 
 " Even this primitive currency was, by the ingenuity of 
 man, extensively counterfeited, by sewing racoon-tails to the 
 opossum-skins, — opossum-skins being worthless and abundant, 
 and racoon -skins were valued by law at one shilling and three 
 pence." 
 
 " The General Assembly of North Carolina, assembled at 
 Newbern, in November, 1785, passed an act to bury in oblivion 
 the conduct of Frankland, provided they returned to their 
 allegiance, and appointed elections to be held in the different 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 269 
 
 counties for members to the General Assembly of North 
 Carolina, and also appointed civil and military officers to 
 support those already appointed. The next year, 1786, pre- 
 sented a strange state of affairs ; two empires extended at the 
 same time over the same territory and over the same people. 
 
 " Courts were held by both Governments, military officers 
 appointed by both, to exercise the same powers. John Tip- 
 ton headed the party for North Carolina, and John Sevier the 
 Frankland party." 
 
 " The next year taxes were imposed by both administra- 
 tions ; but the people most innocently pretended that they did 
 not know to whom to pay ; so paid to neither. Thus deprived 
 of one of the chief means of government, the affairs of Frank- 
 land were approaching to its end. Tipton and Sevier were 
 both residents of Washington County. Sevier was a brave 
 soldier ; he had proved his valor on King's Mountain ; but he 
 was seduced by the allurements of office and ambition, — 
 
 ' The sin whereby the angels fell.' 
 
 " He applied to Dr. Franklin for advice and support ; to the 
 Governor (Matthews) of Georgia, and to Virginia ; from none 
 did he receive any aid or advantage. He realized with fear- 
 ful truth the fable of Gay, — 
 
 The child who many fathers share, 
 Hath rarely known a father's care. 
 He who on many cloth depend 
 Will rarely ever find a friend.' " 
 
 All this shows, Mr. President, that the State of 
 Frankland took its origin in 1784. A government 
 was recognized, and it continued until September, 
 1787. The Legislature that year met at Green- 
 ville, the very t3wn in which I live. 
 
 "In September, 1787, the Legislature of Frankland met 
 for the last time at Greenville. John Menifee was Speaker 
 23* 
 
270 THE SPEECHES 
 
 of the Senate, and Charles Robinson Speaker of the House. 
 They authorized the election of two Representatives to attend 
 the Legislature of North Carolina, and one of the judges of 
 Frankland was elected (David Campbell) and her Treasurer 
 (Langdon Carter) the other. 
 
 " Had the party of Sevier accepted the liberal, fair, and 
 just proposition of Governor Caswell, in 1 785, as stated pre- 
 viously, how much pain and trouble would have been spared 
 to this country, and how much personal suffering to himself '? 
 With all his virtues, honesty, and former public service, he 
 was at this time a doomed man. 
 
 " On the return of the members from the General Assembly 
 at Tarboro', in February, 1788, it was soon understood that 
 Frankland was no more. 
 
 " An execution against the estate of General Sevier had 
 been placed in the hands of the sheriff, and levied on his 
 negroes on Nolichucky River. These were removed for safe- 
 keeping to the house of Colonel Tipton. 
 
 " Brave in his character, obstinate and headstrong, Sevier 
 raised one hundred and fifty men, and marched to Tipton's 
 house, on Watauga River, eight miles east of Jonesboro'. 
 Tipton had information of Sevier's design only time enough to 
 obtain the aid of some fifteen friends, who were with him on 
 Sevier's arrival. 
 
 " Sevier, with his troops and a small cannon, demanded an 
 unconditional surrender of Tipton and all in his house. Tipton 
 had barricaded the house ; and in reply to the unceremonious 
 demand, sent him word ' to fire, and be d— d.' He then sent 
 a written summons to surrender. This letter Tipton forwarded 
 forthwith to the colonel of the county, for aid. This aid, 
 through Robert and Thomas Love, was promptly afforded. 
 The house was watched closely. A man by the name of Webb 
 was killed, a woman wounded in the shoulder, and a Mr. Vann. 
 While, from extreme cold, Sevier's guards were at the fire, a 
 large reinforcement from Sullivan County, under Maxwell and 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON". 271 
 
 Pemberton, passed the guard, and joined the beleaguered 
 household. The moment the junction was formed they sallied 
 out with shouts ; a tremor seized the troops of Sevier, who fled 
 in all directions at the first fire of Tipton. Pugh, the high 
 sheriff of Washington, was mortally wounded, and many taken 
 prisoners. Sevier himself escaped ; his two sons, James and 
 John, were prisoners." 
 
 " Judge Spencer, one of the judges of the State of North 
 Carolina, holding court at Jonesboro', issued a bench-warrant 
 against Governor Sevier for high treason, ( 1 788.) 
 
 " In October, Colonels Tipton, Love, and others, appre- 
 hended Sevier, at the house of Mrs. Brown, near Jonesboro'. 
 Tipton was armed, and swore that he would kill Sevier ; and 
 Sevier really thought he would do so. Tipton was, however, 
 with much exertion, pacified. Handcuffs were placed upon 
 Governor Sevier, and he was carried to Jonesboro.' From 
 thence he was carried, under strong guard, to Morganton, in 
 Burke County, North Carolina, and delivered to William 
 Morrison, the sheriff of Burke. 
 
 " As he passed through Burke, General Charles McDowell 
 and General Joseph McDowell (the latter who was with him 
 in the battle of King's Mountain, and fought by his side) 
 became his securities for a few days, until he could see some 
 friends. He returned punctually, and upon his own respon- 
 sibility the sheriff allowed him time to procure bail. His two 
 sons, with friends, came to Morganton privately, and under 
 their escort he escaped. 
 
 " Thus the career of the first and last Governor of Frank- 
 land terminated. But with all his defects, John Sevier had 
 many virtues. He was fearless to a fault, kind to his friends, 
 and hospitable to all. This gave him great weight among the 
 people ; and although in the General Assembly of North 
 Carolina, (Fayetteville,) in 1788, general oblivion and pardon 
 were extended to all concerned in the late revolt, John Sevier 
 was especially excepted in the act, and debarred from all 
 offices of trust, honor, or profit. 
 
272 THE SPEECHES 
 
 " The next year (1789) so great a favorite with the people 
 ■was Sevier, that he was elected from Greene, to represent 
 that county in the Senate of the General Assembly of North 
 Carolina. He appeared at Fayetteville at the time appointed 
 for the meeting of the Legislature, (second Monday of No- 
 vember.) 
 
 " Such was the sense of his worth, or his contrition for the 
 past, that the Legislature passed early an act repealing the 
 section disqualifying him from any office ; and on taking the 
 oath of allegiance, he was allowed his seat. Thus were the 
 difficulties settled. 
 
 " North Carolina had ever been willing to allow her daughter 
 to set up for herself when of lawful age and under proper 
 restrictions. Cherishing this feeling, she was never unjust 
 towards her fair and lovely offspring. 
 
 " On the 25th of February, 1790, as authorized by a pre- 
 vious act of the General Assembly, passed in the year 1789, 
 Samuel Johnston and Benjamin Hawkins, Senators in Con- 
 gress, executed a deed to the United States in the words of 
 the cession art ; and on the 2d of April of that year, Congress 
 accepted the deed, and Tennessee was born. 
 
 "By proclamation, dated September 1, 1790, Governor 
 Martin announced that the Secretary of State for the United 
 States had transmitted to him a copy of the act of Congress, 
 accepting the cession of North Carolina for this district of the 
 western territory, and the inhabitants of said district ' would 
 take due notice thereof, and govern themselves accordingly.' " 
 
 John Sevier was brave and patriotic, a man loved 
 by the people ; but he had fallen into this error of 
 secession or separation from the State of North 
 Carolina that I have called your attention to here in 
 the history of that State. We find that this doctrine 
 of secession could not even be sustained by him, 
 with his great popularity and with the attachment 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 273 
 
 the people had for him. Instead of Tennessee 
 having her origin or her birth in secession, the pre- 
 cise reverse is true. The State of Frankland had 
 its birth in an attempt at disunion and was rocked 
 to death in the cradle of secession ; and its great 
 defender and founder at that time, notwithstanding 
 his great popularity and the attachment the people 
 had for him, was lodged in irons. That is where 
 secession carried him, with all his popularity, with 
 all his patriotism, with all the attachment the people 
 had for him. Yes, sir, this nefarious, this blighting, 
 this withering doctrine of secession ended by placing 
 that distinguished man in irons. 
 
 What next occurred ? North Carolina passed a 
 law for general pardon and oblivion for all those 
 that had been engaged in this movement, with the 
 exception of this great man, John Sevier. His 
 name is even now venerated in the section of the 
 country where I live ; but, with all his talents and 
 popularity, this infamous, this diabolical, this hell- 
 born and hell-bound doctrine of secession carried 
 him into chains. The State of Frankland had ex- 
 pired, rocked to death in the cradle of secession, and 
 he went back to Greene County, and was elected a 
 member of the Legislature of North Carolina. In 
 passing this general oblivion and pardon, he was 
 made an exception ; and he was not permitted to 
 take his seat in the Legislature until the exception 
 was removed. It was removed, and he took his seat 
 in the Legislature of North Carolina. Frankland 
 
274 THE SPEECHES 
 
 had expired ; it was no more ; and yet we see the 
 odious weight that was heaped upon him by this 
 nefarious doctrine of secession. 
 
 Then what follows, Mr. President ? When we 
 turn to the history, we find that North Carolina 
 then made her cession act, completed it in 1790, 
 and ceded the territory to the United States. A 
 territorial government was established. General 
 Washington himself appointed the first officers in 
 the Territory, which was then styled " the Territory 
 southwest of the river Ohio." In 1794 the Council 
 or Legislature of that Territory elected James White 
 the first delegate to the Congress of the United 
 States from the Territory southwest of the river 
 Ohio — not Frankland or Franklin, for that is 
 numbered with the things that were, but are not. 
 Even with the popularity of the name of Dr. Frank- 
 lin, it was consigned to oblivion. In 1794 the 
 delegate to represent the Territory made his ap- 
 pearance here, and took his seat. In 1796 the 
 constitution was formed ; and then it was that 
 Tennessee began her existence. The peace was 
 made in 1783, and in 1796 Tennessee formed her 
 constitution and applied for admission into this 
 Union. Then it was that Tennessee was brought 
 into existence. She did not pass through this ordeal 
 of secession; this probation of disunion. She germi- 
 nated upon proper principles. The Territory was 
 first organized by Congress after the death of the 
 organization called Frankland ; and in 1796 the 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 275 
 
 people of Tennessee formed their constitution, and 
 were admitted into the Union as a State. 
 
 And, sir, who came into the Union with her 
 when she was admitted as a State ? Andrew Jack- 
 son. It may have been that his early knowledge of 
 the country, it may have been that his early infor- 
 mation upon the subject, made him understand and 
 appreciate ever afterwards the value of the Union. 
 When Tennessee was ushered into this family of 
 States, as an equal member of the Confederacy, 
 General Jackson took his seat as her Representative. 
 The Senator from Mississippi said that Tennessee 
 was " born in secession ; rocked in the cradle of 
 revolution." Sir, she has many fond recollections 
 of the Revolution ; but with all her revolutionary 
 character, her people have never attempted seces- 
 sion. General Jackson first represented her in Con- 
 gress when she came into the Union ; she brought 
 him to the notice of the people of the United States 
 as a public man. In 1833, when an attempt some- 
 what similar to the present was made, he was Pres- 
 ident of the United States ; and it is unnecessary 
 for me to relate what his views of secession were 
 then. It is not necessary for me to refer to the acts 
 of General Jackson in 1833. And now, sir, not in- 
 tending to disparage others, but to give utterance to 
 my conscientious belief, I must say that if such a 
 man as Andrew Jackson were President of the 
 United States at the present time, before this mo- 
 ment steps would have been taken which would 
 
276 THE SrEECIJES 
 
 have preserved us a united people without the 
 shedding of blood, without making war. I believe 
 that if Andrew Jackson were President of the 
 United States, this glorious Union of ours would 
 still be intact. Perhaps it might be jarred a little 
 in some places, but not sufficiently to disturb the 
 harmony and general concord of the whole. That 
 is my opinion. I do not say it to disparage others ; 
 but I believe that this would have been the case if 
 he had been President, pursuing the policy which I 
 feel certain he would have pursued in such an 
 emergency. 
 
 Tennessee came into the Union in 1796. She 
 was the third State that entered the Confederacy 
 alter the old thirteen ratified the Constitution. She 
 was in this Union before Alabama, before Mississippi, 
 before Louisiana, before Florida had an existence. 
 There was a Union then, and she was in it. She 
 has been in it ever since ; and she has continued to 
 contribute her money, her men, and her blood, to 
 the defence of the flag of the Union ; and though 
 these other States may go out, I trust in God that 
 she will still remain in the position she occupied 
 before they were spoken into existence. We have 
 been told that the Union is broken up — that it is 
 already dissolved. Why, sir, according to the Con- 
 stitution, nine States formed the Government ; and 
 provision was made for taking in new States. 
 Taking in a State or taking out a State does not 
 disturb the Union. It was a Union before the 
 
OF ANDREW JOIINSOX. 277 
 
 State came in ; it is a Union after it goes out. We 
 got along very well before these States came in ; and 
 where is the great injury now to result to Tennessee 
 because the}^ propose to go out ? 
 
 I took occasion, in my former remarks, to call the 
 attention of the Senate, and of my constituents to 
 the extent that I have the honor to represent them, 
 to the kind of government that was likely to be 
 formed by the seceding States, and the country they 
 might acquire after they did secede. In relation to 
 this, the Senator from Mississippi said, — 
 
 "But the Senator found somewhere, I believe in Georgia, a 
 
 newspaper article which suggested the advantages of a con- 
 stitutional monarchy. Does the Senator believe there is any 
 considerable number of people in any of the States who favor 
 the establishment of a constitutional monarchy ? " 
 
 The Senator from Georgia 1 felt called upon to 
 say something in the same connection. He said, — 
 
 " As allusion has been made by the Senator from Missis- 
 sippi to an article which appeared in a paper in my own town, 
 and about which a good deal of noise has been made, and 
 which was referred to by the Senator from Tennessee, in his 
 celebrated speech, the other day, as evidence that there was a 
 party in the South in favor of a constitutional monarchy " — 
 
 He went on to state that that idea was suowsted 
 in some paper, he could not exactly tell how ; but 
 it was not by the editor, and it did not amount to 
 much. I did not refer to a single paper ; but I made 
 various extracts from newspapers and speeches, 
 simply as surface indications, as symptoms of what 
 
 1 Mr. Iverson. 
 24 
 
278 THE SPEECHES 
 
 lay below, and what was intended to be the result. 
 I referred to the " Charleston Mercury " ; I referred 
 to other papers ; I referred to the speeches of distin- 
 guished men, some of them leaders in this move- 
 ment. Is it not apparent, now, that unless the 
 public mind is aroused, unless the people are put on 
 the alert, there is a design to establish a government 
 upon the principles of a close corporation ? Can any 
 one that has the least sagacity be so unobservant as 
 not to see what is going on in the South ? It is 
 apparent to all. They seem to unite in setting out 
 with the proposition that the new confederacy shall 
 exclude every State which is not slaveholding, for 
 the reason that those States which are interested in 
 slaves should have the exclusive control and manage- 
 ment of them. Here is a great family of States, 
 some free and some slave, occupying, in one sense, 
 the same relation to each other that individuals in 
 the community do to one another. The proposition 
 is started to form a government of States exclusively 
 interested in slaves. That excludes all the free 
 States. Is the argument good ? Has not slavery 
 been secure heretofore in the Union with non-slave- 
 holding States ; and will not our geographical and 
 physical position be just the same after the present 
 Union is dissolved ? Where does the argument 
 carry us ? We must have a confederacy now com- 
 posed of slave States exclusively. When we have 
 excluded the free States, and we come to make a 
 new government, does not the same argument apply 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 279 
 
 that we must Lave a government to be controlled 
 and administered by that description of persons 
 among us who are exclusively interested in slaves ? 
 If you cannot trust a free State in the confederacy, 
 can you trust a non-slaveholder in a slaveholding 
 State to control the question of slavery ? Where 
 does your argument carry you ? We see where they 
 are drifting; and, as a faithful sentinel upon the 
 watch-tower, I try to notify the people and sound x 
 the tocsin of alarm. If this idea be not carried out, 
 it will be because the public feeling, the public 
 opinion, is aroused against it. 
 
 I alluded yesterday to the fact that the freemen 
 of the State of South Carolina have not been per- 
 mitted to vote for a President since it was a State. 
 There is a great terror and dread of the capacity of 
 the people to govern themselves. In South Carolina, 
 when the ordinance was passed to withdraw from the 
 Union, did the convention trust the people to pass 
 their judgment upon it. Were they consulted ? 
 Did they indorse it ? Have they passed their judg- 
 ment upon it to this day ? Taking the language of 
 Mr. Boyce as an index of their feeling, I have no 
 more doubt than I have of my existence that if this 
 reign of terror subsides, and the hearts of the people 
 of South Carolina can be gotten at, it will be found 
 that a majority of them disapprove and repudiate 
 what has been done there. What do we find in the 
 State of Georgia ? There the proposition was 
 moved to submit the ordinance to the people ; and 
 
280 THE SPEECHES 
 
 were the people consulted ? The vote was 138 to 
 116, I think. It shows a great division. Did they 
 submit it to the people ? Oh no. I know some- 
 thing of the people of the State of Georgia ; and I 
 believe this day, if that seceding ordinance could be 
 submitted to the voting population of Georgia, and 
 the question be fully canvassed and fairly under- 
 stood, they would repudiate and put it down. Go 
 to Florida : were the people consulted there ? Not 
 at all. Look to Alabama ; look to the arguments 
 made there in the convention. It was said, our 
 power is ample ; we must consummate this thing, 
 and not let the people pass upon it. Louisiana re- 
 fused to refer the matter to the people. The people 
 have not been consulted. A reign of terror has 
 been instituted. States have been called upon to 
 make large appropriations of money to buy arms and 
 munitions of war; for what end? The idea has 
 been : " we can, almost with the speed of lightning, 
 run States out of the Union without consulting: the 
 people ; and then, if they dare resist, we have got 
 an army, we have got the money to awe them into 
 submission." These gentlemen are very fearful of 
 coercion, exceedingly alarmed at the word " coerce "; 
 but when you attempt to interpose and stop their 
 career, they do not know of any other term but coer- 
 cion. Look at the despatch which Governor Pickens 
 sent to Mississippi : — 
 
 Charleston, January, 19, 1861. 
 Judge Magrath and myself have sent four telegraphs to 
 you. Please urge Mississippi to send delegates to the Mont- 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 231 
 
 gomery meeting of States, at as early a day as possible — say 
 4th of February — to form immediately a strong provisional 
 government. It is the only thing to prevent war, and let that 
 convention elect immediately a commander-in-chief for the 
 seceding States. You may as well return, at least as far as 
 Montgomery. F. W. PICKENS. 
 
 To Hon. A. Burt Jackson. 
 
 South Carolina has a military establishment, with 
 officers appointed, and the taxes necessary to support 
 them now are grinding her people to the dust ; but 
 she expects in a very short time to transfer that 
 military establishment, with her officers, to the 
 Southern Confederacy that is to be established ; and 
 I suppose the great object in getting the leader ap- 
 pointed at once is that they may be able by military 
 force to awe the people into submission. Have we 
 not seen that nine regiments have been authorized 
 to be raised in Mississippi, and a distinguished 
 Senator, who occupied a seat on this floor a short 
 time since, made the major-general ? No doubt, 
 when the scheme is consummated and carried out, 
 when the military organization is complete, if the 
 people offer to resist, they will be subdued and awed, 
 or driven into submission at the point of the bayonet. 
 Some of these gentry are very much afraid of the 
 people. 
 
 Why, sir, a proposition was even started in my 
 own State to raise sixteen regiments ; for what ? 
 With whom are we at war ? Is anybody attack- 
 ing us ? No. Do we want to coerce anybody ? 
 No. What do we want with sixteen raiments ? 
 
 24* 
 
282 THE SPEECHES 
 
 And it was proposed to appropriate $250,000 to 
 sustain them. There is a wonderful alarm at the 
 idea of coercing the seceding States ; great dread 
 in reference to the power of this Federal Govern- 
 ment to secure obedience to its laws, and espe- 
 cially in reference to making war upon one of the 
 States ; but the public property can be taken, your 
 flag can be fired upon, your ships driven out of 
 port, your gallant officer, with a few men, penned 
 up in a little fort to subsist as best they may. So 
 far as the officer to whom I have just alluded is 
 concerned, I will give utterance to the feelings of 
 my heart when I express my profound approba- 
 tion of his conduct. He was put there to defend 
 the flag of his country. He was there not as an 
 intruder. He was there in possession of the prop- 
 erty owned by the United States, not to menace, 
 not to insult, not to violate rights, but simply to 
 defend the flag and honor of his country, and take 
 care of the public property ; and because he re- 
 tired from a position where he could have been 
 captured, where the American flag could have been 
 struck and made to trail in the dust, and the Pal- 
 metto banner substituted, because he, obeying the 
 impulses of a gallant and brave heart, took choice 
 of another position ; acting upon principles of hu- 
 manity, not injuring others, but seeking to protect 
 his own command from beino; sacrificed and de- 
 stroyed, he is condemned and repudiated, and his 
 action is sought to be converted into a menace of 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 283 
 
 war. Has it come to this, that the Government 
 of the United States cannot even take care of its 
 own property, that your vessels must be . fired 
 upon, that your flag must be struck, and still you 
 are alarmed at coercion ; and because a gallant offi- 
 cer has taken possession of a fort where he cannot 
 very well be coerced, a terrible cry is raised, and 
 war is to be made ? 
 
 I was speaking of the proposition brought for- 
 ward in my own State to raise sixteen regiments. 
 Sir, as far back as the battle of King's Mountain, 
 and in every war in which the rights of the people 
 have been invaded, Tennessee, God bless her, has 
 stood by that glorious flag, which was carried by 
 Washington and followed by the gallant patriots 
 and soldiers of the Revolution, even as the blood 
 trickled from their feet as they passed over the ice 
 and snow ; and under that flag, not only at home, 
 but abroad, her sons have acquired honor and dis- 
 tinction, in connection with citizens of the other 
 States of the Union. She is not yet prepared to 
 band with outlaws, and make war upon that flag 
 under which she has won laurels. Who are we 
 going to fight ? Who is invading Tennessee ? 
 Conventions are got up ; a reign of terror is in- 
 augurated ; and if, by the influence of a subsidized 
 and mendacious press, an ordinance taking the 
 State out of the Confederacy can be extorted, those 
 who make such propositions expect to have our 
 army ready, to have their bands equipped, to have 
 
284 THE SPEECHES 
 
 their pretorian divisions ; then they will tell the 
 people that they must carry the ordinance into 
 effect, and join a Southern Confederacy, whether 
 they will or not ; they shall be lashed on to the car 
 of South Carolina, who entertains no respect for 
 them, but threatens their institution of slavery 
 unless they comply with her terms. Will Ten- 
 nessee take such a position as that ? I cannot be- 
 lieve it ; I never will believe it ; and if an ordinance 
 of secession should be passed by that State under 
 these circumstances, and an attempt should be 
 made to force the people out of the Union, as has 
 been clone in some other States, without first 
 having submitted that ordinance to the people for 
 their ratification or rejection, I tell the Senate and 
 the American people that there are many in Ten- 
 nessee whose dead bodies will have to be trampled 
 over before it can be consummated. [Applause 
 in the galleries.] The Senator from Mississippi 
 referred to the flag of his country ; and I will read 
 what he said, so that I may not be accused of mis- 
 representing him : — 
 
 " It may be pardoned to me, sir, who, in my very boyhood, 
 was given to the military service, and who have followed that 
 flag under tropical suns, and over northern snows, if I here 
 express the deep sorrow which always overwhelms me when 
 I think of turning from the flag I have followed so long, for 
 which I have suffered in ways it does not become me to speak 
 of; feeling that henceforth it is not to be the banner I will 
 hail with the rising sun, and greet as the sun goes down ; the 
 banner which, by day and by night, I am ready to follow. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 285 
 
 But God, who knows the hearts of men, will judge between 
 you and us, at whose door lies the responsibility of this." 
 
 There is no one in the United States who is more 
 willing to do justice to the distinguished Senator 
 from Mississippi than myself; and when I consider 
 his early education ; when I look at his gallant 
 services, finding him first in the military school 
 of the United States, educated by his Government, 
 taught the science of war at the expense of his 
 country — taught to love the principles of the Con- 
 stitution ; afterwards entering its service, fighting 
 beneath the Stars and Stripes to which he has so 
 handsomely alluded, winning laurels that are green 
 and imperishable, and bearing upon his person scars 
 that are honorable ; some of which have been won 
 at home ; others of which have been won in a 
 foreign clime, and upon other fields — I would be 
 the last man to pluck a feather from his cap or a 
 single gem from the chaplet that encircles his brow. 
 But when I consider his early associations ; when 
 I remember that he was nurtured by this Govern- 
 ment ; that he fought for this Government ; that 
 he won honors under the flag of this Government, 
 I cannot understand how he can be willing to hail 
 another banner, and turn from that of his country, 
 under which he has won laurels and received honors. 
 This is a matter of taste, however ; but it seems to 
 me that, if I could not unsheathe my sword in vin- 
 dication of the flag of my country, its glorious Stars 
 and Stripes, I would return the sword to its scab- 
 
286 THE SPEECHES 
 
 bard ; I would never sheathe it in the bosom of 
 my mother ; never ! never ! never ! Sir, my own 
 feelings in reference to that flas are such as must 
 have filled the heart of that noble son of South 
 Carolina, Joel R. Poinsett, when, nearly thirty 
 years ago, in an address to the people of Charles- 
 ton, he declared, — 
 
 " Wherever I have been, I have been proud of being a 
 citizen of this Republic, and to the remotest corners of the 
 earth have walked erect and secure under that banner which 
 our opponents would tear down and trample under foot. I 
 was in Mexico when the town was taken by assault. The 
 house of the American ambassador was then, as it ought to be, 
 the refuge of the distressed and persecuted ; it was pointed 
 out to the infuriated soldiery as a place filled with their ene- 
 mies. They refused to attack. My only defence was the flag 
 of my country, and it was thrown out at the instant that hun- 
 dreds of muskets were levelled at us. Mr. Mason — a braver 
 man never stood by his friend in the hour of danger — and 
 myself placed ourselves beneath its waving folds ; and the 
 attack was suspended. We did not blanch, for we felt strong 
 in the protecting arm of this mighty Republic. We told 
 them that the flag that waved over us was the banner of that 
 nation to whose example they owed their liberties, and to 
 whose protection they were indebted for their safety. The 
 scene changed as by enchantment ; those men who were on the 
 point of attacking and massacring the inhabitants cheered 
 the flag of our country, and placed sentinels to protect it 
 from outrage. 
 
 " Fellow-citizens, in such a moment as that, would it have 
 been any protection to me and mine to have proclaimed my- 
 self a Carolinian ? Should I have been here to tell you this 
 tale if I had hung out the palmetto and single star ? Be 
 assured that, to be respected abroad, we must maintain our 
 place in the Union." 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 287 
 
 Sir, I intend to stand by that flag, and by the 
 Union of which it is the emblem. I agree with 
 Mr. A. H. Stephens of Georgia, " that this Gov- 
 ernment of our fathers, with all its defects, comes 
 nearer the objects of all good governments than 
 any other on the face of the earth." 
 
 I have made allusions to the various Senators 
 who have attacked me, in vindication of myself. 
 I have been attacked on all hands by some five or 
 six, and may be attacked again. All I ask is, that, 
 in making these attacks, they meet my positions, 
 answer my arguments, refute my facts. I care not 
 for the number that may have attacked me ; I care 
 not how many may come hereafter. Feeling that 
 I am in the right, that argument, that fact, that 
 truth are on my side, I place them all at defiance. 
 Come one, come all ; for I feel, in the words of 
 the great dramatic poet, — 
 
 " Thrice is he armed that hath his quarrel just; 
 And he but naked, though locked up in steel, 
 Whose conscience with [treason] is corrupted." 
 
 I have been told, and I have heard it repeated, 
 that this Union is gone. It has been said in this 
 Chamber that it is in the cold sweat of death ; 
 that, in fact, it is really dead, and merely lying in 
 state waiting for the funeral obsequies to be per- 
 formed. If this be so, and the war that has been 
 made upon me in consequence of advocating the 
 Constitution and the Union is to result in my 
 overthrow and in my destruction ; and that flag, 
 
THE SPEECHES 
 
 that glorious flag, the emblem of the Union, which 
 was borne by Washington through a seven-years' 
 struggle, shall be struck from the Capitol and 
 trailed in the dust — when this Union is interred, 
 I want no more honorable winding-sheet than that 
 brave old flag, and no more glorious grave than to 
 be interred in the tomb of the Union. [Applause ' 
 in the galleries.] For it I have stood ; for it I will 
 continue to stand ; I care not whence the blows 
 come ; and some will find, before this contest is 
 over, that while there are blows to be given, there 
 will be blows to receive ; and that, while others 
 can thrust, there are some who can parry. God 
 preserve my country from the desolation that is 
 threatening her, from treason and traitors ! 
 
 " Is there not some chosen curse, 
 
 Some hidden thunder in the stores of heaven, 
 Red with uncommon wrath, to blast the man 
 Who owes his greatness to his country's ruin?" 
 
 [Applause in the galleries.] 
 
 In conclusion, Mr. President, I make an appeal 
 to the conservative men of all parties. You see 
 the posture of public affairs ; you see the condition 
 of the country ; you see along the line of battle the 
 various points of conflict ; you see the struggle 
 which the Union men have to maintain in many 
 of the States. You ought to know and feel what 
 is necessary to sustain those who, in their hearts, 
 desire the preservation of this Union of States. 
 Will you sit with stoic indifference, and see those 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 289 
 
 who are willing to stand by the Constitution and 
 uphold the pillars of the Government driven away 
 by the raging surges that are now sweeping over 
 some portions of the country? As conservative 
 men, as patriots, as men who desire the preser- 
 vation of this great, this good, this unparalleled 
 Government, I ask you to save the country ; or 
 let the propositions be submitted to the people, 
 that the heart of the nation may respond to them. 
 I have an abiding confidence in the intelligence, 
 the patriotism, and the integrity of the great mass 
 of the people ; and I feel in my own heart that, if 
 this subject could be got before them, they would 
 settle the question, and the Union of these States 
 would be preserved. [Applause in the galleries.] 
 
 25 
 
290 THE SPEECHES 
 
 REPLY TO SENATOR LANE OF OREGON. 
 
 DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, MARCH 2, 1861. 
 
 The Senate having under consideration the Report of the 
 Peace Conference, and Mr. Lane of Oregon having concluded 
 his speech, — 
 
 Mr. Johnson said : — Mr. President : it is pain- 
 ful to me to be compelled to occupy any of the 
 time of the Senate upon the subject that has just 
 been discussed by the Senator from Oregon. Had 
 it not been for the extraordinary speech he has 
 made, and the singular course he has taken, I 
 should refrain from saying one word at this late 
 hour of the day and of the session. But, sir, it 
 must be apparent, not only to the Senate, but to 
 the whole country, that, either by accident or by de- 
 sign, there has been an arrangement that any one 
 who appeared in this Senate to vindicate the Union 
 of these States should be attacked. Why is it 
 that no one in the Senate or out of it, who is 
 in favor of the Union of these States, has made 
 an attack upon me ? Why has it been left to 
 those who have taken ground both openly and se- 
 cretly in violation of the Constitution, for the disrup- 
 tion of the Government ? Why has there been a 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 291 
 
 concerted attack upon me from the beginning of this 
 discussion to the present moment, not even confined 
 within the ordinary courtesies of debate and of sena- 
 torial decorum ? It is a question which lifts itself 
 above personalities. I care not from what direction 
 the Senator comes who indulges in personalities to- 
 wards me ; in that, I feel that I am above him, and 
 that he is my inferior. [Applause in the galleries.] 
 
 The Presiding Officer 1 rapped with his mal- 
 let, and then said : The Chair will announce that 
 if that disturbance is repeated in the galleries, they 
 must be cleared. That is the order of the Senate 
 for the purpose of conducting properly the delibera- 
 tions of the Senate. 
 
 Mr. Doolittle. I hope the Chair will enforce 
 the order, and not threaten to do so. When ap- 
 plause is given on the expression of Union senti- 
 ments, in which I fully concur, 1 desire that the 
 order shall be enforced, and there can then be no 
 exception taken if we enforce the roles when ap- 
 plause may be given for any other sentiments 
 uttered on this floor. 
 
 Mr. Johnson. Mr. President, I was alluding to 
 the use of personalities. They are not arguments ; 
 they are the resort of men whose minds are low and 
 coarse. It is very easy to talk about " cowards " ; 
 to draw autobiographical sketches ; to recount the re- 
 markable, the wonderful events and circumstances 
 and exploits that we have performed. I have pre- 
 
 1 Mr. Polk in the chair. 
 
292 THE SPEECHES 
 
 sented facts and authorities ; and upon them I have 
 argued ; from them I have drawn conclusions ; and 
 why have they not been met ? Why have they not 
 been answered ? Why abandon the great issues be- 
 fore the country, and go into personalities ? In this 
 discussion I shall act upon the principle laid down 
 in Cowper's " Conversation," where he says, — 
 
 " A moral, sensible, and well-bred man 
 Will not affront me ; and no other can." 
 
 But there are men who talk about cowardice, 
 cowards, courage, and all that kind of thing ; and in 
 this connection, I will say, once for all, not boast- 
 ingly, with no anger in my bosom, that these two 
 eyes never looked upon any being in the shape of 
 mortal man that this heart of mine feared. 
 
 Sir, have we reached a point of time at which 
 we dare not speak of treason ? Our forefathers 
 talked about it ; they spoke of it in the Constitution 
 of the country ; they have defined what treason is. 
 Is it an offence, is it a crime, is it an insult to recite 
 the Constitution that was made by Washington and 
 his compatriots ? What does the Constitution define 
 treason to be ? 
 
 " Treason against the United States shall consist only in 
 levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, 
 giving them aid and comfort." 
 
 There it is defined clearly that treason shall con- 
 sist only in levying war against the United States, 
 and adhering to and giving aid and comfort to their 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 293 
 
 enemies. Who is it that has been engaged in con- 
 spiracies ? Who is it that has been engaged in mak- 
 ing war upon the United States ? Who is it that 
 has fired upon our flag ? Who is it that has given 
 instructions to take your arsenals, to take your forts, 
 to take your dock-yards, to seize your custom-houses, 
 and rob your treasuries ? Who is it that has been 
 engaged in secret conclaves, and issuing orders for 
 the seizure of public property in violation of the 
 Constitution they were sworn to support ? In the 
 language of the Constitution of the United States, 
 are not those who have been engaged in this ne- 
 farious work guilty of treason ? I will now present 
 a fair issue, and hope it will be fairly met. Show 
 me the man who has been engaged in these con- 
 spiracies; show me who has been sitting in these 
 nightly and secret conclaves, plotting the overthrow 
 of the Government ; show me who has fired upon 
 our flag, has given instructions to take our forts and 
 our custom-houses, our arsenals and our dock-yards, 
 and I will show you a traitor ! [Applause in the 
 galleries.] 
 
 The Presiding Officer : * — The Sergeant-at- 
 Arms will clear the galleries on the right of the 
 Chair immediately. 
 
 Mr. Johnson. That is a fair proposition 
 
 The Presiding Officer. The Senator from 
 Tennessee will pause until the order of the Chair 
 is executed. 
 
 1 Mr. Polk in the chair. 
 25* 
 
294 THE SPEECHES 
 
 [Here a long debate ensued upon questions of 
 order and the propriety of clearing the galleries.] 
 
 Mr. Johnson then continued : — I hope the exe- 
 cution of the order will be suspended, and I will go 
 security for the gallery that they will not applaud 
 any more. I should have been nearly through my 
 remarks by this time but for this interruption. 
 
 The Presiding Officer here announced that the 
 order for clearing the galleries would be suspended. 
 
 Mr. Johnson continued: — Mr. President, when 
 I was interrupted by a motion to clear the galleries, 
 I was making a general allusion to treason as denned 
 in the Constitution of the United States, and to 
 those who were traitors and guilty of treason within 
 the scope and meaning of the law and the Constitu- 
 tion. My proposition was, that if they would show 
 me who were guilty of the offences I have enumer- 
 ated, I would show them who were the traitors. 
 That being done, were I the President of the 
 United States, I would do as Thomas Jefferson did 
 in. 1806 with Aaron Burr, who was charged with 
 treason : I would have them arrested and tried for 
 treason, and, if convicted, by the Eternal God they 
 should suffer the penalty of the law at the hands of 
 the executioner. Sir, treason must be punished. 
 Its enormity and the extent and depth of the offence 
 must be made known. The time is not distant, 
 if this Government is preserved, its Constitution 
 obeyed, and its laws executed in every department, 
 when something of this kind must be done. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 295 
 
 The Senator from Oregon, in his remarks, said 
 that a mincl that it required six weeks to stuff could 
 not know much of anything. He intimated that I 
 had been " stuifed." I made my speech on the 
 19th of December. The gentleman replied. I 
 made another speech on the 5th and 6th of Feb- 
 ruary. And now, after a lapse of about four weeks, 
 and at the close of the session, when it is believed 
 there will be no opportunity to respond on account 
 of the great press of business which must necessarily 
 be acted on, he makes a reply. How long has he 
 been " stuffing " ? By whom and how often has he 
 been " stuifed " ? [Laughter.] He has been stuffed 
 twice ; and if the stuffing operation was as severe 
 and as laborious as the delivery has been, he has had 
 a troublesome time of it ; for his travail has been 
 great, the delivery remarkable and excruciatingly 
 painful. [Laughter.] 
 
 Again : he speaks of " triumphant ignorance and 
 exulting stupidity." Repartee and satire are not 
 limited to one. I have no disposition, however, to 
 indulge in coarse flings ; and, in fact, I think it is 
 unsenatorial. Whatever may be the character of 
 my mind, I have never obtrusively made it the sub- 
 ject of consideration. I may, nevertheless, have 
 exhibited now and then the "exulting stupidity and 
 triumphant ignorance " of which the Senator has 
 spoken. Great and magnanimous minds pity igno- 
 rance. The Senator from Oregon, rich in intel- 
 lectual culture, with a mind comprehensive enough 
 
296 THE SPEECHES 
 
 to retain the wisdom of ages, and an eloquence to 
 charm a listening Senate, deplores mine ; but he 
 should also be considerate enough to regard my 
 humility. Unpretending in my ignorance, I am 
 content to gaze at his lofty flights and glorious 
 daring without aspiring to accompany him to re- 
 gions for which my wings have not been plumed 
 nor my eyes fitted. Gorgeously bright are those 
 fair fields in which he revels. To me, alas ! his 
 heaven appears but as a murky region, dull, opaque, 
 leaden. My pretension has been simply to do my 
 duty to my State and to my country. 
 
 The Senator has thought proper to refer to the 
 action of my State ; and I may be permitted to re- 
 mark, that we in the South understand some things 
 as well as they are understood in the North ; and 
 when we find one who calls himself a Northern man, 
 who boasts of his position there, making great pro- 
 fessions of friendship, greater attachment to our in- 
 stitutions and our interests than we do ourselves, in 
 some minds it may have a tendency to excite sus- 
 picion. The Senator from Oregon is more Southern 
 than the South itself. He has taken under his 
 wing of protection the peculiar guardianship of the 
 Southern States, and his every utterance is upon 
 " the equality of the States, their rights in the 
 Union, or their independence out of it." I think 
 Dr. Johnson advised that when a man comes to 
 your house, and voluntarily makes great professions 
 of his purity, his uprightness of purpose, his exalted 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 297 
 
 character, of being far above suspicion and imputa- 
 tion, if you have any silver-ware hide it. When 
 Northern Senators and Northern gentlemen make 
 greater professions of devotion to our institutions 
 than we do ourselves, our suspicions are somewhat 
 excited. 
 
 The Senator has alluded to the action of my 
 State ; he has commented upon my devotion to the 
 people ; he has been reviewing my political history ; 
 he has even commented upon the nature and char- 
 acter of my mind ; and he has failed to discover 
 anything extraordinary in it. As to the character 
 of my mind, as I before remarked, that is a subject 
 which I have never obtruded upon any one. I have 
 never made any pretensions to anything extraordi- 
 nary, as regards intellect or extensive information ; 
 but, were the reverse of this all true, and had I the 
 wisdom of Solomon, and a mind as strong, as clear, 
 and as penetrating as the rays of the noonday sun 
 when there is not a speck or a dot to obscure his 
 disk, I should then even despair of breaking through 
 the triple case of bigotry, superciliousness, and self- 
 conceit, that surrounds the mind of the Senator from 
 Oregon. Mind, did I say ? I recall that term ; I 
 will not dignify it with the appellation of mind. No, 
 it is the most miserable and the poorest caricature 
 of a mind, that cannot even tell when it is upside up 
 or upside down. 
 
 The Senator has reviewed my political history. 
 He has not discovered that I ever introduced or pro- 
 
298 THE SPEECHES 
 
 jected any great measure except the " Homestead": 
 to that I had given great attention and labor. From 
 what he has said on this occasion, I may infer that 
 he was opposed to the Homestead policy. I be- 
 lieved it was a beneficent measure. It has been an 
 object long near my heart to see every head of a 
 family domiciliated. I thought it was important 
 that every honest and industrious head of a family 
 in this Republic should have a home and an abiding 
 place for his wife and children. I think so still. I 
 can well remember the period of time at which I 
 could exult in the assurance that I had a home for 
 my family ; and I know how to sympathize with 
 those who are not so blessed. Less gifted than the 
 Senator from Oregon, I did not perceive that when, 
 in the Senate, in the House of Representatives, and 
 before the people, I advocated a measure that I 
 thought had a tendency to alleviate and ameliorate 
 the condition of the great mass of mankind, I was 
 incurring the censure that is due to a crime. Lam- 
 entably devoid of his wisdom, if I had succeeded 
 in accomplishing the great object I contemplated, 
 the measure of my ambition would have been fall. 
 I have labored for it long ; I labor still. In 1846 it 
 was introduced into the House of Representatives 
 with but few friends. In 1852 it received a two- 
 thirds vote of that House. It came to the Senate 
 of the United States, and during the last session of 
 Congress forty-four Senators voted for it, and only 
 eight against it. The Senator from Oregon himself, 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 299 
 
 though he doubted and wavered, recorded his vote 
 for it; but he is opposed to it now. I think it was 
 one of the best acts of his life ; and if it had suc- 
 ceeded I think it would have been better for the 
 country. 
 
 But he intimates that I have been voting and act- 
 ing with Senators who are not so intensely Southern 
 as he pretends to be. Sir, look at the Senator's 
 course this morning. W7w has tried to defeat the 
 measures that are so well calculated to restore peace ? 
 Who is trving to cast out the olive-branch that has 
 been brought into the Senate ? "Why does he not 
 stand with his noble colleague when this measure of 
 peace is presented to the country ? 
 
 But he refers to what has been the action of my 
 State. Well, sir, we all know that the issue was 
 directly made ; and what has been the result ? Ten- 
 nessee has spoken in language not to be misunder- 
 stood. She has spoken in thunder-tones that she is 
 against violations of the Constitution and the trea- 
 sonable schemes which would result in breaking up 
 the Government. The Senator assumes a special 
 guardianship over Tennessee. He had better try to 
 take care of Oregon, and leave my colleague and 
 myself, and the Representatives from Tennessee, to 
 attend to Tennessee affairs. Where does he stand ? 
 His colleague is in favor of measures to restore peace 
 and sustain the country, and he is against them ; and 
 did it occur to him that others might ask how he 
 stood with the people of Oregon ? Tennessee stands 
 
300 THE SPEECHES 
 
 redeemed, regenerated, and disenthralled by the ex- 
 ercise of the elective franchise, that glorious Frank- 
 lin-rod which conducts the thunder of tyranny from 
 the heads of the people. If the people of our sister 
 States had enjoyed the same privilege of going to 
 the ballot-box, and passing their judgment upon the 
 ordinances of secession, I believe more of them 
 would now be standing side by side with Tennessee, 
 sustaining the laws and the Constitution. But the 
 people have been overslaughed, a system of usurpa- 
 tion has been adopted, and a reign of terror instituted. 
 The Senator is exceedingly solicitous about Ten 
 nessee. I am inclined to think — I do not intend 
 to be censorious or personal, but entirely senatorial 
 — that at twelve o'clock on Monday next, or a few 
 minutes before, when the hand of the dial is moving 
 round ip mark that important point of time when his 
 term of office shall expire, instead of thinking about 
 the action of my State, he may soliloquize in the 
 language of Cardinal Wolsey, and exclaim, — 
 
 " Nay, then, farewell ! 
 I have touched the highest point of all my greatness ; 
 And, from that full meridian of my glory, 
 I haste now to my setting: I shall fall 
 Like a bright exhalation in the evening, 
 And no man see me more." 
 
 If the Senator has received the news from Ten- 
 nessee, if the information has broken through that 
 triple case of bigotry, superciliousness, and self-con- 
 ceit which ensconce his caricature of a mind, with 
 all his allusions to courage, and blood, and coward- 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 301 
 
 ice, he might feel like Macbeth, who, so long 
 deceived by the juggling fiends, when told by 
 Macduff that he was not of woman born, but from 
 his mother's womb untimely ripped, in agony ex- 
 claimed, — 
 
 " Accursed be that tongue that tells me so, 
 For it hath cowed my better part of man : 
 And be these juggling fiends no more believed, 
 That palter with us in a double sense; 
 That keep the word of promise to our ear, 
 And break it to our hope." 
 
 Yes, Mr. President, I have alluded to treason and 
 traitors, and shall not shrink from the responsibility 
 of having done so, come what will ; and while I, 
 her humble representative, was speaking, Tennessee 
 sent an echo back, in tones of thunder, which has 
 carried terror and dismay through the whole camp 
 of conspirators. 
 
 The Senator has alluded to my political course. 
 What had that to do with the pending question ? I 
 did not attack the Senator from Oregon ; he has 
 attacked me. I had not even made an allusion to 
 him in my speech, except in general terms ; but he 
 inquires into my consistency. How consistent has 
 he been ? We know how he stands upon popular 
 or squatter sovereignty. On that subject he spoke 
 at Concord, New Hampshire, where he maintained 
 that the inhabitants of the Territories were the best 
 judges ; that they were the very people to settle all 
 these questions. I will read what the Senator said 
 on that occasion : — 
 
302 THE SPEECHES 
 
 " There is nothing in the law, gentlemen, but what every 
 enlightened American heart should approve. The idea in- 
 corporated in the Kansas-Nebraska bill is the true American 
 principle; for the bill does not establish or prohibit slavery; 
 but leaves the people of these Territories perfectly free to 
 regulate their own local affairs in their own way. Is there 
 any man who can object to that idea ? Is there any Amer- 
 ican citizen who can oppose that principle V 
 
 " Gentlemen, I desire to say to you that the principle 
 incorporated into the Kansas-Nebraska bill is the very prin- 
 ciple in defence of which your forefathers entered into the 
 service of their country in the Revolutionary War ; for the 
 American colonies, two years previous to the Declaration 
 of Independence, asserted this same principle we now find 
 incorporated in the Kansas-Nebraska bill. 
 
 " Upon examination, you will find that the Declaration 
 of Rights, made October 14, 1774, asserts that the people of 
 the several colonies '•are entitled to a free and exclusive power 
 of legislation in their several provincial legislatures in all 
 cases of internal polity.' This was refused by the Crown, 
 but reasserted by our forefathers. Upon this issue the 
 battles of the Revolution were fought ; by the blood of our 
 fathers this principle of self-government was established. 
 This right, refused by the King, was secured, consecrated, 
 and established by the best blood that ever flowed in the 
 veins of man. Would you now refuse to the people of the 
 Territories the rights your noble sires demanded of the 
 Crown, and won by their blood — thus placing yourselves in 
 opposition to the right of self-government in the Territories, 
 thereby occupying the very position towards the Territories 
 that George III. did to the colonies ? 
 
 " The simple question involved here is, ' are the people 
 capable of regulating their internal affairs, or must Con- 
 gress regulate those affairs for them ? ' It is strictly the doc- 
 trine of congressional non-intervention. Now, if that idea 
 is the correct one — if it is true that the American people 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 303 
 
 are capable of self-government — then the principles of the 
 Kansas-Nebraska bill are right, and opposition to that bill 
 is wrong; consequently, dangerous to the best interests of 
 the country. 
 
 " The question of slavery is a most, perplexing one, and 
 ought not to be agitated. We should leave it with the 
 State where it constitutionally exists, and the people of the 
 Territories, to prohibit or establish, as to them may seem 
 right and proper. 
 
 " All that the Democracy asks in relation to this matter is, , 
 that the people of the Territory should be left perfectly free 
 to settle the question of slavery for themselves, without the 
 interference of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, or any other 
 State." 
 
 During the last Congress, however, the Senator 
 made a speech, in which he repeated, I cannot tell 
 how many times, u the equality of the States, the 
 rights of the States in the Union, and their rights 
 out of the Union ; " and he thus shifted his course 
 and repudiated his former position on squatter sov- 
 ereignty. That speech was made on the 24th of 
 May last. From it I will read the following ex- 
 tract: — 
 
 " I only desire to say, in relation to the series of resolu- 
 tions, a portion of which I have already voted in favor of, 
 that I shall vote in favor of the rest ; for the whole of them 
 together meet with my hearty approbation. They assert 
 the truth ; they assert the great principle that the constitu- 
 tional rights of the States are equal ; that the States have 
 equal rights in this country under the Constitution ; and, 
 as I understand it, they must be maintained in that equality. 
 These resolutions only assert that principle ; and I say that 
 it is a misfortune to the country, in my opinion, that the 
 
304 THE SPEECHES 
 
 principles laid down in these resolutions had not been as- 
 serted sooner. They ought to have been asserted by the 
 Democratic party, in plain English, ten years ago. If they 
 had been, you would have had no trouble in this country 
 to-day ; the Democratic party would have been united and 
 strong, and the equality and constitutional rights of the 
 States would have been maintained in the Territory, and 
 in all other things; squatter sovereignty would not have 
 been heard of, and to-day we would be united." 
 
 If the conflict between his speech made in Con- 
 cord in 1856 and his speech made here on the 24th 
 day of May last can be reconciled, according to any 
 rules of construction, it is fair to reconcile the con- 
 flict. If the discrepancy is so great between his 
 speech made then and his speech on the 24th of 
 May last as not to be reconciled, of course the dis- 
 crepancy is against him ; but I am willing to let one 
 speech go as a set-off to the other, which will make 
 honors easy, so far as speech-making is concerned. 
 
 Then how does the matter stand ? The speech 
 made at Concord, extracts from which I have read, 
 is on the one side, and that made in the Senate on 
 the 24th of May last, to which I have referred, is on 
 the other side. Now we will come to the sticking 
 place. We will now make a test from which there 
 is no escape. You have seen the equivocation to- 
 day. You have seen the cuttle-fish attempt to be- 
 cloud the water and elude the grasp of its pursuer. 
 I intend to stick his inconsistencies to him as close 
 and as tight as what I have heard sometimes called 
 " Jew David's Adhesive Plaster." Now to the rec- 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 305 
 
 ord, and we will see how the Senator's vote stands 
 as compared with his speeches. By referring to the 
 record, it will be found that Mr. Clingman offered 
 the following as an amendment to the fourth resolu- 
 tion of the series introduced by Mr. Davis : — 
 
 "Resolved, That the existing condition of the Territories 
 of the United States does not require the intervention of 
 Congress for the protection of property in slaves." 
 
 What was the vote on the amendment proposed 
 to that resolution by Mr. Browm, to strike out the 
 word " not " ? I want the Senator's attention, for 
 I am going to cite the record from which there is 
 no appeal. How would it read to strike out the 
 word "not"? 
 
 " That the existing condition of the Territories of the 
 United States does require the intervention of Congress 
 for the protection of property in slaves." 
 
 Among those who voted against striking out the 
 word " not," who declared that protection of slavery 
 in the Territories by legislation of Congress was 
 unnecessary, was the Senator from Oregon. When 
 was that ? On the 25th day of May last. The Sen- 
 ator, under the solemn sanction of his oath, declared 
 that legislation was not necessary. Now where do 
 we find him ? Here is a proposition to amend the 
 Constitution to protect the institution of slavery in 
 the States, and here is the proposition brought for- 
 ward by the Peace Conference, and we find the 
 Senator standing against the one, and I believe he 
 recorded his vote against the other. 
 
 26* 
 
306 THE SPEECHES 
 
 But we will proceed further with the investiga- 
 tion. The Senator voted that it was not necessary 
 to legislate by Congress for the protection of slave 
 property. Mr. Brown then offered the amend- 
 ment to the resolution submitted by Mr. Davis, to 
 strike out all after the word " resolved," and to 
 insert in lieu thereof, — 
 
 " That experience having already shown that the Con- 
 stitution and the common law, unaided by statutory enact- 
 ment, do not afford adequate and sufficient protection to 
 slave property — - some of the Territories having failed, others 
 having refused, to pass such enactments — it has become 
 the duty of Congress to interpose, and pass such laws as 
 will afford to slave property in the Territories that protec- 
 tion which is given to other kinds of property." 
 
 We have heard a great deal said here to-day of 
 " other kinds," and every description of property. 
 There is a naked, clear proposition. Mr. Brown 
 says it is needed ; that the court and the common 
 law do not give ample protection ; and then the 
 Senator from Oregon is called upon ; but what is 
 his vote ? We find, in the vote upon this amend- 
 ment, that but three Senators voted for it ; and the 
 Senator from Oregon records his vote, and says 
 " no," it shall not be established ; and every South- 
 ern Senator present, save three, voted against it 
 also. When was that ? On the 25th day of May 
 last. Here is an amendment, now, to protect and 
 secure the States against any encroachment upon 
 the institution within the States, and there the Sen- 
 ator from Oregon swore that no further legislation 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 307 
 
 was necessary to protect it in the Territories. Then, 
 all the amendments being voted down, the Senate 
 came to the vote upon this resolution, — 
 
 " That, if experience should at any time prove that the 
 judicial and executive authority do not possess means to 
 insure adequate protection to constitutional rights in a Ter- 
 ritory, and if the territorial government should fail or refuse 
 to provide the necessary remedies for that purpose, it will 
 be the duty of Congress to supply such deficiency, within the 
 limits of its constitutional powers." 
 
 Does not the resolution proceed upon the idea that 
 it was not necessary then ; but if hereafter the Ter- 
 ritories should refuse, and the courts and the com- 
 mon law could not give ample protection, then it 
 would be the duty of Congress to do this thing? 
 What has transpired since the 25th day of May last ? 
 Is not the decision of the court with us ? Is there 
 not the Constitution carrying it there ? Why was 
 not this resolution, declaring protection necessary, 
 passed during the last Congress ? The presidential 
 election was on hand. 
 
 I have been held up, and indirectly censured, be- 
 cause I have stood by the people ; because I have 
 advocated those measures that are sometimes called 
 demagogical. I would to God that we had a few 
 more men here who were for the people in fact, 
 and who would legislate in conformity with their 
 will and wishes. If we had, the difficulties and 
 dangers that surround us now would be postponed 
 and set aside ; they would not be upon us. But in 
 
308 THE SPEECHES 
 
 May last we could not vote that it was necessary to 
 pass a slave code for the Territories. Oh, no, the 
 presidential election was on hand. We were very 
 willing then to try to get Northern votes ; to secure 
 their influence in the passage of resolutions ; and to 
 crowd some men down, and let others up. It was all 
 very well then; but since the people have deter- 
 mined that some one else should be President of the 
 United States, all at once the grape has got to be 
 very sour, and gentlemen do not have as good an 
 opinion of the people as they had before ; they have 
 changed their views in regard to the people. They 
 have not thought quite as well of some of the aspir- 
 ants as they desired ; and, as they could not get to 
 be President and Vice-President of all these United 
 States, rather than miss it altogether, they would 
 be perfectly willing to be President and Vice-Presi- 
 dent of a part, and therefore they will divide — yes, 
 they will divide. They are in favor of secession ; 
 of breaking up the Union ; of having the rights of 
 the States out of the Union ; and as they signally 
 failed in being President and Vice-President of all, 
 as the people have decided against them, they have 
 reached that precise point of time at which the Gov- 
 ernment ought to be dissevered and broken up. It 
 looks a little that way. 
 
 I have no disposition, Mr. President, to press this 
 controversy further. If the Senator from Oregon is 
 satisfied with the reply he has made to my speech 
 or speeches, I am more than satisfied. I am willing 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 309 
 
 that his speeches and mine shall go to the country ; 
 and, as to the application and understanding of the 
 authorities that are recited in each, I am willing to 
 leave for the determination of an intelligent public. 
 I shall make no issue with him on that subject. I 
 feel to-day — and I say it in no spirit of egotism — 
 that, in the reply I made to his speech, I vanquished 
 every position he assumed ; I nailed many of his 
 statements to the counter as spurious coin ; and I felt 
 that I had the arguments, that I had the authority ; 
 and so feeling, I know when I have my adversary 
 in my power ; I know when I have an argument 
 that cannot be explained away, and a fact that can- 
 not be upturned. The Senator felt it. I know he 
 felt it from his former manifestations, and from the 
 manner in which he has poured forth the wrath so 
 long nursed in his bosom. Yes, sir, in that con- 
 test, figuratively speaking, he was impaled and left 
 writhing in bitter agony. He felt it. I saw he felt 
 it, and now I have no disposition, in concluding my 
 remarks, to mutilate the dead, or add one single pang 
 to the tortures of the already politically damned. 
 I am a humane man ; I will not add another pang 
 to the intolerable sufferings of the distinguished 
 Senator from Oregon. [Laughter.] I sought no 
 controversy with him ; I have made no issue with 
 him ; it has been forced upon me. How many have 
 attacked me ; and is there a single man, North or 
 South, who is in favor of this glorious Union, who 
 has dared to make an assault upon me ? Is there 
 
310 THE SPEECHES 
 
 one ? No, not one. But it is all from secession ; it 
 is all from that reign of terror which usurpation 
 has inaugurated. The Senator has made the set- 
 to ; and it is for the Senate and the country to 
 determine who has been crushed in the tilt. I am 
 satisfied, if he is. I am willing, as I said before, 
 that his speech and mine shall go to the country, 
 and let an intelligent people read and understand, 
 and see who is right and who is wrong on this 
 great issue. 
 
 But, sir, I alluded to the fact that secession has 
 been brought about by usurpation. During the 
 last forty days six States of this Confederacy have 
 been taken out of the Union ; how ? By the voice 
 of the people ? No ; it is demagogism to talk of 
 the people. By the voice of the freemen of the 
 country ? No. By whom has it been done ? 
 Have the people of South Carolina passed upon the 
 ordinance adopted by their convention ? No ; but 
 a system of usurpation was instituted, and a reign 
 of terror inaugurated. How was it in Georgia ? 
 Have the people there passed upon the ordinance 
 of secession ? No. We know that there was a 
 powerful party there, of passive, conservative men, 
 who have been overslaughed, borne down ; and 
 tyranny and usurpation have triumphed. A con- 
 vention passed an ordinance to take the State out of 
 the Confederacy ; and the very same convention ap- 
 pointed delegates to go to a congress to make a 
 constitution, without consulting the people. So with 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 311 
 
 Louisiana ; so with Mississippi ; so with all the six 
 States which have undertaken to form a new con- 
 federacy. Have the people been consulted ? Not 
 in a single instance. We are in the habit of saying 
 that man is capable of self-government ; that he has 
 the right, the unquestioned right, to govern himself ; 
 but here a government has been assumed over 
 him ; it has been taken out of his hands, and at 
 Montgomery a set of usurpers are enthroned, legis- 
 lating, and making constitutions and adopting them, 
 without consulting the freemen of the country. Do 
 we not know it to be so ? Have the people of Ala- 
 bama, of Georgia, of any of those States, passed 
 upon it ? No ; but a constitution is adopted by 
 those men, with a provision that it may be changed 
 by a vote of two thirds. Four votes in a conven- 
 tion of six can change the whole organic law of a 
 people constituting six States. Is not this a coup- 
 (Tetat equal to any of Napoleon ? Is it not a usur- 
 pation of the people's rights ? 
 
 In some of those States even the flag of our 
 country has been changed. One State has a pal- 
 metto, another has a pelican, and another has the 
 rattlesnake run up instead of the Stars and Stripes. 
 On a former occasion I spoke of the origin of seces- 
 sion ; and I traced its early history to the Garden 
 of Eden, when the serpent's wile and the serpent's 
 wickedness beguiled and betrayed our first mother. 
 After that occurred, and they knew light and knowl- 
 edge, when their Lord and Master appeared, they 
 
312 THE SPEECHES 
 
 seceded, and hid themselves from his presence. 
 The serpent's wile and the serpent's wickedness 
 first started secession ; and now secession brings 
 about a return of the serpent. Yes, sir ; the wily 
 serpent, the rattlesnake, has been substituted as the 
 emblem on the flag of one of the seceding States, 
 and that old flag, the Stars and the Stripes, under 
 which our fathers fought and bled and conquered, 
 and achieved our rights and our liberties, is pulled 
 down and trailed in the dust. Will the American 
 people tolerate it ? They will be indulgent ; time, I 
 think, will be given ; but they will not submit to it. 
 
 A word more in conclusion. Give the border 
 States that security which they desire, and the time 
 will come when the other States will come back ; 
 when they will be brought back — how ? Not by 
 the coercion of the border States, but by the coer- 
 cion of the people ; and those leaders who have 
 taken them out will fall beneath the indignation and 
 the accumulating force of that public opinion which 
 will ultimately crush them. The gentlemen who 
 have taken those States out are not the men to 
 bring them back. 
 
 I have already suggested that the idea may have 
 entered into some minds, " if we cannot get to be 
 President and Vice-President of the whole United 
 States, we may divide the Government, set up a 
 new establishment, have new offices, and monop- 
 olize them ourselves when we take our States 
 out." Here we see a President made, a Vice- 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 313 
 
 President made, cabinet officers appointed, and yet 
 the great mass of the people not consulted, nor 
 their assent obtained in any manner whatever. 
 The people of the country ought to be aroused to 
 this condition of things ; they ought to buckle on 
 their armor ; and, as Tennessee has done, (God 
 bless her !) by the exercise of the elective fran- 
 chise, by going to the ballot-box under a new set 
 of leaders, repudiate and put down those men who 
 have carried these States out and usurped a gov- 
 ernment over their heads. I trust in God that 
 the old flag of the Union will never be struck. 
 I hope it may long wave, and that we may long 
 hear the national air sung : — 
 
 " The Star-Spangled banner, O long may it wave 
 O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave." 
 
 Long may we hear Hail Columbia, that good 
 old national air ; long may we hear, and never 
 repudiate, the old tune of Yankee Doodle ! Long 
 may wave that gallant old flag which went through 
 the Revolution, and which was borne by Tennessee 
 and Kentucky at the battle of New Orleans. And 
 in the language of another, while it was thus 
 proudly and gallantly unfurled as the emblem of 
 the Union, the Goddess of Liberty hovered around, 
 when " the rockets' red glare " went forth through 
 the heavens, indicating that the battle was raging, 
 and the voice of the old chief could be heard 
 rising above the din of the storm, urging his gallant 
 men on to the stern encounter, and watched the 
 
 27 
 
314 THE SPEECHES 
 
 issue as the conflict grew fierce, and the result was 
 doubtful ; but when, at length, victory perched 
 upon your standard, it was then, from the plains of 
 New Orleans, that the Goddess made her loftiest 
 flight, and proclaimed victory in strains of exul- 
 tation. Will Tennessee ever desert the grave of 
 him who bore it in triumph, or desert the flag 
 that he waved with success ? No, never ; she was 
 in the Union before some of these States were in 
 existence ; and she intends to remain in, and insist 
 upon — as she has the confident belief she shall 
 get — all her constitutional rights and protection in 
 the Union, and under the Constitution of the coun- 
 try. [Applause in the galleries.] 
 
 The Presiding Officer i 1 — It will become the 
 unpleasant but imperative duty of the Chair to clear 
 the galleries. 
 
 Mr. Johnson. I have done. 
 
 [The applause was renewed, and was louder and 
 more general than before. Hisses were succeeded 
 by applause, and cheers were given and reiterated, 
 with " Three cheers more for Johnson of Ten- 
 nessee ! "] 
 
 [As Mr. Johnson sat down, the spectators in the 
 densely crowded galleries rose in order to leave, 
 when, after the lapse of a few seconds, a faint cheer, 
 followed by the clapping of a single pair of hands T 
 was raised in the southeast corner of the ladies' gal- 
 lery. This was hesitatingly imitated by two or three 
 
 1 Mr. Fitch in the chair. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 315 
 
 persons further on in the south range of the same 
 gallery, but, instantaneously gathering strength, it 
 lighted up the enthusiasm of the packed galleries in 
 the west and northwest quarters, and a tremendous 
 outburst of applause, putting to silence the powerful 
 blows from the hammer of the Presiding Officer, 
 succeeded. Three cheers were given for the Union, 
 and three for Andrew Johnson of Tennessee ; and 
 as by this time the Senators on the floor gave the 
 strongest token of indignation and outraged dignity, 
 the retreating; crowd uttered a shower of hisses. 
 Altogether, the exhibition was the most vociferous 
 and unrepressed that ever took place in the galleries 
 of either house of Congress.] 
 
316 THE SPEECHES 
 
 SPEECH AT CINCINNATI, OHIO. 
 
 DELIVERED JUNE 19, 1861. 
 
 Fellow-Citizens : — In reply to the cordial 
 welcome which has just been tendered to me, 
 through your chosen organ, — in reply to what has 
 been said by the gentlemen chosen by you to bid 
 me welcome to Cincinnati, I have not language 
 adequate to express my feelings of gratitude. I 
 cannot find language to thank you for the tender 
 of good-fellowship which has been made to me on 
 the present occasion. I came here without any 
 expectation that such a reception was in store for 
 me. I had no expectation of being received and 
 welcomed in the language, I may say, the eloquent 
 and forcible language of your chosen organ. I am 
 deserving of no such tender. 
 
 I might conclude what little I am going to say 
 by merely responding to and indorsing every single 
 sentence uttered on this occasion, in welcoming me 
 to your midst. [Applause.] 
 
 For myself, I feel that while I am a citizen of a 
 Southern State — a citizen of the South, and of the 
 State of Tennessee, I feel, at the same time, that I 
 am also a citizen of the United States. [Applause.] 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 317 
 
 Most cordially do I respond to what has been said 
 in reference to the maintenance of the Constitution 
 of the United States, in all its bearings, in all its 
 principles therein contained. The Constitution of 
 the United States lays down the basis upon which 
 the Union of all the States of this confederacy can 
 and may be maintained and preserved, if it be lit- 
 erally and faithfully carried out. [Applause.] So 
 far as I am concerned, feeling that I am a citizen 
 of the Union — that I am a citizen of the United 
 States, I am willing to abide by that Constitution. 
 I am willing to live under a government that is 
 built upon and perpetuated upon the principles laid 
 down by the Constitution, which was framed by 
 Washington and his compeers, after coming from 
 the heat and strife of bloody revolution. [Ap- 
 plause.] 
 
 I repeat, again, that I have not language adequate 
 to express my gratitude and appreciation of the 
 kindness which has been manifested in regard to 
 my humble self. I cannot sufficiently thank you 
 for the manifestation of your appreciation of the 
 course I have pursued in regard to the crisis which 
 is now upon this country. I have no words to 
 utter, or rather I have words which will not give 
 utterance to the feelings that I entertain on this 
 occasion. [Applause.] I feel, to-day, a confidence 
 in my own bosom that the cordiality, and the sym- 
 pathy, and the response that comes here from the 
 people of Ohio, is heartfelt and sincere. I feel that 
 27* 
 
318 THE SPEECHES 
 
 in reference to the great question now before the 
 people, those whom I see before me are honest and 
 sincere. [Applause.] I repeat again, and for 
 the third time, that I have no language with which 
 I can express my gratitude to you, and at the same 
 time my devotion to the principles of the Consti- 
 tution, and the flag and emblem of our glorious 
 Union of States. [Applause.] 
 
 I know that there has been much said about the 
 North, much said about the South. I am proud 
 here, to-day, to hear the sentiments which have 
 been uttered in reference to the North and the 
 South, and the relations that exist between these 
 two sections. [Applause.] I am glad to hear it 
 said in such a place as this, that the pending diffi- 
 culties — I might say, the existing war — which 
 are now upon this country, do not grow out of any 
 animosity to the local institution of any section. 
 [Applause.] I am glad to be assured that it grows 
 out of a determination to maintain the glorious 
 principles upon which the Government itself rests, 
 — the principles contained in the Constitution, — 
 and, at the same time, to rebuke and to bring back, 
 as far as may be practicable, within the pale of the 
 Constitution, those individuals, or States even, who 
 have taken it upon themselves to exercise a prin- 
 ciple and doctrine at war with all government, 
 with all association — political, moral, and religious. 
 [Applause.] I mean the doctrine of secession, 
 which is neither more nor less than a heresy — 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 319 
 
 a fundamental error — a political absurdity, coming 
 in conflict with all organized government, with 
 everything that tends to preserve law and order 
 in the United States, or wherever else the odious 
 and abominable doctrine may be attempted to be 
 exercised. I look upon the doctrine of secession 
 as coming in conflict with all organism, moral and 
 social. I repeat, without regard to the peculiar 
 institutions of the respective States composing this 
 confederacy, without regard to any government 
 that may be founded in the future, or exists in the 
 present, this odious doctrine of secession should be 
 crushed out, destroyed, and totally annihilated. 
 No government can stand, no religious, or moral, 
 or social organization can stand, where this doctrine 
 is tolerated. [Applause.] It is disintegration — 
 universal dissolvement — in making war upon every- 
 thing that has a tendency to promote and ameliorate 
 the condition of the mass of mankind. [Applause.] 
 Therefore I repeat, that this odious and abominable 
 doctrine — you must pardon me for using a strong 
 expression — I do not say it in a profane sense — 
 but this doctrine I conceive to be — hell-bom and 
 hell-bound, and one which will carry everything in 
 its train, unless it is arrested and crushed out from 
 our midst. [Great Applause.] 
 
 In response to what has been said to me here to- 
 day, I confess, when I lay my hand upon my bosom, 
 I feel gratified at hearing the sentiments that have 
 been uttered — that we are all willing to stand up 
 
320 THE SPEECHES 
 
 for the constitutional rights guaranteed to every 
 State, every community, — that we are all deter- 
 mined to stand up for the prerogatives secured to 
 us in the Constitution as citizens of States, compos- 
 ing one grand confederacy, whether we belong to 
 the North or to the South, to the East or to the 
 West. I say that I am gratified to hear such senti- 
 ments uttered here to-day. I regard them as the 
 most conclusive evidence that there is no disposition 
 on the part of any citizens of the loyal States to 
 make war upon any peculiar institution of the South, 
 [Applause,] whether it be slavery or anything else, 
 — leaving that institution under the Constitution, 
 to be controlled by time, circumstances, and the 
 great laws which lie at the foundation of all things 
 which political legislation can control. [Applause.] 
 While I am before you, my countrymen, I am in 
 hopes it will not be considered out of place for me 
 to make a single remark or two in reference to 
 myself as connected with the present crisis. My 
 position in the Congress of the United States during 
 its last session is, I suppose, familiar to most, if not 
 all, of you. You know the doctrine I laid down 
 then, and I can safely say that the opinions I enter- 
 tain now on the questions of the day are as they 
 were then. I have not changed them. I have 
 seen no reason to change them. I believe that a 
 government without the power to enforce its laws 
 made in * conformity with the Constitution, is no 
 government at all. [Applause.] We have arrived 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 321 
 
 at that period in our national history at which it 
 has become necessary for this Government to say 
 to the civilized, as well as to the pagan world, 
 whether it is in reality a government, or whether 
 it is but a pretext for a government. If it has 
 power to preserve its existence, and to maintain 
 the principles of the Constitution and the laws, 
 that time has now arrived. If it is a government, 
 that authority should be asserted. I say, then, let 
 the civilized world see that we have a government. 
 Let us dispel the delusion under which we have 
 been laboring since the inauguration of the Gov- 
 eminent in 1789, — let us show that it is not an 
 ephemeral institution, that we have not merely 
 imagined we had a government, and when the 
 test came, that the government frittered away be- 
 tween our fingers and quickly faded in the distance. 
 [Applause.] The time has come when the gov- 
 ernment reared by our fathers should assert itself, 
 and give conclusive proof to the civilized world that 
 it is a reality and a perpetuity. [Applause.] Let 
 us show to other nations that this doctrine of seces- 
 sion is a heresy ; that States coming into the con- 
 federacy, that individuals living in the confederacy, 
 under the Constitution have no right nor authority, 
 upon their own volition, to set the laws and the 
 Constitution aside, and to bid defiance to the au- 
 thority of the government under which they live. 
 [Applause.] 
 
 I substantially cited the best authority that could 
 
322 THE SPEECHES 
 
 be produced upon this subject, and took this position 
 during the last session of Congress. I stand here 
 to-day before you and advocate the same principles 
 for which I then contended. As early as 1833, 
 (let me here say I am glad to find that the com- 
 mittee which have waited upon me on this occasion 
 represent all the parties among which we have been 
 divided,) — as early as 1833, I say, I formed my 
 opinions in reference to this doctrine of secession 
 in the nullification of the laws of the United States. 
 I held these doctrines up to the year 1850, and I 
 maintain them still. [Applause.] I entertained 
 these opinions down to the latest sitting of Con- 
 gress, and I have reiterated them. I entertain and 
 express them here to-day. [Applause.] In this 
 connection I may be permitted to remark, that, 
 during our last struggle for the Presidencv, all 
 parties contended for the preservation of the Union. 
 Without going further back, what was that strug- 
 gle ? Senator Douglas, of the State of Illinois, was 
 a candidate. His friends presented him as the best 
 Union man. I shall speak upon this subject in ref- 
 erence to my position. Mr. Breckinridge's friends 
 presented him to the people as the Union candidate. 
 I was one of Mr. Breckinridge's friends. The Bell 
 men presented the claims of the Hon. John Bell 
 of Tennessee for the Presidency upon the ground 
 that he was the best Union candidate. The Re- 
 publican party, so far as I understand them, have 
 always been in favor of the Union. Then here 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 323 
 
 was the contest between four candidates presented 
 to the consideration of the people of the United 
 States. 
 
 Now, where do we find ourselves ? In times 
 gone by you know we had our discussions and our 
 quarrels. It was bank and anti-bank questions, 
 tariff and anti-tariff, internal improvement and 
 anti-internal improvement, or the distribution of 
 the money derived from the sale of public land 
 among the several States. Such measures as these 
 were presented to the people, and the aim in the 
 solution of all was how best to preserve the union 
 of these States. One party favored the measures 
 as calculated to promote the welfare of our common 
 country ; another opposed them to bring about the 
 same result. Then what was the former contest ? 
 Bringing it down to the present time, there has 
 been no disagreement between Republicans, Bell 
 men, Douglas men, and Breckinridge men, as re- 
 gards the preservation of the union of States. 
 Now, however, these measures are all laid aside ; 
 all these party questions are left out of consid- 
 eration, and the great question comes up as to the 
 Constitution, as adopted by the old Articles of Con- 
 federation, and afterwards reaffirmed in the adoption 
 of the Constitution of the United States. Now, 
 when this great question arises, involving the pres- 
 ervation and existence of the United States, I am 
 proud to meet this vast concourse of people, and 
 hear them say they are willing to lay aside all party 
 
324 THE SPEECHES 
 
 measures, all party considerations, and come up to 
 join in one fraternal hug to sustain the bright Stars 
 and broad Stripes of our glorious Union, — all will- 
 ing to cooperate for the consummation of a sublime 
 purpose, without regard to former party differences, 
 
 — that we are all determined to stand fast by the 
 union of these States. [Applause.] 
 
 So far as I am concerned, I am willing to say in 
 this connection that I am proud to stand here among 
 you as one of the humble upholders and supporters 
 of the Stars and Stripes that have been borne by 
 Washington through a seven years' revolution, — a 
 bold and manly struggle for our independence, and 
 separation from the mother-country. That is my flag 
 
 — that flag was borne by Washington in triumph. 
 Under it I want to live, and under no other. It is 
 that flag that has been borne in triumph by the 
 Revolutionary fathers over every battle-field, when 
 our brave men, after toil and danger, laid down and 
 slept on the cold ground, with no covering but the 
 inclement sky, and arose in the morning and re- 
 newed their march over the frozen ground, as the 
 blood trickled from their feet^ — all to protect that 
 banner and bear it aloft triumphantly. I have inti- 
 mated that I should make some allusion to myself. 
 I have indicated to you what w T ere my opinions and 
 my views from 1838 down to the moment I stand 
 before you. With the facts in relation to the con- 
 test which took place recently in the State of Ten- 
 nessee, you are all familiar. No longer ago than 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 325 
 
 last February there was an extra session of the 
 Legislature called. There was then a law passed 
 authorizing a convention to be called. The people 
 of that State voted it down by a majority of sixty- 
 four thousand. 
 
 In a very short time afterwards another session 
 of the Legislature was called. This Legislature 
 went into secret session in a very short time. While 
 the Southern Confederacy, or its agents, had access 
 to it, and were put in possession of the doings and 
 proceedings of this secret session, the great mass of 
 my own State were not permitted even to put their 
 ears to the keyhole, or to look through a crevice in 
 the doors, to ascertain what was being done. A 
 league with the Southern Confederacy has been 
 formed, and the State has been handed over to the 
 Southern Confederacy, with Jefferson Davis at its 
 head. We, the people of Tennessee, have been 
 handed over to this Confederacy, I say, like sheep 
 in the shambles, bound hand and foot, to be dis- 
 posed of as Jefferson Davis and his cohorts may 
 think proper. This Ordinance was passed by the 
 Convention with a proviso that it should be sub- 
 mitted to the people. The Governor was authorized 
 to raise fifty-five thousand men. Money was appro- 
 priated to enable him to carry out this diabolical 
 and nefarious scheme, depriving the people of their 
 rights, disposing of them as stock in the market, — 
 handing them over, body and soul, to the Southern 
 Confederacy. 
 
 28 
 
326 THE SPEECHES 
 
 Now you may talk about slaves and slavery, but 
 in most instances when a slave changes his master, 
 even he has the privilege of choosing whom he de- 
 sires for his next master ; but in this instance the 
 sovereign people of a free State have not been al- 
 lowed the power or privilege of choosing the master 
 they desired to serve. They have been given a 
 master without their consent or advice. No trouble 
 was taken to ascertain what their desires were, — 
 they were at once handed over to this Southern 
 Confederacy. 
 
 Mr. Johnson here referred to the provisions of 
 the Tennessee Secession Ordinance, &c. Noticing 
 the persecution of the Union men in Tennessee, he 
 remarked : — 
 
 But while this contest has been going on, a por- 
 tion of our fellow-citizens have been standing up for 
 the Constitution and the Union, and because they 
 have dared to stand upon the great embattlement 
 of constitutional liberties, exercising the freedom and 
 the liberty of speech, a portion of our people have 
 declared that we are traitors ; they have said that our 
 fate was to be the fate of traitors ; and that hemp 
 was growing, and that the day of our execution was 
 approaching, — that the time would come when those 
 who dare stand by the Constitution and the prin- 
 ciples therem embraced, would expiate their deeds 
 upon the gallows. We have met all these things. 
 We have met them in open day. We have met 
 them face to face — toe to toe — at least in one por- 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 327 
 
 tion of the State. We have told them that the 
 Constitution of the United States defines treason, 
 and that definition is, that treason against the United 
 States shall consist only in levying war against the 
 General Government of the United States. We 
 have told them that the time would come when the 
 principles of the Constitution and the law defining 
 treason would be maintained. We have told them 
 that the time would come when the judiciary of 
 the Government would be sustained in such a man- 
 ner that it could define what was treason under the 
 Constitution and the law made in conformity with 
 it, and that when defined, they would ascertain who 
 were the traitors, and who it was that would stretch 
 the hemp they had prepared for us. [Applause.] 
 
 I know that, in reference to myself and others, 
 rewards have been offered, and it has been said that 
 warrants have been issued for our arrest. Let me 
 say to you here to-day, that I am no fugitive, 
 especially no fugitive from justice. [Laughter.] If 
 I were a fugitive, I would be a fugitive from 
 tyranny — a fugitive from the reign of terror. But, 
 thank God, the country in which I live, and that 
 division of the State from which I hail, will record 
 a vote of twenty-five thousand against the Seces- 
 sion Ordinance. The county in which I live gave 
 a majority of two thousand and seven against this 
 odious, diabolical, nefarious, hell - born and hell- 
 bound doctrine. 
 
828 THE SPEECHES 
 
 SPEECH ON THE WAR FOR THE UNION. 
 
 DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, JULY 27, 1861. 
 
 The Senate having under consideration the joint resolu- 
 tion to approve and confirm certain acts of the President of 
 the United States for suppressing insurrection and rebellion, 
 Mr. Johnson said : — 
 
 Mr. President : When I came from my home 
 to the seat of Government, in compliance with the 
 proclamation of the President of the United States 
 calling us together in extra session, it was not my 
 intention to engage in any of the discussions that 
 might transpire in this body ; but since the session 
 began, in consequence of the course that things 
 have taken, I feel unwilling to allow the Senate to 
 adjourn without saying a few words in response to 
 many things that have been submitted to the Senate 
 since its session commenced. What little I shall 
 say to-day will be without much method or order. 
 I shall present the suggestions that occur to my 
 mind, and shall endeavor to speak of the condition 
 of the country as it is. 
 
 On returning here, we find ourselves, as we were 
 when we adjourned last spring, in the midst of a 
 civil war. That war is now progressing, without 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 329 
 
 much hope or prospect of a speedy termination. It 
 seems to me, Mr. President, that our Government 
 has reached one of three periods through which all 
 governments must pass. A nation, or a people, 
 have first to pass through a fiery ordeal in obtain- 
 ing their independence or separation from the gov- 
 ernment to which they were attached. We passed 
 through such an one in the Revolution : we were 
 seven years in effecting the separation, and in tak- 
 ing our position amongst the nations of the earth 
 as a separate and distinct power. Then, after hav- 
 ing succeeded in establishing its independence, and 
 taken its position among the nations of the earth, 
 a nation must show its ability to maintain that posi- 
 tion, that separate and distinct independence against 
 other powers, against foreign foes. In 1812, in the 
 history of our Government, this ordeal commenced, 
 and terminated in 1815. 
 
 There is still another trial through which a nation 
 must pass. It has to contend against internal foes ; 
 against enemies at home ; against those who have 
 no confidence in its integrity, or in the institutions 
 that mav be established under its organic ] aw . We 
 are in the midst of this third ordeal, and the prob- 
 lem now being solved before the nations of the 
 earth, and before the people of the United States, 
 is, whether we can succeed in maintaining ourselves 
 against the internal foes of the Government ; whether 
 we can succeed in putting down traitors and treason, 
 and in establishing the great fact that we have a 
 
 28* 
 
330 THE SPEECHES 
 
 Government with sufficient strength to maintain its 
 existence against whatever combination may be pre- 
 sented in opposition to it. 
 
 This brings me to a proposition laid down by the 
 Executive in his recent message to the Congress 
 of the United States. In that message the Presi- 
 dent said, — 
 
 " This is essentially a people's contest. On the side of the 
 Union it is a struggle for maintaining in the world that form 
 and substance of government whose leading object is to ele- 
 vate the condition of men ; to lift artificial weights from all 
 shoulders ; to clear the paths of laudable pursuit for all ; to 
 afford all an unfettered start, and a fair chance in the race of 
 life. Yielding to partial and temporary departures, from 
 necessity, this is the leading object of the Government for 
 whose existence we contend." 
 
 I think the question is fairly and properly stated 
 by the President, that it is a struggle whether the 
 people shall rule; whether the people shall have a 
 government based upon their intelligence, upon 
 their integrity, upon their purity of character, suf- 
 ficient to govern themselves. I think this is the 
 true issue ; and the time has now arrived when the 
 energies of the nation must be put forth, when there 
 must be union and concert among all who agree in 
 man's capability of self - government, in order to 
 demonstrate that great proposition, without regard 
 to former party divisions or prejudices. 
 
 Since this discussion commenced, it has been 
 urged in argument, by Senators on one side, that 
 there w T as a disposition to change the nature and 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 331 
 
 character of the Government ; and that, if we pro- 
 ceeded as we were going, it would result in estab- 
 lishing a dictatorship. It has been said that the 
 whole framework, nature, genius, and character of 
 the Government would be entirely changed ; and 
 great apprehensions have been expressed that it 
 would result in a consolidation of the Government 
 or a dictatorship. We find, in the speech delivered 
 by the distinguished Senator from Kentucky 1 the 
 other day, the following paragraph, alluding to what 
 will be the effect of the passage of this joint resolu- 
 tion approving the action of the President : — 
 
 " Here in Washington, in Kentucky, in Missouri, every- 
 where where the authority of the President extends, in his 
 discretion he will feel himself warranted by the action of Con- 
 gress upon this resolution to subordinate the civil to the mili- 
 tary power ; to imprison citizens without warrant of law ; to 
 suspend the writ of habeas corpus ; to establish martial law; 
 to make seizures and searches without warrant ; to suppress 
 the press ; to do all those acts which rest in the will and in 
 the authority of a military commander. In my judgment, sir, 
 if we pass it, we are upon the eve of putting, so far as we can, 
 in the hands of the President of the United States the power 
 of a dictator." 
 
 Then, in reply to the Senator from Oregon, 2 he 
 seems to have great apprehension of a radical change 
 in our form of government. The Senator goes on 
 to say, — 
 
 " The pregnant question, Mr. President, for us to decide 
 is, whether the Constitution is to be respected in this struggle ; 
 whether we are to be called upon to follow the flag over the 
 1 Mr. Breckinridge. 2 Mr. Baker. 
 
332 THE SPEECHES 
 
 ruins of the Constitution ? Without questioning the motives 
 of any, I believe that the whole tendency of the present pro- 
 ceedings is to establish a government without limitation of 
 powers, and to change radically our frame and character of 
 government." 
 
 Sir, I most fully concur with the Senator that 
 there is a great effort being made to change the 
 nature and character of our Government. I think 
 that effort is being demonstrated and manifested 
 most clearly every day ; but we differ as to the 
 parties who are making this great effort. 
 
 The Senator alludes in his speech to a conversa- 
 tion he had with some very intelligent gentleman 
 who formerly represented our country abroad. It 
 appears from that conversation that foreigners were 
 accustomed to say to Americans, " I thought your 
 Government existed by consent ; now how is it to 
 exist? " and the reply was, " We intend to change 
 it ; we intend to adapt it to our condition ; these 
 old colonial geographical divisions and States will 
 ultimately be rubbed out, and we shall have a gov- 
 ernment strong and powerful enough." The Sen- 
 ator seemed to have great apprehensions based on 
 those conversations. He read a paragraph from a 
 paper, indicating that State lines were to be rubbed 
 out. In addition to all this he goes on to state that 
 the writ of habeas corpus has been violated, and he 
 says that since the Government commenced there 
 has not been a case equal to the one which has 
 recently transpired in Maryland. I shall take up 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON, 333 
 
 some of his points in their order, and speak of them 
 as I think they deserve to be spoken of. The Sena- 
 tor says, — 
 
 " The civil authorities of the country are paralyzed, and a 
 practical martial law is being established all over the land. 
 The like never happened in this country before, and would 
 not be tolerated in any country in Europe which pretends to 
 the elements of civilization and regulated liberty. George 
 Washington carried the thirteen colonies through the war of 
 the Revolution without martial law. The President of the 
 United States cannot conduct the Government three months 
 "without resorting to it." 
 
 The Senator puts great stress on the point, and 
 speaks of it in very emphatic language, that Gen- 
 eral Washington carried the country through the 
 seven years of the Revolution without resorting to 
 martial law during all that period of time. Now, 
 how does the matter stand? When we come to 
 examine the history of the country, it would seem 
 that the Senator had not hunted up all the cases. 
 We can find some, and one in particular, not very 
 different from the case which has recently occurred, 
 and to which he alluded. In 1777, the second year 
 of the war of the Revolution, numbers of the So- 
 ciety of Friends in Philadelphia were arrested on 
 suspicion of being disaffected to the cause of Amer- 
 ican freedom. A publication now before me says, — 
 
 " The persons arrested, to the number of twenty," .... 
 " were taken into custody, by military force, at their homes 
 or usual places of business ; many of them could not obtain 
 any knowledge of the cause of their arrest, or of any one to 
 
334 THE SPEECHES 
 
 whom they wore amenable, and they could only hope to avail 
 themselves of the intervention of some civil authority. 
 
 " The Executive Council [of the State of Pennsylvania], 
 being formed of residents of the city and county of Phila- 
 delphia, had a better knowledge of the Society of Friends and 
 of their individual characters than the members of Congress 
 assembled from the various parts of the country, and ought to 
 have protected them. But instead of this, they caused these 
 arrests of their fellow-citizens to be made with unrelenting 
 severity, and from the 1st to the 4th day of September, 1777, 
 the party was taken into confinement in the Mason's Lodge, 
 in Philadelphia. 
 
 "On the minutes of Congress of 3d September, 1777, it 
 appears that a letter was received by them from George Bryan, 
 Vice-President of the Supreme Executive Council, dated 2d 
 September, stating that arrests had been made of persons in- 
 imical to the American States, and desiring the advice of 
 Congress particularly whether Augusta and Winchester, in 
 Virginia, would not be proper places at which to secure pris- 
 oners." .... 
 
 " Congress must have been aware that it was becoming a 
 case of very unjust suffering, for they passed their resolution 
 of 6th September, 1777, as follows: — 
 
 " ' That it be recommended to the Supreme Executive 
 Council of the State of Pennsylvania to hear what the said re- 
 monstrants can allege to remove the suspicions of their being 
 disaffected or dangerous to the United States.' 
 
 " But the Supreme Executive Council on the same day, 
 referring to the above, 
 
 " ' Resolved, That the President do write to Congress to let 
 them know that the Council has not time to attend to that 
 business in the present alarming crisis, and that they were, 
 agreeably to the recommendation of Congress, at the moment 
 the resolve was brought into Council, disposing of everything 
 for the departure of the prisoners.' " 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 335 
 
 " As the recommendation of Congress of the 6th of Septem- 
 ber, to give the prisoners a hearing, was refused by the Su- 
 preme Executive Council, the next minute made by Congress 
 was as follows : — 
 
 " * In Congress, 8th September, 1777. 
 
 " ' Resolved, That it would be improper for Congress to enter 
 into a hearing of the remonstrants or other prisoners in the 
 Mason's Lodge, they being inhabitants of Pennsylvania; and 
 therefore, as the Council declines giving them a hearing for 
 the reasons assigned in their letter to Congress, that it be 
 recommended to said Council to order the immediate departure 
 of such of the said prisoners as yet refuse to swear or affirm 
 allegiance to the State of Pennsylvania, to Staunton, in Vir- 
 ginia.' 
 
 " The remonstrances made to Congress, and to the Supreme 
 Executive Council, being unavailing, the parties arrested were 
 ordered to depart for Virginia, on the 11th September, 1777, 
 when, as their last resource, they applied, under the laws of 
 Pennsylvania, to be brought before the judicial court by writs 
 of habeas corpus. 
 
 " The departure of the prisoners was committed to the care 
 of Colonel Jacob Morgan, of Bucks County, and they were 
 guarded by six of the light-horse, commanded by Alexander 
 Nesbitt and Samuel Caldwell, who were to obey the despatches 
 from the Board of War, of which General Horatio Gates was 
 president, directed to the lieutenants of the counties through 
 which the prisoners were to pass. 
 
 " The writs of habeas corpus, on being presented to the Chief 
 Justice, were marked by him, 'Allowed by Thomas McKean,' 
 and they were served on the officers who had the prisoners in 
 custody, when they had been taken on their journey as far as 
 Reading, Pennsylvania, on the 14th day of September, but the 
 officers refused to obey them. 
 
 " It appears by the Journal of the Supreme Executive 
 Council of the 1 6th of September, that Alexander Nesbitt, one 
 of the officers, had previously obtained information about the 
 
336 THE SPEECHES 
 
 "writs, and made a report of them ; when the Pennsylvania 
 Legislature, at the instance of the Supreme Executive Coun- 
 cil, passed a law on the 16th of September, 1777, to suspend 
 the habeas corpus act; and although it was an ex post facto 
 law, as it related to their case, the Supreme Executive Coun- 
 cil on that day ordered the same to be carried into effect." 
 
 Continuing the history of this case, we find 
 that — 
 
 " The party consisted of twenty persons, of whom seventeen 
 were members of the Society of Friends. They were ordered 
 first to Staunton, then a frontier town in the western settle- 
 ment of Virginia, but afterwards to be detained at Winchester, 
 where they were kept in partial confinement nearly eight 
 months, without provision being made for their support ; for 
 the only reference to this was by a resolution of the Supreme 
 Executive Council of Pennsylvania, dated April 8, 1778, as 
 follows : — 
 
 " ' Ordered, That the whole expenses of arresting and con- 
 fining the prisoners sent to Virginia, the expenses of their 
 journey, and all other incidental charges, be paid by the said 
 prisoners.' 
 
 " During the stay of the exiles at Winchester, nearly all of 
 them suffered greatly from circumstances unavoidable in their 
 situation — from anxiety, separation from their families left 
 unprotected in Philadelphia, then a besieged city, liable at any 
 time to be starved out or taken by assault ; while from sick- 
 ness and exposure during the winter season, in accommoda- 
 tions entirely unsuitable for them, two of their number departed 
 this life in the month of March, 1778." 
 
 Thus, Mr. President, we find that the writ of 
 habeas corpus was suspended by the authorities of 
 Pennsylvania, during the Revolution, in the case 
 of persons who were considered dangerous and 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 337 
 
 inimical to the country. A writ was taken out 
 and served upon the officers, and they refused to 
 surrender the prisoners, or even to give them a 
 hearing. If the Senator from Kentucky had de- 
 sired an extreme case, and wished to make a dis- 
 play of his legal and historical information, it would 
 have been very easy for him to have cited this case 
 — much more aggravated, much more extravagant, 
 much more striking, than the one in regard to 
 which he was speaking. Let it be remembered, 
 also, that this case, although it seems to be an ex- 
 travagant and striking one, occurred during the 
 war of the Revolution, under General Washington, 
 before we had a President. We find that at that 
 time the writ of habeas corpus was suspended, and 
 twenty individuals were denied even the privilege 
 of a hearing, because they were considered inimical 
 and dangerous to the liberties of the country. In 
 the midst of the Revolution, when the writ of 
 habeas corpus was as well understood as it is now, 
 when they were familiar with its operation in Great 
 Britain, when they knew and understood all the 
 rights and privileges it granted to the citizen, we 
 find that the Legislature of Pennsylvania passed 
 a law suspending the writ of habeas corpus, and 
 went back and relieved the officers who refused to 
 obey the writs, and indemnified them from the 
 operation of any wrong they might have done. If 
 the Senator wanted a strong and striking case, one 
 that would bear comment, why did he not go back 
 
 29 
 
338 THE SPEECHES 
 
 to this case, that occurred in the Revolution, during 
 the very period referred to by him ? But no ; all 
 these cases seem to have been forgotten, and the 
 mind was fixed upon one of recent occurrence. 
 There is a great similarity in them ; but the one 
 to which I have alluded is a much stronger case 
 than that referred to by the Senator. It was in 
 Philadelphia, where Congress was sitting ; it was 
 in Pennsylvania, where these persons, who were 
 considered inimical to the freedom of the country, 
 were found. Congress was appealed to, but Con- 
 gress executed the order ; and the Legislature of 
 Pennsylvania afterwards passed a law indemnifying 
 the persons who in execution of the order violated 
 the right to the writ of habeas corpus. What is 
 our case now ? We are not struggling for the 
 establishment of our nationality, but we are now 
 struggling for the existence of the Government. 
 Suppose the writ of habeas corpus has been sus- 
 pended : the question arises whether it was not a 
 justifiable suspension at the time ; and ought we 
 not now to indorse what we would ourselves have 
 done if we had been here at the time the power 
 was exercised ? 
 
 The impression is sought to be made on the pub- 
 lic mind that this is the first and only case where 
 the power has been exercised. I have shown that 
 there is one tenfold more striking, that occurred 
 during our struggle for independence. Is this the 
 first time that persons in the United States have 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 339 
 
 been placed under martial law? In 1815, when New 
 Orleans was about to be sacked, when a foreign foe 
 was upon the soil of Louisiana, New Orleans was 
 put under martial law, and Judge Hall was made 
 a prisoner because he attempted to interpose. Is 
 there a man here, or in the country, who condemns 
 General Jackson for the exercise of the power of 
 proclaiming martial law in 1815 ? Could that city 
 have been saved without placing it under martial 
 law, and making Judge Hall submit to it ? I know 
 
 7 © o 
 
 that General Jackson submitted to be arrested, 
 tried, and fined $1000 ; but what did Congress do 
 in that case ? It did just we are called on to do in 
 this case. By the restoration of his fine — an act 
 passed by an overwhelming majority in the two 
 houses of Congress — the nation said "We approve 
 what you did." Suppose, Mr. President, (and it 
 may have been the case,) that the existence of the 
 Government depended upon the protection and 
 successful defence of New Orleans ; and suppose, 
 too, it was in violation of the strict letter of the 
 Constitution for General Jackson to place New 
 Orleans under martial law, but without placing it 
 under martial law the Government would have been 
 overthrown : is there any reasonable, any intelli- 
 gent man in or out of Congress who would not 
 indorse and approve the exercise of a power which 
 was indispensable to the existence and maintenance 
 of the Government ? The Constitution was likely 
 to be overthrown, the law was about to be violated, 
 
340 THE SPEECHES 
 
 and the Government trampled under foot ; and 
 whenever it becomes necessary to prevent this, 
 even by exercising a power that comes in conflict 
 with the Constitution in time of peace, it surely 
 ought to be exercised. If General Jackson had 
 lost the city of New Orleans, and the Government 
 had been overthrown through a refusal on his part 
 to place Judge Hall and the city of New Orleans 
 under martial law, he ought to have lost his head. 
 But he acted as a soldier ; he acted as a patriot ; 
 he acted as a statesman, — as one devoted to the 
 institutions and the preservation and the existence 
 of his Government ; and the grateful homage of a 
 nation was his reward. 
 
 Then, sir, the power which has been exercised 
 in this instance is no new thing. In great emer- 
 gencies, when the life of a nation is in peril, when 
 its very existence is endangered, to question too 
 nicely, to scan too critically, its acts in the very 
 midst of that crisis, when the Government is liable 
 to be overthrown, is to make war upon it, and to 
 try to paralyze its energies. If those who seem 
 to violate the laws of the United States in their 
 efforts to preserve the Government are to be called 
 to an account, wait until the country passes out of 
 its peril ; wait until the country is relieved from its 
 difficulty ; wait until the crisis passes by, and then 
 come forward, dispassionately, and ascertain to 
 what extent the law has been violated, if indeed 
 it has been violated at all. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 341 
 
 A great ado has been made in reference to the 
 Executive proclamation calling out the militia of 
 the States to the extent of seventy-five thousand 
 men. That call was made under the authority of 
 the act of 1795, and is perfectly in accordance with 
 the law. It has been decided by the Supreme 
 Court of the United States that that act is consti- 
 tutional, and that the President alone is the judge 
 of the question whether the exigency has arisen. 
 This decision was made in the celebrated case of 
 Martin vs. Mott. Let me read from the opinion 
 of the court, delivered by Judge Story : — 
 
 " It has not been denied here that the act of 1795 is within 
 the constitutional authority of Congress, or that Congress may 
 not lawfully provide for cases of imminent danger of invasion, 
 as well as for cases where an invasion has actually taken place. 
 In our opinion, there is no ground for a doubt on this point, 
 even if it had been relied on ; for the power to provide for 
 repelling invasion includes the power to provide against the 
 attempt and danger of invasion, as the necessary and proper 
 means to effectuate the object. One of the best means to 
 repel invasion is to provide the requisite force for action before 
 the invader himself has reached the soil. 
 
 " The power thus confided by Congress to the President is, 
 doubtless, of a very high and delicate nature. A free people 
 are naturally jealous of the exercise of military power ; and 
 the power to call the militia into actual service is certainly felt 
 to be one of no ordinary magnitude. But it is not a power 
 which can be executed without a correspondent responsibility. 
 It is, in its terms, a limited power, confined to cases of actual 
 invasion, or of imminent danger of invasion. If it be a limited 
 power, the question arises, by whom is the exigency to be 
 judged c f and decided ? Is the President the sole and ex- 
 29* 
 
342 THE SPEECHES 
 
 elusive judge whether the exigency has arisen, or is it to be 
 considered as an open question, upon which every officer, to 
 whom the orders of the President are addressed*, may decide 
 for himself, and equally open to be contested by every militia 
 man who shall refuse to obey the orders of the President ? 
 "We are all of opinion that the authority to decide whether the 
 exigency has arisen belongs exclusively to the President, and 
 that his decision is conclusive upon all other persons. We 
 think that this construction necessarily results from the nature 
 of the power itself and from the manifest object contemplated 
 by the act of Congress. The power itself is to be exercised 
 upon sudden emergencies, upon great occasions of state, and 
 under circumstances which may be vital to the existence of the 
 Union. A prompt and unhesitating obedience to orders is in- 
 dispensable to the complete attainment of the object. The ser- 
 vice is a military service, and the command of a military nature ; 
 and in such cases every delay and every obstacle to an efficient 
 and immediate compliance necessarily tend to jeopard the pub- 
 lic interests." — Martin vs. Mott, 12 Wheaton's Reports, p. 29. 
 
 We see, then, that the power is clear as to calling 
 out the militia ; and we have seen that we have 
 precedents for the suspension of the writ of habeas 
 corpus. 
 
 The next objection made is, that the President 
 had no power to make additions to the Navy and 
 Army. I say that in this he is justified by the 
 great law of necessity. At the time, I believe it 
 was necessary to the existence of the Government ; 
 and it being necessary, he had a right to exercise 
 all those powers that, in his judgment, the crisis 
 demanded for the maintenance of the existence of 
 the Government itself. The real question — if you 
 condemn the President for acting in the absence 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 343 
 
 of law — is, Do you condemn the propriety of his 
 course ; do you condemn the increase of the Army ; 
 do you condemn the increase of the Navy ? If 
 you oppose the measure simply upon the ground 
 that the Executive called them forth anticipating 
 law, I ask what will you do now ? The question 
 presents itself at this time, Is it not necessary to 
 increase the Army and the Navy ? If you con- 
 demn the exercise of the power by the Executive 
 in the absence of law, what will you do now, as 
 the law-making power, when it is manifest that the 
 Army and Navy should be increased ? You make 
 war upon the Executive for anticipating the action 
 of Congress. Does not the Government need an 
 increase of the Army and the Navy ? Where do 
 gentlemen stand now ? Are they for it ? Do they 
 sustain the Government ? Are they giving it a 
 helping hand ? No ; they go back and find fault 
 with the exercise of a power that they say was 
 without law ; but now, when they have the power 
 to make the law, and when the necessity is appar- 
 ent, they stand back and refuse. Where does that 
 place those who take that course ? It places them 
 against the Government, and against placing the 
 means in the hands of the Government to defend 
 and perpetuate its existence. The object is ap- 
 parent, Mr. President. We had enemies of the 
 Government here last winter ; in my opinion, we 
 have enemies of the Government here now. 
 I said that I agreed with the Senator from Ken- 
 
344 THE SPEECHES 
 
 tucky that there was a design — a deliberate deter- 
 mination — to change the nature and character of our 
 Government. Yes, sir, it has been the design for 
 a long time. All the talk about slavery and com- 
 promise has been but a pretext. We had a long 
 disquisition, and a very feeling one, from the Sen- 
 ator from Kentucky. He became pathetic on the 
 hopelessness of compromises. Did not the Senator 
 from California 1 the other day show unmistakably 
 that it was not compromises they wanted ? I will 
 add, that compromise was the thing they most 
 feared ; and their great effort was to get out of 
 Congress before any compromise could be made. 
 From the first, their cry was for peaceable secession 
 and reconstruction. They talked not of compro- 
 mise ; and, I repeat, their greatest dread and fear 
 was, that something would be agreed upon ; that 
 their last and only pretext would be swept from 
 under them, and that they would stand before the 
 country naked and exposed. The Senator from 
 California pointed out to you a number of these 
 men who stood here and did not vote for certain 
 propositions of compromise, and by their means 
 those propositions were lost. 
 
 What was the action before the committee of 
 thirteen ? Why did not that committee agree ? 
 Some of the most ultra men from the North were 
 members of that committee, and they proposed to 
 amend the Constitution so as to provide that Con- 
 
 l Mr. Latham. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 345 
 
 gress in the future never should interfere with the 
 subject of slavery. The committee failed to agree, 
 and some of its members at once telegraphed to 
 their States that they must go out of the Union at 
 once. But after all that transpired in the early 
 part of the session, what was done ? We know 
 what the argument has been, in times gone by, 
 again and again. It has been said that one great 
 object of the North was, first to abolish slavery 
 in the District of Columbia and the slave-trade 
 between the States, as a kind of initiative measure ; 
 next, to exclude it from the Territories ; and when 
 the free States constituted three fourths of all the 
 States, so as to have power to change the Consti- 
 tution, they would amend the Constitution so as to 
 give Congress power to legislate upon the subject 
 of slavery in the States, and expel it from the 
 States in which it is now. Has not that been the 
 argument ? Now, how does the matter stand ? 
 At the last session of Congress seven States with- 
 drew ; it may be said that eight withdrew ; reducing 
 the remaining slave States down to one fourth of 
 the whole number of States. The charge has been 
 made, that, whenever the free States constituted a 
 majority in the Congress of the United States suf- 
 ficient to amend the Constitution, they would so 
 amend it as to legislate upon the institution of 
 slavery within the States, and that the institution 
 of slavery would be overthrown. This has been 
 the argument ; it has been repeated again and again 4 
 
346 THE SPEECHES 
 
 and hence the great struggle about the Territories. 
 The argument was, that we must prevent the cre- 
 ation of free States; we did not want to be re- 
 duced to that point where, under the sixth article 
 of the Constitution, three fourths could amend 
 the Constitution so as to exclude slavery from the 
 States. This has been the great point ; this has 
 been the rampart over which it has been urged that 
 the free States wanted to pass. Now, how does the 
 fact stand ? Let us " render unto Caesar the things 
 that are Caesar's." We reached, at the last session, 
 just the point where we were in the power of the 
 free States, and then what was done ? Instead of 
 an amendment to the Constitution of the United 
 States conferring power upon Congress to legislate 
 upon the subject of slavery, what was done ? This 
 joint resolution was passed by a two-thirds majority 
 in each House : — 
 
 " Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
 the United States of America in Congress assembled, That 
 the following article be proposed to the Legislatures of the 
 several States, as an amendment to the Constitution of the 
 United States, which, when ratified by three fourths of said 
 Legislatures, shall be valid, to all intents and purposes, as 
 part of the said Constitution, viz : 
 
 " Art. 13. No amendment shall be made to the Constitu- 
 tion which will authorize or give to Congress the power to 
 abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic insti- 
 tutions thereof, including that of persons held to service or 
 labor by the laws of said State." 
 
 Is not that very conclusive ? Here is an amend- 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 347 
 
 ment to the Constitution of the United States to 
 make the Constitution unamendable upon that sub- 
 ject, as it is upon some other subjects ; that Con- 
 gress, in the future, should have no power to legis- 
 late on the subject of slavery within the States. 
 Talk about " compromise," and about the settlement 
 of this question ; how can you settle it more sub- 
 stantially ? How can you get a guaranty that is 
 more binding than such an amendment to the Con- 
 stitution ? This places the institution of slavery in 
 the States entirely beyond the control of Congress. 
 Why have not the Legislatures that talk about 
 44 reconstruction " and " compromise " and 44 guaran- 
 ties," taken up this amendment to the Constitution 
 and adopted it? Some States have adopted it. 
 How many Southern States have done so ? Take 
 my own State, for instance. Instead of accepting 
 guaranties protecting them in all future time against 
 the legislation of Congress on the subject of slavery, 
 they undertake to pass ordinances violating the Con- 
 stitution of the country, and taking the State out of 
 the Union and into the Southern Confederacy. It 
 is evident to me from all these things, that with 
 many the talk about compromise and the settlement 
 of this question is mere pretext, especially with those 
 who understand the question. 
 
 What more was done at the last session of Con- 
 gress, when the North had the power ? Let us tell 
 the truth. Three territorial bills were brought for- 
 ward and passed. You remember in 1847, when 
 
348 THE SPEECHES 
 
 the agitation arose in reference to the Wilmot pro- 
 viso. You remember in 1850 the contest about 
 slavery prohibition in the Territories. You remem- 
 ber in 1854 the excitement in reference to the Kan- 
 sas-Nebraska bill, and the power conferred on the 
 Legislature by it. Now we have a Constitutional 
 amendment, proposed at a time when the Republi- 
 cans have the power ; and at the same time they 
 come forward with three territorial bills, and in 
 neither of those bills can be found any prohibition, 
 so far as slavery in the Territories is concerned. 
 Colorado, Nevada, and Dakota are organized with- 
 out any prohibition of slavery. But what do you 
 find in these bills ? Mark, Mr. President, that there 
 is no slavery prohibition ; mark too, the language of 
 the sixth section, conferring power upon the Terri- 
 torial Legislature, — 
 
 " Sec. 6. And be it further enacted, That the legislative 
 power of the Territory shall extend to all rightful subjects 
 of legislation consistent with the Constitution of the United 
 States and the provisions of this act ; but no law shall be 
 passed interfering with the primary disposal of the soil ; no 
 tax shall be imposed upon the property of the United States ; 
 nor shall the lands or other property of non-residents be taxed 
 higher than the lands or other property of residents ; nor shall 
 any law be passed impairing the rights of private property ; 
 nor shall any discrimination be made in taxing different kinds 
 of property ; but all property subject to taxation shall be in 
 proportion to the value of the property taxed." 
 
 Can there be anything more clear and conclusive ? 
 First, there is no prohibition ; next, the Legislature 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 349 
 
 shall have no power to legislate so as to impair the 
 rights of private property, and shall not tax one de- 
 scription of property higher than another. Now, 
 Mr. President, I ask any reasonable, intelligent man 
 throughout the Union, to take the amendment to 
 the Constitution, take the three territorial bills, put 
 them all together, and how much of the slavery ques- 
 tion is left ? Is there any of it left ? Yet we hear 
 talk about compromise ; and it is said the Union 
 must be broken up because you cannot get com- 
 promise. Does not this settle the whole question ? 
 I should like to know how much more secure we 
 can be in regard to this question of slavery ? These 
 three territorial bills cover every square inch of ter- 
 ritory we have got ; and here is an amendment to 
 the Constitution embracing the whole question, so 
 far as the States and the public lands of the United 
 States are concerned. I know there are some who 
 are sincere in this talk about compromise ; but there 
 are others who are merely making it a pretext, 
 who come here claiming something in the hope that 
 it will be refused, and that then, upon that refusal, 
 their States may be carried out of the Union. 
 
 I am as much for compromise as any one can be ; 
 and there is no one who would desire more than 
 myself to see peace and prosperity restored to the 
 land ; but when we look at the condition of the 
 country, we find that rebellion is rife, that treason 
 has reared its head. A distinguished Senator from 
 Georgia once said, " When traitors become numer- 
 
 30 
 
350 THE SPEECHES 
 
 ous enough, treason becomes respectable." Traitors 
 are getting to be so numerous now that I suppose 
 treason has almost got to be respectable ; but God 
 being willing, whether traitors be many or few, as I 
 have hitherto waged war against traitors and trea- 
 son, and in behalf of the Government which was 
 constructed by our fathers, I intend to continue it to 
 the end. [Applause in the galleries.] 
 
 The President pro tempore. Order ! 
 
 Mr. Johnson continued : — Mr. President, we 
 are in the midst of a civil war ; blood has been shed ; 
 life has been sacrificed. Who commenced it ? Of 
 that we will speak hereafter. I am speaking now 
 of the talk about compromise. Traitors and rebels 
 are standing with arms in their hands, and it is said 
 that we must go forward and compromise with them. 
 They are in the wrong ; they are making war upon 
 the Government ; they are trying to upturn and de- 
 stroy our free institutions. I say to them that the 
 compromise I have to offer under the existing cir- 
 cumstances is, — " Ground your arms ; obey the 
 laws ; acknowledge the supremacy of the Consti- 
 tution ; — when you do that, I will talk to you 
 about compromises." All the compromise that I 
 have to make is the compromise of the Constitu- 
 tion of the United States. It is one of the best 
 compromises that can be made. We lived under 
 it from 1789 down to the 20th of December, 1860, 
 when South Carolina undertook to go out of the 
 Union. We prospered; we advanced in wealth, 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 351 
 
 in commerce, in agriculture, in trade, in manufac- 
 tures, in all the arts and sciences, and in religion, 
 more than any people upon the face of God's earth 
 had ever done before in the same time. What better 
 compromise do you want ? You lived under it un- 
 til you got to be a great and prosperous people. It 
 was made by our fathers, and cemented by their 
 blood. When you talk to me about compromise, I 
 hold up to you the Constitution under which you > 
 derived all your greatness, and which was made by 
 the fathers of your country. It will protect you in 
 all your rights. 
 
 But it is said we had better divide the country, 
 and make a treaty and restore peace. If, under 
 the Constitution which was framed by Washington 
 and Madison and the patriots of the Revolution, 
 we cannot live as brothers, as we have in times gone 
 by, I ask, can we live quietly under a treaty, sepa- 
 rated, as enemies ? Suppose you make a treaty of 
 peace and a division, our geographical and physical 
 position will remain just the same ; and if the same 
 causes of irritation, if the same causes of division 
 continue to exist, and we cannot now live as broth- 
 ers in fraternity under the Constitution made by 
 our fathers, and as friends in the same Government, ■ 
 how can we live in peace as aliens and enemies un- 
 der a treaty? It cannot be done ; it is impracticable. 
 
 But, Mr. President, I concur fully with the dis- 
 tinguished Senator from Kentucky in the dislike 
 expressed by him to a change in the form of our 
 
852 THE SPEECHES 
 
 Government. He seemed to be apprehensive of a 
 dictatorship. He feared there might be a change in 
 the nature and character of our institutions. I could, 
 if I chose, refer to many proofs to establish the fact 
 that there has been a design to change the nature 
 of our Government. I could refer to Mr. Rhett ; 
 I could refer to Mr. Inglis ; I could refer to various 
 others to prove this. The " Montgomery Daily 
 Advertiser," one of the organs of the so-called 
 Southern Confederacy, says, — 
 
 " Has it been a precipitate revolution ? It has not. With 
 coolness and deliberation the subject has been thought of for 
 forty years ; for ten years it has been the all-absorbing theme 
 in political circles. From Maine to Mexico all the different 
 phases and forms of the question have been presented to the 
 people, until nothing else was thought of, nothing else spoken 
 of, and nothing else taught in many of the political schools." 
 
 This, in connection with other things, shows that 
 this movement has been long contemplated, and that 
 the idea has been to separate from and break up this 
 Government, to change its nature and character ; 
 and now, after they have attempted the separation, 
 if they can succeed, their intention is to subjugate 
 and overthrow and make the other States submit to 
 their form of government. 
 
 To carry out the idea of the Senator from Ken- 
 tucky, I want to show that there is conclusive proof 
 of a design to change our Government. 
 
 I quote from the " Georgia Chronicle " : — 
 
 " Our own republican Government has failed midway in its 
 trial, and with it have nearly vanished the hopes of those phi- 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 353 
 
 lanthropists who, believing in man's capacity for self-govern- 
 ment, believed, therefore, in spite of so many failures, in the 
 practicability of a republic." 
 
 " If this Government has gone down," asks the 
 editor, " what shall be its substitute ? " And he 
 answers by saying that, as to the present generation, 
 " it seems their only resort must be to a constitu- 
 tional monarchy." Hence you see the Senator and 
 myself begin to agree in the proposition that the 
 nature and character of the Government are to be 
 changed. 
 
 William Howard Russell, the celebrated cor- 
 respondent of the "London Times," spent some time 
 in South Carolina, and he writes : — 
 
 " From all quarters have come to my ears the echoes of the 
 same voice ; it may be feigned, but there is no discord in the 
 note, and it sounds in wonderful strength and monotony all 
 over the country. Shades of George III., of North, of John- 
 son, of all who contended against the great rebellion which 
 tore these colonies from England, can you hear the chorus 
 which rings through the State of Marion, Sumter, and Pinck- 
 ney, and not clap your ghostly hands in triumph ? That voice 
 says, ' If we could only get one of the royal race of England 
 to rule over us, we should be content ! ' Let there be no mis- 
 conception on this point. That sentiment, varied in a hundred 
 ways, has been repeated to me over and over again. There 
 is a general admission that the means to such an end are 
 wanting, and that the desire cannot be gratified. But the 
 admiration for monarchical institutions on the English model, 
 for privileged classes, and for a landed aristocracy and gentry, 
 is undisguised and apparently genuine. With the pride of 
 having achieved their independence, is mingled in the South 
 Carolinian's heart a strange regret at the result and conse- 
 30* 
 
354 THE SPEECHES 
 
 quences, and many are they who ' would go back to-morrow 
 if we could.' An intense affection for the British connection, 
 a love of British habits and customs, a respect for British sen- 
 timent, law, authority, order, civilization, and literature, pre- 
 eminently distinguish the inhabitants of this State," &c. 
 
 This idea was not confined to localities. It was 
 extensively prevalent, though policy prompted its 
 occasional repudiation. At a meeting of the people 
 of Bibb County, Georgia, the proposal of a consti- 
 tutional monarchy for the Southern States, " as 
 recommended by some of the advocates of imme- 
 diate disunion," was discussed but not concurred 
 in." Here is evidence that the public mind had 
 been sought to be influenced in that direction ; 
 but the people were not prepared for it. Mr. 
 Toombs, of Georgia, during the delivery of a 
 speech by Mr. A. H. Stephens, before the Legis- 
 lature of that State, did not hesitate to express a 
 preference for the form of the British Government 
 over our own. 1 
 
 Not long since — some time in the month of 
 May — I read in the " Richmond Whig," published 
 at the place where their government is now oper- 
 ating, — the centre from which they are directing 
 their armies which are making war upon this Gov- 
 ernment, — an article in which it is stated that, 
 rather than submit to the Administration now in 
 power in the city of Washington, they would prefer 
 passing under the constitutional reign of the ami- 
 
 1 See The Rebellion Record. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 355 
 
 able Queen of Great Britain. I agree, therefore, 
 with the Senator from Kentucky, that there is a 
 desire to change this Government. We see it 
 emanating from every point in the South. Mr. 
 Toombs was not willing to wait for the movement 
 of the people. Mr. Stephens, in his speech to the 
 Legislature of Georgia, preferred the calling of a 
 convention ; but Mr. Toombs was unwilling to 
 wait. Mr. Stephens was unwilling to see any 
 violent action in advance of the action of the peo- 
 ple ; but Mr. Toombs replied, — "I will not wait; 
 I will take the sword in my own hand, disregard- 
 ing the will of the people, even in the shape of a 
 convention ; " and history will record that he kept 
 his word. He and others had become tired and 
 dissatisfied with a government of the people ; they 
 have lost confidence in man's capacity for self- 
 government ; and, furthermore, they would be will- 
 ing to form an alliance with Great Britain ; or, if 
 Great Britain were slow in forming the alliance, 
 with France ; and they know they can succeed 
 there, on account of the hate and malignity which 
 exist between the two nations. They would be 
 willing to pass under the reign of the amiable and 
 constitutional Queen of Great Britain ! Sir, I love 
 woman, and woman's reign in the right place ; but 
 when we talk about the amiable and accomplished 
 Queen of Great Britain, I must say that all our 
 women are ladies, all are queens, all are equal to 
 Queen Victoria, and many of them greatly her 
 
356 THE SPEECHES 
 
 superiors. They desire no such thing ; nor do we. 
 Hence we see whither this movement is tending. 
 It is to a change of government ; in that the Sen- 
 ator and myself most fully concur. 
 
 The Senator from Kentucky was wonderfully 
 alarmed at the idea of a "dictator," and replied 
 with as much point as possible to the Senator 
 from Oregon, who made the suggestion. But, sir, 
 what do we find in the " Richmond Examiner," 
 published at the seat of government of the so- 
 called Confederate States? 
 
 " In the late debates of the congress of this Confederacy, 
 Mr. Wright of Georgia showed a true appreciation of the 
 crisis when he advocated the grant of power to the president 
 that would enable him to make immediate defence of Rich- 
 mond, and to bring the whole force of the Confederacy to bear 
 on the affairs of Virginia. It is here that the fate of the Con- 
 federacy is to be decided ; and the time is too short to permit 
 red tape to interfere with public safety. No power in exec- 
 utive hands can be too great, no discretion too absolute, at 
 such moments as these. We need a dictator. Let lawyers 
 talk when the world has time to hear them. Now let the 
 sword do its work. Usurpations of power by the chief, for 
 the preservation of the people from robbers and murderers, will 
 be reckoned as genius and patriotism by all sensible men in 
 the world now, and by every historian that will judge the 
 deed hereafter." 
 
 The articles in their leading papers, the "Whig" 
 and the " Examiner," and the speeches of their 
 leading men, all show unmistakably that their great 
 object is to change the character of the Govern- 
 ment. Hence we come back to the proposition 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 32* 
 
 that it is a contest whether the people shall govern 
 or not. I have here an article that appeared in 
 the " Memphis Bulletin," of my own State, from 
 which it appears that under this reign of seces- 
 sion, this reign of terror, that is destructive of all 
 good, and the accomplishment of nothing that is 
 right, they have got things beyond their control : — 
 
 " In times like these there must be one ruling power to 
 which all others must yield. ' In a multitude of counsellors,' 
 saith the Book of Books, ' there is safety ; ' but nowhere are 
 we told, in history or revelation, that there is aught of safety 
 in a multitude of rulers. Any ' rule of action,' sometimes 
 called the ' law,' is better than a multitude of conflicting, 
 irreconcilable statutes. Any one head is better than forty, 
 each of which may conceive itself the nonpareil, par excel- 
 lence, supreme ' caput ' of all civil and military affairs. 
 
 " Let Governor Harris be king, if need be, and Baugh a 
 despot." 
 
 " Let Governor Harris be king, and Baugh a 
 despot," says the " Bulletin." Who is Baugh ? The 
 Mayor of Memphis. The mob " reign of terror " 
 gotten up under this doctrine of secession is so 
 great that we find that they are appealing to the 
 one-man power. They are even willing to make 
 the mayor of the city a despot, and Isham G. 
 Harris, a little petty Governor of Tennessee, a 
 king. He is to be made king over the State that 
 contains the bones of the immortal, the illustrious 
 Jackson. Isham G. Harris a kino; ! Or Jeff 
 Davis a dictator, and Isham G. Harris one of his 
 satraps. He a king over the free and patriotic 
 
358 THE SPEECHES 
 
 people of Tennessee ! Isham G. Harris to be my 
 king. Yes, sir, my king! I know the man. I 
 know his elements. I know the ingredients that 
 constitute the compound called Isham G. Harris. 
 King Harris to be my master, and the master of 
 the people that I have the proud and conscious 
 satisfaction of representing on this floor ! Mr. 
 President, he should not be my slave. [Applause 
 in the galleries.] 
 
 The President pro tempore. Order ! A repe- 
 tition of the offence will compel the Chair to order 
 the galleries to be cleared forthwith. The order 
 of the Senate must and shall be preserved. No 
 demonstrations of applause or of disapprobation will 
 be allowed. The Chair hopes not to be compelled 
 to resort to the extremity of clearing the galleries 
 of the audience. 
 
 Mr. Johnson. I was proceeding with this line 
 of argument to show that the Senator from Ken- 
 tucky and myself agree in the general proposition 
 that there was a fixed determination to change the 
 character and nature of the Government ; and so 
 far I think I have succeeded very well. And now, 
 when we are looking at the elements of which this 
 Southern Confederacy is composed, it may be well 
 enough to examine the principles of the elements 
 out of which is to be made a government that they 
 prefer to this. We have shown, so far as the 
 slavery question is concerned, that the whole ques- 
 tion is settled ; and it is shown to the American 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 359 
 
 people and to the world that the people of the 
 Southern States have now got no right which they 
 said they had lost before they went out of this 
 Union ; but, on the contrary, many of their rights 
 have been diminished, and oppression and tyranny 
 have been inaugurated in their stead. Let me ask 
 you, sir, to-day, and let me ask the nation, what 
 right has any State in this so-called confederacy 
 lost under the Constitution of the United States? 
 Let me ask each individual citizen in the United 
 States, what right has he lost by the continuance 
 of this Government based on the Constitution of the 
 United States? Is there a man North or South, 
 East or West, who can put his finger on one single 
 privilege, or one single right, of which he has been 
 deprived by the Constitution or Union of these 
 States ? Can he do it ? Can he see it ? Can he 
 feel it ? No, sir ; there is no one right that he has 
 lost. But how many rights and privileges, and 
 how much protection have they lost by going out 
 of the Union, and violating the Constitution of the 
 United States ! 
 
 Pursuing this line of argument in regard to the 
 formation of their government, let us take South 
 Carolina, for instance, and see what her notions 
 of government are. She is the leading spirit, and 
 will constitute one of the master elements in the 
 formation of this proposed Confederate Government. 
 Let us see what are her notions of government — 
 a State that will contribute to the formation of the 
 
360 THE SPEECHES 
 
 government that is to exist hereafter. In the con- 
 stitution of South Carolina it is provided that — 
 
 " No person shall be eligible to a seat in the House of 
 Representatives, unless he is a free white man, of the age of 
 twenty-one years, and hath been a citizen and resident of this 
 State three years previous to his election. If a resident in 
 the election district, he shall not be eligible to a seat in the 
 House of Representatives, unless he be legally seized and 
 possessed, in his own right, of a settled freehold estate of five 
 hundred acres of land and ten negroes." 
 
 This is the notion that South Carolina has of 
 the necessary qualifications of a member of the 
 lower branch of the State Legislature. Now, I 
 desire to ask the distinguished Senator from Ken- 
 tucky — who seems to be so tenacious about com- 
 promises, about rights, and about the settlement 
 of this question, and who can discover that the 
 Constitution has been violated so often and so 
 flagrantly by the Administration now in power, 
 yet never can see that it has been violated any- 
 where else — if he desires to seek under this South 
 Carolina government for his lost rights ? I do 
 not intend to be personal. I wish he were in 
 his seat, for he knows that I have the greatest 
 kindness for him. I am free to say, in connec- 
 tion with what I am about to observe, that I am 
 a little selfish in this ; because if I lived in South 
 Carolina, with these disabilities or qualifications 
 affixed upon a member, I would not be eligible 
 to a seat in the lower branch of the Legislature. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 361 
 
 That would be a poor place for me to go and get 
 my rights; would it not? I doubt whether the 
 Senator from Kentucky is eligible to-day to a seat 
 in the lower branch of the Legislature of South 
 Carolina. I should not be, and I believe I am just 
 as good as any who do take seats there. 
 
 In looking further into the constitution of South 
 Carolina, in order to ascertain what are her prin- 
 ciples of government, what do we find ? We find 
 it provided that, in the apportionment of these 
 representatives, the whole number of whke in- 
 habitants is to be divided by sixty-two, and every 
 sixty-second part is to have one member. Then 
 all the taxes are to be divided by sixty-two, and 
 every sixty-second part of the taxes is to have one 
 member also. Hence we see that slaves, consti- 
 tuting the basis of property, would get the largest 
 amount of representation ; and we see that prop- 
 erty goes in an equal representation to all the num- 
 bers, while those numbers constitute a part of the 
 property-holders. That is the basis of their repre- 
 sentation. 
 
 Sir, the people whom I represent desire no such 
 form of government. Notwithstanding they have 
 been borne down ; notwithstanding there has been 
 an army of fifty-five thousand men created by the 
 Legislature ; notwithstanding 15,000,000 of money 
 have been appropriated to be expended against the 
 Union ; and notwithstanding the arms manufac- 
 tured by the Government, and distributed among 
 
 31 
 
362 THE SPEECHES 
 
 the Stat3s for the protection of the people, have 
 been denied to them by this little petty tyrant of a 
 king, and are now turned upon the Government 
 for its overthrow and destruction, those people, 
 when left to themselves to carry out their own 
 government and the honest dictates of their own 
 consciences, will be found to be opposed to this 
 revolution. 
 
 Mr. President, while the congress of the Confed- 
 erate States was engaged in the formation of their 
 constitution, I find a protest from South Carolina 
 against a decision of that congress in relation to the 
 slave-trade published in the " Charleston Mercury," 
 of February 13. It is written by L. W. Spratt to 
 " Hon. John Perkins, delegate from Louisiana." It 
 begins in this way : — 
 
 " From the abstract of the constitution for the provisional 
 government, published in the papers this morning, it appears 
 that the slave-trade, except with the slave States of North 
 America, shall be prohibited. The congress, therefore, not 
 content with the laws of the late United States against it, 
 which, it is to be presumed, were readopted, have unalter- 
 ably fixed the subject, by a provision of the constitution." 
 
 He goes on and protests. We all know that that 
 constitution is made for the day, just for the time 
 being, a mere tub thrown out to the whale, to amuse 
 and entertain the public mind for a time. We know 
 this to be so. But in making his argument, Mr. 
 Spratt, a commissioner who went to Florida, a 
 member of the convention that took the State of 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 363 
 
 South Carolina out of the Union, says, in this pro- 
 test, — 
 
 " The South is now in the formation of a slave republic. 
 This, perhaps, is not admitted generally. There are many 
 contented to believe that the South, as a geographical section, 
 is in mere assertion of its independence ; that it is instinct 
 with no especial truth — pregnant of no distinct social nature ; 
 that for some unaccountable reason the two sections have 
 become opposed to each other ; that for reasons equally 
 insufficient there is disagreement between the people that 
 direct them ; and that from no overruling necessity, no im- 
 possibility of coexistence, but as mere matter of policy, it has 
 been considered best for the South to strike out for herself, 
 and establish an independence of her own. This, I fear, 
 is an inadequate conception of the controversy." 
 
 This indicates the whole scheme. 
 
 " The contest is not between the North and South as 
 geographical sections, for between such sections merely 
 there can be no contest ; nor between the people of the 
 North and the people of the South, for our relations have 
 been pleasant ; and on neutral grounds there is still nothing 
 to estrange us. We eat together, trade together, and prac- 
 tise yet, in intercourse, with great respect, the courtesies 
 of common life. But the real contest is between the two 
 forms of society which have become established, the one 
 at the North, and the other at the South." 
 
 The protest continues : — 
 
 11 With that perfect economy of resources, that just appli- 
 cation of power, that concentration of forces, that security 
 of order which results to slavery from the permanent direction 
 of its best intelligence, there is no other form of human labor 
 that can stand against it, and it will build itself a home, and 
 erect for itself, at some point within the present limits of the 
 
364 THE SPEECHES 
 
 Southern States, a structure of imperial power and grandeur 
 — a glorious confederacy of States that will stand aloft and 
 serene for ages amid the anarchy of democracies that will 
 
 reel around it." 
 
 " But it may be that to this end another revolution may be 
 necessary. It is to be apprehended that this contest between 
 democracy and slavery is not yet over. It is certain that both 
 forms of society exist within the limits of the Southern States; 
 both are distinctly developed within the limits of Virginia ; 
 and there, whether we perceive the fact or not, the war 
 already rages. In that State there are about five hundred 
 thousand slaves to about one million of whites ; and as at 
 least as many slaves as masters are necessary to the consti- 
 tution of slave society, about five hundred thousand of the 
 white population are in legitimate relation to the slaves, 
 and the rest are in excess." 
 
 Hence we see the propriety of Mr. Mason's letter, 
 in which he declared that all those who would not 
 vote for secession must leave the State, and thereby 
 you get clear of the excess of white population over 
 slaves. They must emigrate. 
 
 " Like an excess of alkali or acid in chemical experiments, 
 they are unfixed in the social compound. Without legitimate 
 connection with the slave, they are in competition with him." 
 
 The protest continues : — 
 
 " And even in this State [South Carolina] the ultimate 
 result is not determined. The slave condition here would 
 seem to be established. There is here an excess of one hun- 
 dred and twenty thousand slaves ; and here is fairly exhibited 
 the normal nature of the institution. The officers of the 
 State are slave-owners, and the representatives of slave-owners. 
 In their public acts they exhibit the consciousness of a supe- 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 365 
 
 rior position. Without unusual individual ability, they exhibit 
 the elevation of tone and composure of public sentiment 
 proper to a master class. There is no appeal to the mass, 
 for there is no mass to appeal to ; there are no demagogues, 
 for there is no populace to breed them ; judges are not forced 
 upon the stump ; governors are not to be dragged before the 
 people ; and when there is cause to act upon the fortunes of 
 our social institution, there is perhaps an unusual readiness 
 to meet it." 
 
 Again : — 
 
 " It is probable that more abundant pauper labor may pour 
 in, and it is to be feared that even in this State, the purest in 
 its slave condition, democracy may gain a foothold, and that 
 here also the contest for existence may be waged between 
 them. 
 
 " It thus appears that the contest is not ended with a dis- 
 solution of the Union, and that the agents of that contest still 
 exist within the limits of the Southern States. The causes 
 that have contributed to the defeat of slavery still occur ; 
 our slaves are still drawn off by higher prices to the West. 
 There is still foreign pauper labor ready to supply their place. 
 Maryland, Virginia, Kentucky, Missouri, possibly Tennessee 
 and North Carolina, may lose their slaves, as New York, 
 Pennsylvania, and New Jersey have done. In that condi- 
 tion they must recommence the contest. There is no avoiding 
 that necessity. The systems cannot mix ; and thus it is that 
 slavery, like the Thracian horse returning from the field of 
 victory, still bears a master on his back ; and, having achieved 
 one revolution to escape democracy at the North, it must still 
 achieve another to escape it at the South. That it will ulti- 
 mately triumph none can doubt. It will become redeemed 
 and vindicated, and the only question now to be determined 
 is, shall there be another revolution to that end ? " 
 
 " If, in short, you shall own slavery as the source of your 
 31* 
 
366 . THE SPEECHES 
 
 authority, and act for it, and erect, as you are commissioned 
 to erect, not only a Southern, but a slave republic, the work 
 
 will be accomplished." 
 
 " But if you shall not ; if you shall commence by ignoring 
 slavery, or shall be content to edge it on by indirection ; if 
 you shall exhibit care but for the republic, respect but a de- 
 mocracy ; if you shall stipulate for the toleration ©f slavery, 
 as an existing evil, by admitting assumptions to its prejudice, 
 and restrictions to its power and progress, you reinaugurate 
 the blunder of 1789; you will combine States, whether true 
 or not, to slavery ; you will have no tests of faith ; some will 
 find it to their interests to abandon it ; slave labor will be 
 fettered ; hireling labor will be free ; your confederacy is 
 again divided into antagonistic societies ; the irrepressible 
 conflict is again commenced ; and as slavery can sustain the 
 structure of a stable government, and will sustain such struct- 
 ure, and as it will sustain no structure but its own, another 
 revolution comes ; but whether in the order and propriety 
 of this, is gravely to be doubted." 
 
 In another part of this protest I find this par- 
 agraph : — 
 
 " If the clause be carried into the permanent government, 
 our whole movement is defeated. It will abolitionize the 
 border slave States — it will brand our institution. Slavery 
 cannot share a government with democracy — it cannot 
 bear a brand upon it; thence another revolution. It may 
 be painful, but we must make it. The constitution can- 
 not be changed without. The border States, discharged of 
 slavery, will oppose it. They are to be included by the 
 concession : they will be sufficient to defeat it. It is doubt- 
 ful if another movement will be as peaceful." * 
 
 In this connection, let me read the following 
 paragraph from De Bow's " Review " : — 
 
 1 See The Rebellion Record. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 367 
 
 " All government begins with usurpation, and is continued 
 by force. Nature puts the ruling elements uppermost, and 
 the masses below and subject to those elements. Less than 
 this is not government. The right to govern resides in a 
 very small minority, the duty to obey is inherent in the 
 great mass of mankind." 
 
 We find by an examination of all these articles, 
 that the whole idea is to establish a republic based 
 upon slavery exclusively, in which the great mass 
 of the people are not to participate. We find an 
 argument made here against the admission of non- 
 slaveholding States into their Confederacy. If they 
 refuse to admit a non-slaveholding State into the 
 Confederacy, for the very same reason they will ex- 
 clude an individual who is not a slaveholder, in a 
 slaveholding State, from participating in the exercise 
 of the powers of the Government. Take the whole 
 argument through, and that is the plain meaning of 
 it. Mr. Spratt says, that sooner or later it will be 
 done ; and if the present revolution will not accom- 
 plish it, it must be brought about even if another 
 revolution has to take place. We see, therefore, 
 that it is most clearly contemplated to change the 
 character and nature of the Government so far as 
 they are concerned. They have lost confidence in 
 the integrity, in the capability, in the virtue and in- 
 telligence of the great mass of the people to govern. 
 Sir, in the section of the country where I live, not- 
 withstanding we reside in a slave State, we believe 
 that freemen are capable of self-government. We 
 care not in what shape their property exists ; whether 
 
368 THE SPEECHES 
 
 it is in the shape of slaves or otherwise. We hold 
 that it is upon the intelligent free white people of 
 the country that all Governments should rest, and 
 by them all Governments should be controlled. 
 
 I think, therefore, sir, that the President and the 
 Senator from Kentucky have stated the question 
 aright. This is a struggle between two forms of 
 government. It is a struggle for the existence of 
 the Government we have. The issue is now fairly 
 made up. All who favor free government must 
 stand with the Constitution, and in favor of the 
 Union of the States as it is. That Union being once 
 restored, the Constitution again becoming supreme 
 and paramount, when peace, law, and order shall 
 be restored, when the Government shall be restored 
 to its pristine position, then, if necessary, we can 
 come forward under proper and favorable circum- 
 stances to amend, change, alter, and modify the Con- 
 stitution, as pointed out by the fifth article of the 
 instrument, and thereby perpetuate the Govern- 
 ment. This can be done, and this should be done. 
 
 We have heard a great deal said in reference to 
 the violation of the Constitution. The Senator 
 from Kentucky seems exceedingly sensitive about 
 violations of the Constitution. Sir, it seems to 
 me, admitting that his apprehensions are well 
 founded, that a violation of the Constitution for the 
 preservation of the Government, is more tolerable 
 than one for its destruction. In all these complaints, 
 in all these arraignments of the present Government 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 369 
 
 for violation of law and disregard of the Constitu- 
 tion, have you heard, as was forcibly and eloquently 
 said by the Senator from Illinois, 1 before me, one 
 word uttered against violations of the Constitution 
 and the trampling under foot of law by the States, 
 or the party, now making war upon the Govern- 
 ment of the United States ? Not one word, sir. 
 
 The Senator enumerates what he calls violations 
 of the Constitution, — the suspension of the writ of 
 habeas corpus, the proclaiming of martial law, the 
 increase of the Army and Navy, and the existing 
 war; and then he asks, " Why all this?" The 
 answer must be apparent to all. 
 
 But first, let me supply a chronological table of 
 events on the other side. 
 
 1860. December 27. Fort Moultrie and Castle 
 Pinckney, at Charleston, seized. 
 
 December 27. The revenue - cutter William 
 Aiken surrendered by her commander, and taken 
 possession of by South Carolina. 
 
 December 30. The United States arsenal at 
 Charleston seized. 
 
 1861. January 2. Fort Macon and the United 
 States arsenal at Fayetteville seized by North 
 Carolina. 
 
 January 3. Forts Pulaski and Jackson, and 
 the United States arsenal at Savannah, seized by 
 Georgia troops. 
 
 January 4. Fort Morgan and the United States 
 arsenal at Mobile seized by Alabama. 
 
 1 Mr. Browning. 
 
370 THE SPEECHES 
 
 January 8. Forts Johnson and Caswell, at Smith- 
 ville, seized by North Carolina ; restored by order 
 of Governor Ellis. 
 
 January 9. The Star of the West, bearing rein- 
 forcements for Major Anderson, fired at in Charles- 
 ton harbor. 
 
 January 12. Fort McRae, at Pensacola, seized by 
 Florida. 
 
 January 10. The steamer Marion seized by South 
 Carolina ; restored on the 11th. 
 
 January 11. The United States arsenal at Baton 
 Rouge, and Forts Pike, St. Philip, and Jackson, 
 seized by Louisiana. 
 
 January 12. Fort Barrancas and the navy -yard 
 at Pensacola seized by Florida. 
 
 These forts cost $5,947,000, are pierced for one 
 thousand and ninety-nine guns, and are adapted for 
 a war garrison of five thousand four hundred and 
 thirty men. 
 
 We find, as was shown here the other day, and as 
 has been shown on former occasions, that the State 
 of South Carolina seceded, or attempted to secede 
 from this Confederacy of States without cause. In 
 seceding, her first step was a violation of the Con- 
 stitution. She seceded on the 20th of last December, 
 making: the first innovation and violation of the law 
 and the Constitution of the country. On the 27th 
 day of December what did she do '? She seized Fort 
 Moultrie and Castle Pinckney, and caused your little 
 band of sixty or seventy men under the command 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 371 
 
 of Major Anderson to retire to a little pen in the 
 ocean — Fort Sumter. She commenced erecting 
 batteries, arraying cannon, preparing for war ; in 
 effect, proclaiming herself at once our enemy. Seced- 
 ing from the Union, taking Fort Moultrie and Castle 
 Pinckney, driving your men in fact into Fort Sumter, 
 I say were practical acts of war. You need not talk 
 to me about technicalities, and the distinction that 
 you have got no war until Congress declares it. Con- 
 gress could legalize it, or could make war, it is true ; 
 but that was practical war. Who began it ? Then, 
 sir, if South Carolina secedes, withdraws from the 
 Union, becomes our common enemy, is it not the 
 duty, the constitutional duty of the Government and 
 of the President of the United States to make war, 
 or to resist the attacks and assaults made by an 
 enemy ? Is she not as much our enemy as Great 
 Britain was in the Revolutionary struggle ? Is she 
 not to-day as much our enemy as Great Britain was 
 during the war of 1812 ? 
 
 In this connection I desire to read some remarks 
 made by the Senator from Missouri 1 in his speech 
 the other day, in regard to this general idea of who 
 made the war. He said, speaking of the war, — 
 
 " This has all been brought about since the adjournment of 
 the last Congress — since the 4th of March ; indeed, since the 
 15th of April. Congress has declared no war. The Con- 
 stitution of the United States says ' that Congress shall be 
 authorized to declare war ; ' and yet, sir, though Congress 
 
 i Mr. Polk. 
 
372 THE SPEECHES 
 
 has declared no war, we are in the midst of a war monstrous 
 in its character, and hugely monstrous in its proportions. 
 That war has been brought on by the President of the United 
 States since the 4th of March, of his own motion, and of his 
 own wrong ; and under what circumstances ? Before the 
 close of the last Congress, as early as the month of January, 
 secession was an accomplished fact. Before the close of the 
 last Congress, as many States had seceded from the Union, 
 or had claimed to secede, as had on the 15th of April; and 
 yet the last Congress made no declaration of war ; the last 
 Congress passed no legislation calculated to carry on a war; 
 the last Congress refused to pass bills having this direction, 
 or having any purpose of coercion. Now, sir, how has this 
 war been brought on ? I have said that, in my judg- 
 ment, it has been brought on by the President of the United 
 States ; and a portion of the procedure which has resulted 
 in it is named in the preamble of this joint resolution, which 
 it is proposed that we shall approve and legalize." 
 
 The Senator from Kentucky 1 spoke in similar 
 language. Alluding to the refusal of Kentucky to 
 respond to the first call of the President for seventy- 
 live thousand men, he said, — 
 
 " She believed that the calling forth of such an immense 
 armament was for the purpose of making a war of subjuga- 
 tion on the Southern States, and upon that ground she refused 
 to furnish the regiments called for. The Senator seems to be 
 a little offended at the neutrality of Kentucky. Sir, Ken- 
 tucky has assumed a position of neutrality, and I only hope 
 that she may be able to maintain it. She has assumed that 
 position because there is no impulse of her patriotic heart 
 that desires her to imbrue her hands in a brother's blood, 
 whether he be from the North or the South. Kentucky looks 
 upon this war as unholy, unrighteous, and unjust. Kentucky 
 
 i Mr. Powell. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 373 
 
 believes that this war, if carried out, can result in nothing 
 else than a final disruption of this Confederacy. She hopes, 
 she wishes, she prays, that this Union may be maintained. 
 She believes that cannot be done by force of arms ; that it 
 must be done by compromise and conciliation, if it can be 
 done at all ; and hence, being devoted truly to the Union, she 
 desires to stay this war, and desires measures of peace to be 
 presented for the adjustment of our difficulties." 
 
 I desire in this connection to place before the 
 Senate the remarks of both the Senators from Ken- 
 tucky and the Senator from Missouri, and to answer 
 them at the same time. The Senator from Missouri 
 says the war was brought on since the 4th of March 
 by the President of the United States of his own 
 motion. The Senator from Kentucky pronounces 
 it an unjust, an unrighteous, and an unholy war. 
 Sir, I think it is an unjust, an unrighteous, and an 
 unholy war. 
 
 But, sir, I commenced enumerating the facts 
 with the view of showing who commenced the war. 
 How do they stand ? I have just stated that South 
 Carolina seceded — withdrew from the Confeder- 
 acy; and in the very act of withdrawing, she makes 
 practical war upon the Government, and becomes 
 its enemy. The Star of the West, on the 7th of 
 January, laden simply with provisions to supply 
 those starving men in Fort Sumter, attempted to 
 enter the harbor, and was fired upon, and had to 
 tack about, and leave the men in the forts to perish 
 or do the best they could. We also find, that on 
 the 11th of April General Beauregard had an inter- 
 
 32 
 
374 THE SPEECHES 
 
 view with Major Anderson, and made a proposition 
 to him to surrender. Major Anderson stated, in 
 substance, that he could do no such thing ; that he 
 could not strike the colors of his country, and re- 
 fused to surrender ; but he said, at the same time, 
 that by the 15th of the month his provisions would 
 give out, and if not reinforced and supplied, star- 
 vation must take place. It seems that at this time, 
 Mr. Pry or, from Virginia, was in Charleston. The 
 convention of Virginia was sitting, and it was im- 
 portant that the cannon's roar should be heard in 
 the land. Virginia was to be taken out of the 
 Union, although a majority of the delegates in the 
 convention were elected against secession, and in 
 favor of the Union. We find that after being in 
 possession of the fact that by the 15th of the month 
 the garrison would be starved out and compelled to 
 surrender, on the morning of the 12th they com- 
 menced the bombardment, fired upon your fort and 
 upon your men. They knew that in three days 
 the troops in Fort Sumter would be compelled to 
 surrender ; but they wanted war. It was indispen- 
 sable to produce an excitement in order to hurry 
 Virginia out of the Union, and they commenced 
 the war. The firing was kept up until such time 
 as the fort was involved in smoke and flames, and 
 Major Anderson and his men were compelled to 
 lie on the floor with their wet handkerchiefs to their 
 faces to save them from suffocation and death. 
 Even in the midst of all this, they refused to cease 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 375 
 
 their firing, but kept it up until he was compelled 
 to surrender. 
 
 Who then commenced the war? Who struck 
 the first blow ? Who violated the Constitution 
 in the first place ? Who trampled the law under 
 foot, and violated the law morally and legally ? 
 Was it not South Carolina, in seceding ? And yet 
 you talk about the President having brought on 
 the war by his own motion, when these facts are 
 incontrovertible. No one dare attempt to assail 
 them. But after Fort Sumter was attacked and 
 surrendered, what do we find stated in Montgom- 
 ery when the news reached there ? Here is the 
 telegraphic announcement of the reception of the 
 news there : — 
 
 "Montgomery, Friday, April 12, 1861. 
 " An immense crowd serenaded President Davis and Sec- 
 retary Walker, at the Exchange Hotel, to-night." 
 
 Mr. Davis refused to address the audience, but 
 his Secretary of War did. The Secretary of War, 
 Mr. Walker, said, — 
 
 " No man could tell where the war this day commenced 
 would end, but he would prophesy that the flag which now 
 flaunts the breeze here would float over the dome of the Old 
 Capitol at Washington, before the 1st of May. Let them try 
 Southern chivalry and test the extent of Southern resources, 
 and it might float eventually over Faneuil Hall itself." 
 
 What is the announcement ? We have attacked 
 Fort Sumter, and it has surrendered, and no one 
 can tell where this war will end. By the first of 
 
376 THE SPEECHES 
 
 May our flag will wave in triumph from the dome 
 of the Old Capitol at Washington, and ere long 
 perhaps from Faneuil Hall in Boston. Then, was 
 this war commenced by the President on his own 
 motion ? You say the President of the United 
 States did wrong in ordering out seventy-five thou- 
 sand men, and in increasing the Army and Navy 
 under the exigency. Do we not know, in connec- 
 tion with these facts, that so soon as Fort Sumter 
 surrendered they took up the line of march for 
 Washington ? Do not some of us who were here 
 know that we did not even go to bed very confi- 
 dently and securely, for fear the city would be taken 
 before the rising sun ? Has it not been published 
 in the Southern newspapers that Ben McCulloch 
 was in readiness, with five thousand picked men, in 
 the State of Virginia, to make a descent and at- 
 tack the city, and take it ? 
 
 What more do we find ? We find that the 
 Congress of this same pseudo-republic, this same 
 Southern Confederacy that has sprung up in the 
 South, as early as the 6th of March passed a law 
 preparing for this invasion — preparing for this 
 war which they commenced. Here it is : — 
 
 " That in order to provide speedily forces to repel invasion, 
 maintain the rightful possession of the Confederate States of 
 America in every portion of territory belonging to each State, 
 and to secure the public tranquillity and independence against 
 threatened assault, the President be, and he is hereby, au- 
 thorized to employ the militia, military, and naval forces of 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 377 
 
 the Confederate States of America, and ask for and accept 
 the services of any number of volunteers, not exceeding one 
 hundred thousand." 
 
 When your forts were surrendered, and when 
 the President of the so-called Southern Confeder- 
 acy was authorized to call out the entire militia, 
 naval, and military force, and then to receive into 
 the service of the Confederate States one hundred 
 thousand men, the President calls for seventy-five 
 thousand men to defend the capital and the public 
 property. Are we for the Government, or are we 
 against it ? That is the question. Taking all the 
 facts into consideration, do we not see that an 
 invasion was intended ? It was even announced 
 by Mr. Iverson upon this floor that ere long their 
 Congress would be sitting here and this Govern- 
 ment would be overthrown. When the facts are 
 all put together we see the scheme, and it is noth- 
 ing more nor less than executing a programme 
 deliberately made out ; and yet Senators hesitate, 
 falter, and complain, and say the President has 
 suspended the writ of habeas corpus, increased the 
 Army and Navy, and they ask, where was the ne- 
 cessity for all this? With your forts taken, your 
 men fired upon, your ships attacked at sea, and one 
 hundred thousand men called into the field by this 
 so-called Southern Confederacy, with the additional 
 authority to call out the entire military and naval 
 force of those States, Senators talk about the enor- 
 mous call of the President for seventy-five thousand 
 
 32* 
 
378 THE SPEECHES 
 
 men, and the increase he has made of the Army 
 and Navy. Mr. President, it all goes to show, in 
 my opinion, that the sympathies of Senators are 
 with the one government and against the other. 
 Admitting that there was a little stretch of power ; 
 admitting that the margin was pretty wide when 
 the power was exercised, the query now comes, 
 when yon have got the power, when you are sitting 
 here in a legislative attitude, are you willing to 
 sustain the Government and give it the means 
 to sustain itself? It is not worth while to talk 
 about what has been done before. The question 
 on any measure should be, is it necessary now ? 
 If it is, it should not be withheld from the Gov- 
 ernment. 
 
 Senators talk about violating the Constitution 
 and the laws. A great deal has been said about 
 searches and seizures, and the right of protection 
 of persons and of papers. I reckon it is equally 
 as important to protect a Government from seizure 
 as it is an individual. I reckon the morality and 
 the law of the case would be just as strong in 
 seizing upon that which belonged to the Federal 
 Government as it would upon that belonging to an 
 individual. What belongs to us in the aggregate 
 is protected and maintained by the same law, moral 
 and legal, as that which applies to an individual. 
 These rebellious States, after commencing this war, 
 after violating the Constitution, seized our forts, 
 r*tf arsenals, our dock-yards, our custom-houses, 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 379 
 
 our public buildings, our ships, and last, though 
 not least, plundered the independent treasury at 
 New Orleans of $1,000,000. And yet Senators 
 talk about violations of the law and the Constitu- 
 tion. They say the Constitution is disregarded, 
 and the Government is about to be overthrown. 
 Does not this talk about violations of the Consti- 
 tution and law come with a beautiful grace from 
 that side of the House ? I repeat again, sir, are 
 not violations of the Constitution necessary for its 
 protection and vindication more tolerable, than 
 violations of that sacred instrument aimed at the 
 overthrow and destruction of the Government. 
 We have seen instances, and other instances might 
 occur, where it might be indispensably necessary 
 for the Government to exercise a power and to 
 assume a position that was not clearly legal and 
 constitutional, in order to resist the entire over- 
 throw and upturning of the Government and all 
 our institutions. 
 
 But the President issued his proclamation. When 
 did he issue it, and for what ? He issued his proc- 
 lamation calling out seventy-five thousand men 
 after the Congress of the so-called Southern Con- 
 federacy had passed a law to call out the entire 
 militia, and to receive into their service one hundred 
 thousand men. The President issued his proclama- 
 tion after they had taken Fort Moultrie and Castle 
 Pinckney ; after they had fired upon and reduced 
 Fort Sumter. Fort Sumter was taken on the 12th, 
 
380 THE SPEECHES 
 
 and on the loth he issued his proclamation. Taking 
 all these circumstances together, it showed that they 
 intended to advance, and that their object was to 
 extend their power, to subjugate the other States, 
 and to overthrow the Constitution and the laws 
 and the Government. 
 
 Senators talk about violations of the Constitution. 
 Have you heard any intimation of complaint from 
 those Senators about this Southern Confederacy — 
 this band of traitors to their country and their 
 country's institutions ? I repeat, substantially, the 
 language of the Senator from Illinois, 1 " Have you 
 heard any complaint or alarm about violations of 
 constitutional law on that side ? Oh, no ! But we 
 must stand still ; the Government must not move 
 while they are moving with a hundred thousand 
 men ; while they have the power to call forth the 
 entire militia and the army and the navy. While 
 they are reducing our forts, and robbing us of our 
 property, we must stand still ; the Constitution and 
 the laws must not be violated ; and an arraignment 
 is made to weaken and paralyze the Government in 
 its greatest peril and trial." 
 
 On the loth of April the proclamation was issued 
 calling out seventy-five thousand men, after the Con- 
 federate States had authorized one hundred thousand 
 men to be received by their President, — this man 
 Davis, who stood up here and made a retiring speech, 
 — a man educated and nurtured by the Government; 
 
 1 Mr. Browning. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 381 
 
 who sucked its pap ; who received all his military 
 instruction at the hands of this Government ; a man 
 who got all his distinction, civil and military, in the 
 service of this Government, beneath the Stars and 
 Stripes, and then, without cause, — without being 
 deprived of a single right or privilege, — the sword 
 he unsheathed in vindication of that flag in a foreign 
 land, given to him by the hand of his cherishing 
 mother, he stands this day prepared to plunge into 
 her bosom ! Such men as these have their apologists 
 here in Congress, to excuse and extenuate their acts, 
 either directly or indirectly. You never hear from 
 them of law or Constitution being violated down 
 there. Oh, no ; that is not mentioned. 
 
 On the 15th the President issued his proclama- 
 tion calling seventy-five thousand men into the ser- 
 vice of the United States, and on the 17th this same 
 Jefferson Davis, President of the Southern Con- 
 federacy, in retaliation for the proclamation issued 
 by the President of the United States, and in viola- 
 tion of the constitution of this pseudo-confederacy, 
 issued his proclamation proposing to issue letters of 
 marque and reprisal. In other words, he proposed 
 to open an office and say, we will give out licenses 
 to rob the citizens of the United States of all their 
 property, wherever it can be picked up upon the high 
 seas. This he proposed to do not only in violation 
 of the constitution of the Confederate States, but in 
 violation of the law of nations; for no people — I 
 care not by what name you call it — has a right to 
 
382 THE SPEECHES 
 
 issue letters of marque and reprisal until its inde- 
 pendence is first acknowledged as a separate and dis- 
 tinct power. Has that been done? I think, there- 
 fore, Senators can find some little violation of consti- 
 tution and law down there among themselves. Sir, 
 they have violated the law and the Constitution 
 every step they progressed in going there, and now 
 they violate it in trying to come this way. There 
 was a general license offered, a premium to every 
 freebooter, to every man who wanted to plunder and 
 play the pirate on the high seas, to come and take a 
 commission, and plunder in the name of the Southern 
 Confederacy ; to take, at that time, the property of 
 Tennessee or the property of Kentucky, — your beef, 
 your pork, your flour, and every other product mak- 
 ing its way to a foreign market. Mr. Davis author- 
 ized letters of marque and reprisal to pick them up 
 and appropriate them. After that, their Congress 
 saw that he had gone ahead of their constitution and 
 the law of nations, and they passed a law modifying 
 the issuance of letters of marque and reprisal, that 
 they should prey upon the property of the citizens 
 of the United States, excepting certain States, — ex- 
 cepting Kentucky and Tennessee, — holding that 
 out as a bait, as an inducement to get them in. 
 
 I do not think, therefore, when we approach the 
 subject fairly and squarely, that there was any very 
 great wrong in the President of the United States, on 
 the 19th, issuing his proclamation blockading their 
 ports, saying you shall not have the opportunity, so far 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 383 
 
 as I can prevent it, of plundering and appropriating 
 other people's property on the high seas. I think 
 he did precisely what was right. He would have 
 been derelict to his duty, and to the high behest of 
 the American people, if he had sat here and failed 
 to exert every power within his reach and scope to 
 protect the property of citizens of the United States 
 on the high seas. 
 
 Senators seem to think it is no violation of the 
 Constitution to make war on your Government; 
 and when its enemies are stationed in sight of the 
 capital, there is no alarm, no dread, no scare, no 
 fright. Some of us would not feel so verv comfort- 
 able if they were to get this city. I believe there 
 are others who would not be very much disturbed. 
 I do not think I could sleep right sound if they were 
 in possession of this city ; not that I believe I am 
 more timid than most men, but I do not believe 
 there would be much quarter for me ; and, by way 
 of self-protection, and enjoying what few rights I 
 have remaining, I expect it would be better, if they 
 were in possession of this city, for me to be located 
 in some other point, not too inconvenient or too re- 
 mote. I believe there are others who would feel 
 very comfortable here. 
 
 Then, Mr. President, in tracing this subject 
 along, I cannot see what great wrong has been com- 
 mitted by the Government in taking the course it 
 has taken. I repeat again, this Government is now 
 passing through its third ordeal ; and the time has 
 
384 THE SPEECHES 
 
 arrived when it should put forth its entire power, 
 and say to rebels and traitors wherever they are, 
 that the supremacy of the Constitution, and laws 
 made in pursuance thereof, shall be sustained ; that 
 those citizens who have been borne down and tyran- 
 nized over, and who have had laws of treason passed 
 against them in their own States, and who have been 
 threatened with confiscation of property, shall be pro- 
 tected. I say it is the paramount duty of this Gov- 
 ernment to assert its power and maintain its integ- 
 rity. I say it is the duty of this Government to 
 protect those States, or the loyal citizens of those 
 States, in the enjoyment of a republican form of gov- 
 ernment ; for we have seen one continued system of 
 usurpation carried on, from one end of the Southern 
 States to the other ; disregarding the popular will, 
 setting at defiance the judgment of the people, dis- 
 regarding their rights, paying no attention to their 
 State constitutions in any way whatever. We are 
 bound, under the Constitution, to protect those 
 States and their citizens. We are bound to guaran- 
 tee to them a republican form of government ; it is 
 our duty to do it. If we have no Government, let 
 the delusion be dispelled ; let the dream pass away ; 
 and let the people of the United States, and the na- 
 tions of the earth, know at once that we have no 
 Government. If we have a Government, based on 
 the intelligence and virtue of the American people, 
 let that great fact be now established, and once 
 established, this Government will be on a more 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 385 
 
 enduring and permanent basis than it ever was be- 
 fore. I still have confidence in the integrity, the 
 virtue, the intelligence, and the patriotism of the 
 great mass of the people ; and so believing, I in- 
 tend to stand by the Government of my fathers to 
 the last extremity. 
 
 In the last presidential contest I am free to say 
 that I took some part. I advocated the pretensions 
 and claims of one of the distinguished sons of Ken- 
 tucky, as a Democrat. I am a Democrat to-day ; I 
 expect to die one. My Democracy rests upon the 
 great principle I have stated ; and in the support of 
 measures, I have always tried to be guided by a 
 conscientious conviction of right ; and I have laid 
 down for myself as a rule of action, in all doubtful 
 questions, to pursue principle ; and in the pursuit of 
 a great principle I can never reach a wrong conclu- 
 sion. I intend, in this case, to pursue principle. I 
 am a Democrat, believing the principles of this Gov- 
 ernment are Democratic. It is based upon the 
 Democratic theory. I believe Democracy can stand, 
 notwithstanding all the taunts and jeers that are 
 thrown at it throughout the Southern Confederacy. 
 The principles which I call Democracy — I care not 
 by whom they are sustained, whether by Republi- 
 cans, by Whigs, or not — are the great principles 
 that lie at the foundation of this Government, and 
 they will be maintained. We have seen that so far 
 the experiment has succeeded well; and now we 
 should make an effort, in this last ordeal through 
 
 33 
 
386 THE SPEECHES 
 
 which we are passing, to crush out the fatal doc- 
 trine of secession and those who are upholding it in 
 the shape of rebels and traitors. 
 
 I advocated the professions of a distinguished son 
 of Kentucky at the late election, for the reason that 
 I believed he was a better Union man than any- 
 other candidate in the field. Others advocated the 
 claims of Mr. Bell, believing him to be a bettei 
 Union man ; others those of Mr. Douglas. In the 
 South we know that there was no Republican ticket. 
 I was a Union man then ; I was a Union man in 
 1833 ; I am a Union man now. And what has 
 transpired since the election in November last that 
 has produced sufficient cause to break up this Gov- 
 ernment? The Senator from California enumer- 
 ated the facts up to the 25th day of May, 1860, 
 when there was a vote taken in this body declar- 
 ing that further legislation was not necessary for 
 the protection of slave property in the Territories. 
 Now, from the 6th of November up to the 20th of 
 December, tell me what transpired of sufficient 
 cause to break up this Government? Was there 
 any innovation, was there any additional step taken 
 in reference to the rights of the States or the insti- 
 tution of slavery ? If the candidate whose claims 1 
 advocated had been elected President, — I speak of 
 him as a candidate, of course not meaning to be per- 
 sonal, — I do not believe this Government would 
 have been broken up. If Stephen A. Douglas had 
 been elected, I do not believe this Government 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 387 
 
 would have been broken up. Why ? Because 
 those who advocated the pretensions of Mr. Lincoln 
 would have done as all parties have done heretofore: 
 they would have yielded to the high behest of the 
 American people. 
 
 Then, is the mere defeat of one man, and the elec- 
 tion of another, according to the forms of law and 
 the Constitution, sufficient cause to break up this 
 Government ? No ; it is not sufficient cause. Do 
 we not know, too, that if all the seceding Senators 
 had stood here as faithful sentinels, representing the 
 interests of their States, they had it in their power 
 to check any advance that might be made by the 
 incoming Administration ? I showed these facts, and 
 enumerated them at the last session. They were 
 shown here the other day. On the 4th of March, 
 when President Lincoln was inaugurated, we had a 
 majority of six upon this floor in opposition to his 
 Administration. Where, then, is there even a pre- 
 text for breaking up the Government upon the idea 
 that he would have encroached upon our rights ? 
 Does not the nation know that Mr. Lincoln could 
 not have made his Cabinet without the consent of 
 the majority of the Senate ? Do we not know that 
 he could not even have sent a minister abroad with- 
 out the majority of the Senate confirming the nomi- 
 nation? Do we not know that if any minister whom 
 he sent abroad should make a treaty inimical to the 
 institutions of the South, that treaty could not have 
 been ratified without a majority of two thirds of the ' 
 Senate. 
 
388 THE SPEECHES 
 
 With all these facts staring them in the face, 
 where is the pretence for breaking up this Govern- 
 ment ? Is it not clear that there has been a fixed 
 purpose, a settled design to break up the Govern- 
 ment, and change the nature and character and 
 whole genius of the Government itself? Does it 
 not prove conclusively, as there was no cause, that 
 they simply selected it as an occasion that was favor- 
 able to excite the prejudices of the South, and there- 
 by enable them to break up this Government and 
 establish a Southern confederacy ? 
 
 Then when we get at it, what is the real cause ? 
 If Mr. Breckinridge, or Mr. Davis, or some other 
 favorite of those who are now engaged in break- 
 ing up the Government, had been elected President 
 of the United States, it would have been a very 
 nice thing ; they would have respected the judgment 
 of the people, and no doubt their confidence in the 
 capacity of the people for self-government would 
 have been increased ; but it so happened that the 
 people thought proper to elect somebody else, ac- 
 cording to law and the Constitution. Then, as 
 all parties had done heretofore, it was the duty of the 
 whole people to acquiesce ; if he made a good Pres- 
 ident, to sustain him ; if he became a bad one, to 
 condemn him ; if he violated the law and the Con- 
 stitution, to impeach him. We had our remedy 
 under the Constitution and in the Union. 
 
 What is the real cause ? Disappointed ambition ; 
 an unhallowed ambition. Certain men could not 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 389 
 
 wait any longer, and they seized this occasion to do 
 what they had been wanting to do for a long time — 
 to break up the Government. If they could not rule 
 a large country, they thought they might rule a 
 small one. Hence one of the prime movers in the 
 Senate ceased to be a Senator, and passed out to be 
 President of the Southern Confederacy. Another, 
 w T ho was bold enough on this floor to proclaim him- 
 self a rebel, retired as a Senator, and became Sec- 
 retary of State. All perfectly disinterested, no am- 
 bition about it ! Another, Mr. Benjamin of Lou- 
 isiana, — one who understands something about the 
 idea of dividing garments ; who belongs to the tribe 
 that parted the garments of our Saviour, and upon 
 his vesture cast lots, — went out of this body and 
 was made Attorney-General, to show his patriotism 
 and disinterestedness — nothing else ! Mr. Slidell, 
 disinterested altogether, is to go as minister to 
 France. I might enumerate many such instances. 
 This is all patriotism, pure disinterestedness ! Do 
 we not see where it all begins ? In disappointed, 
 impatient, unhallowed ambition. There has been 
 no cause for breaking up this Government ; there 
 have been no rights denied, no privileges trampled 
 upon under the Constitution and Union, that 
 might not have been remedied more effectually in 
 the Union than outside of it. What rights are to 
 be attained outside of the Union ? The seceders 
 have violated the Constitution, trampled it under 
 foot ; and what is their condition now ? Upon the 
 
 33* 
 
390 THE SPEECHES 
 
 abstract idea that they had a right to secede, they 
 have gone out ; and what is the consequence ? Op- 
 pression, taxation, blood, and civil war. They have 
 gone out of the Union ; and, I repeat again, they 
 have got taxes, usurpations, blood, and civil war. 
 
 I said just now that I had advocated the election 
 to the Presidency of the distinguished Senator from 
 Kentucky, on the ground that he was a good Union 
 man. I wish we could now hear his eloquent voice 
 in favor of the old Government of our fathers, and 
 in vindication of the Stars and Stripes, that have been 
 borne in triumph everywhere. I hold in my hand 
 a document which was our text-book in the cam- 
 paign. It is headed " Breckinridge and Lane Cam- 
 paign Document No. 16. Who are the disunion- 
 ists ? Breckinridge and Lane the true Union can- 
 didates." It contains an extract which I will read 
 from the Senator's address on the removal of the 
 Senate from the old to the new Chamber. I would 
 to God he was as good a Union man to-day as I 
 think he was then : — 
 
 " Such is our country ; ay, and more — far more than my 
 mind could conceive or my tongue could utter. Is there au 
 American who regrets the past ? Is there one who will deride 
 his country's laws, pervert her Constitution, or alienate her 
 people ? If there be such a man, let his memory descend to 
 
 posterity laden with the execrations of all mankind." 
 
 " Let us devoutly trust that another Senate, in another age, 
 shall bear to a new and larger Chamber this Constitution, 
 vigorous and inviolate, and that the last generation of pos- 
 terity shall witness the deliberations of the Representatives 
 of American States, still united, prosperous, and free." 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 391 
 
 Now this was the text — an extract from a speech 
 of the Senator, after the nomination was made : — 
 
 " When that convention selected me as one of its candi- 
 dates, looking at my humble antecedents and the place of my 
 habitation, it gave to the country, so far as I was concerned, 
 a personal and geographical guaranty that its interest was in 
 the Union." 
 
 In addition to that, in Tennessee we headed our 
 electoral ticket as if to give unmistakable evidence 
 of our devotion to the Union, and the reason why 
 we sustained him, " National Democratic Ticket. 
 * Instead of dissolving the Union, we intend to 
 lengthen it and to strengthen it.' — Breckinridge" 
 Where are his eloquent tones now ? They are 
 heard arraigning the Administration for what he 
 conceives to be premature action, in advance of the 
 law, or a slight departure from the Constitution. 
 Which is the most tolerable, premature action, ac- 
 tion in advance of law, a slight departure from the 
 Constitution, (putting it on his own ground,) or an 
 entire overthrow of the Government ? Are there 
 no advances, are there no inroads, being made to- 
 day upon the Constitution and the existence of the 
 Government itself? Let us look at the question 
 plainly and fairly. Here is an invading army al- 
 most within cannon-shot of the capital, headed by 
 Jeff Davis and Beauregard. Suppose they advance 
 on the city to-night ; subjugate it ; depose the exist- 
 ing authorities ; expel the present Government : 
 what kind of government have you then ? Is there 
 
392 THE SPEECHES 
 
 any Constitution in it ?1 Is there any law in it ? 
 The Senator can stand here almost in sight of the 
 enemy, see the citadel of freedom, the Constitution, 
 trampled upon, and there is no apprehension ; but 
 he can look with an eagle eye, and, with an analytic 
 process almost unsurpassed, discriminate against and 
 attack those who are trying to manage your Gov- 
 ernment for its safety and preservation. He has no 
 word of condemnation for the invading army that 
 threatens to overthrow the capital, that threatens to 
 trample the Constitution and the law under foot. I 
 repeat, suppose Davis, at the head of his advancing 
 columns, should depose your Government and expel 
 your authority : what kind of government will you 
 have? Will there be any Constitution left? How 
 eloquent my friend was upon constitutions. He 
 told us the Constitution was the measure of power, 
 and that we should understand and feel constitu- 
 tional restraints ; and yet when your Government is 
 perhaps within a few hours of being overthrown, 
 and the law and Constitution trampled under foot, 
 there are no apprehensions on his part ; no words of 
 rebuke for those who are endeavoring to accomplish 
 such results. 
 
 The Old Dominion has got the brunt of the war 
 upon her hands. I sympathize with her most deep- 
 ly, and especially with the loyal portion of her citi- 
 zens, who have been browbeaten and domineered 
 over. Now the war is transferred to Virginia, and 
 her plains are made to run with blood ; and when 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 393 
 
 this is secured, what do we hear in the far South ? 
 Howell Cobb, another of these disinterested patri- 
 ots, said not long since, in a speech in Georgia : — 
 
 " The people of the Gulf States need have no apprehen- 
 sions ; they might go on with their planting and their other 
 business as usual ; the war would not come to their section ; 
 its theatre would be along the border of the Ohio River and 
 in Virginia." 
 
 Virginia ought to congratulate herself upon that 
 position, for she has got the war. Now they want 
 to advance. Their plans and designs are to get 
 across into Maryland, and carry on a war of subju- 
 gation. There is wonderful alarm among certain 
 gentlemen here at the term " subjugate." They 
 are alarmed at the idea of making citizens who 
 have violated the law simply conform to it by en- 
 forcing their obedience. If a majority of the citi- 
 zens in a State have violated the Constitution, have 
 trampled it under foot, and violated the law, is it 
 subjugation to assert the supremacy of the Constitu- 
 tion and the law ? Is it any more than a simple 
 enforcement of the law ? It would be one of the 
 best subjugations that could take place if some of 
 them were subjugated, and brought back to the 
 constitutional position that they occupied before. 
 I would to God that Tennessee stood to-day where 
 she did three months ago. 
 
 Mr. President, it is provided in the Constitution 
 of the United States that " no State shall, with- 
 out the consent of Congress, lay any duty of ton- 
 
394 THE SPEECHES 
 
 nage, keep troops or ships of war in time of peace, 
 enter into any agreement or compact with another 
 State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in war 
 unless actually invaded, or in such imminent danger 
 as will not admit of delay." The State authori- 
 ties of Tennessee, before her people had even voted 
 upon an ordinance to separate her from the Union, 
 formed a league by which they transferred fifty- 
 five thousand men, the whole army, over to the 
 Confederate States for the purpose of prosecuting 
 their war. Is it not strange that such a palpable 
 violation of the Constitution should not be referred 
 to and condemned by any one ? Here is a member 
 of the Union, without even having the vote taken 
 upon an ordinance of separation or secession, form- 
 ing a league, by its commissioners or ministers, and 
 handing over fifty-five thousand men to make war 
 upon the Government of the United States, though 
 they were themselves then within the Union. No 
 one seems to find fault with that. The fact is, that, 
 in the whole progress of secession, the Constitution 
 and the law have been violated at every step from 
 its incipiency to the present point. How have the 
 people of my State been treated ? I know that this 
 may not interest the Senate to any very great ex- 
 tent ; but I must briefly refer to it. The people of 
 a portion of that State, having devotion and attach- 
 ment to the Constitution and the Government as 
 framed by the sires of the Revolution, still adhering 
 to it, gave a majority of more than twenty thousand 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 395 
 
 votes in favor of the Union at the election. After 
 that, this portion of the State, East Tennessee, 
 called a convention, and the convention published 
 an address, in which they sum up some of the 
 grievances which we have been bearing in that por- 
 tion of the country. They say : — 
 
 " The ' Memphis Appeal,' a prominent disunion paper, pub- 
 lished a false account of our proceedings, under the head » The 
 Traitors in Council,' and styled us, who represented every 
 county but two in East Tennessee, ' the little batch of dis- 
 affected traitors who hover around the noxious atmosphere of 
 Andrew Johnson's home.' Our meeting was telegraphed to 
 the * New Orleans Delta,' and it was falsely said that we had 
 passed a resolution recommending submission if seventy thou- 
 sand votes were not cast against secession. The despatch 
 added that ' the Southern-Rights men are determined to hold 
 possession of the State, though they should be in a minority.' " 
 
 They had fifty-five thousand men and $5,000,000 
 to sustain them, the State authorities with them, 
 and made the declaration that they intended to 
 hold the State though they should be in a minor- 
 ity. This shows the advance of tyranny and usur- 
 pation. By way of showing to the Senate some of 
 the wrongs borne and submitted to by that people, 
 who are loyal to the Government — who have been 
 deprived of the arms furnished by the Govern- 
 ment for their protection — withheld by this little 
 man Harris* the Governor of the State, — I will 
 read a few paragraphs from the address : — 
 
 " It has passed laws declaring it treason to say or do any- 
 thing in favor of the Government of the United States, or 
 
396 THE SPEECHES 
 
 against the Confederate States ; and such a law is now before, 
 and we apprehend will soon be passed by, the Legislature of 
 Tennessee. 
 
 " It has involved the Southern States in a war whose suc- 
 cess is hopeless, and which must ultimately lead to the ruin 
 of the people. 
 
 l ^tts bigoted, overbearing, and intolerant spirit has already 
 subjected the people of East Tennessee to many petty griev- 
 ances ; our people have been insulted ; our flags have been 
 fired upon and torn down ; our houses have been rudely en- 
 tered ; our families subjected to insult ; our peaceable meetings 
 interrupted ; our women and children shot at by a merciless 
 soldiery ; our towns pillaged ; our citizens robbed, and some 
 of them assassinated and murdered. 
 
 " No effort has been spared to deter the Union men of East 
 Tennessee from the expression of their free thoughts. The 
 penalties of treason have been threatened against them, and 
 murder and assassination have been openly encouraged by 
 leading secession journals. As secession has been thus over- 
 bearing and intolerant while in the minority in East Tennes- 
 see, nothing better can be expected of the pretended majority 
 than wild, unconstitutional, and oppressive legislation ; an 
 utter contempt and disregard of law ; a determination to force 
 every Union man in the State to swear to the support of a 
 constitution he abhors ; to yield his money and property to 
 aid a cause he detests ; and to become the object of scorn 
 and derision, as well as the victim of intolerable and relent- 
 less oppression." 
 
 These are some of the wrongs that we are en- 
 during in that section of Tennessee ; not nearly all 
 of them, but a few which I have presented that the 
 country may know what we are submitting to. 
 Since I left my home, having only one way to leave 
 the State through two or three passes coming out 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON". 397 
 
 through Cumberland Gap, I have been advised that 
 they had even sent their armies to blockade these 
 passes in the mountains, as they say, to prevent 
 Johnson from returning with arms and munitions 
 to place in the hands of the people to vindicate their 
 rights, repel invasion, and put down domestic insur- 
 rection and rebellion. Yes, sir, there they stand in 
 arms, environing a population of three hundred and 
 twenty-five thousand loyal, brave, patriotic, and un- 
 subdued people ; but yet powerless, and not in a 
 condition to vindicate their rights. Hence I come 
 to the Government, and I do not ask it as a sup- 
 pliant, but I demand it as a constitutional right, 
 that you give us protection, give us arms and muni- 
 tions ; and if they cannot be got there in any other 
 way, to take them there with an invading army, 
 and deliver the people from the oppression to which 
 they are now subjected. We claim to be the State. 
 The other divisions may have seceded and gone 
 off; and if this Government will stand by and per- 
 mit those portions of the State to go off, and not 
 enforce the laws and protect the loyal citizens 
 there, we cannot help it ; but we still claim to be 
 the State, and if two thirds have fallen off, or have 
 been sunk by an earthquake, it does not change our 
 relation to this Government. If the Government 
 will let them go, and not give us protection, the 
 fault is not ours ; but if you will give us protection 
 we intend to stand as a State, as a part of this Con- 
 federacy, holding to the Stars and Stripes, the flag 
 
398 THE SPEECHES 
 
 of our country. We demand it according to law ; 
 we demand it upon the guaranties of the Constitu- 
 tion. You are bound to guarantee to us a repub- 
 lican form of government, and we ask it as a 
 constitutional right. We do not ask you to inter- 
 fere as a party, as your feelings or prejudices may 
 be one way or another in reference to the parties 
 of the country ; but we ask you to interfere as a 
 Government, according to the Constitution. Of 
 course we want your sympathy, and your regard, 
 and your respect ; but we ask your interference on 
 constitutional grounds. 
 
 The amendments to the Constitution which con- 
 stitute the Bill of Rights declare that " a well regu- 
 lated militia being necessary to the security of a free 
 State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms 
 shall not be infringed." Our people are denied this 
 right, secured to them in their own constitution and 
 the Constitution of the United States ; yet we hear 
 no complaints here of violations of the Constitution 
 ia this respect. We ask the Government to inter- 
 pose to secure us this constitutional right. We want 
 the passes in our mountains opened, we want deliver- 
 ance and protection for a downtrodden and oppressed 
 people who are struggling for their independence 
 without arms. If we had had ten thousand stand of 
 arms and ammunition when the contest commenced, 
 we should have asked no further assistance. We 
 have not got them. We are a rural people ; we 
 have villages and small towns — no large cities. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 399 
 
 Our population is homogenous, industrious, frugal, 
 brave, independent ; but now harmless and power- 
 less, and oppressed by usurpers. You may be too 
 late in coming to our relief ; or you may not come 
 at all, though I do not doubt that you will come ; 
 they may trample us under foot ; they may convert 
 our plains into graveyards, and the caves of our 
 mountains into sepulchres ; but they will never take 
 us out of this Union, or make us a land of slaves — 
 no, never ! We intend to stand as firm as adamant, 
 and as unyielding as our own majestic mountains 
 that surround us. Yes, we will be as fixed and as 
 immovable as are they upon their bases. We will 
 stand as long as we can ; and if we are overpowered, 
 and liberty shall be driven from the land, we intend, 
 before she departs, to take the flag of our country, 
 with a stalwart arm, a patriotic heart, and an honest 
 tread, and place it upon the summit of the loftiest 
 and most majestic mountain. We intend to plant it 
 there, and leave it, to indicate to the inquirer who 
 may come in after-times, the spot where the God- 
 dess of Liberty lingered and wept for the last time, 
 before she took her flight from a people once prosper- 
 ous, free, and happy. 
 
 We ask the Government to come to our aid. We 
 love the Constitution as made by our fathers. We 
 have confidence in the integrity and capacity of the 
 people to govern themselves. We have lived enter- 
 taining these opinions : we intend to die entertaining 
 them. The battle has commenced. The President 
 
400 THE SPEECHES 
 
 has placed it upon the true ground. It is an issue 
 on the one hand for the people's Government, and 
 its overthrow on the other. We have commenced 
 the battle of Freedom. It is Freedom's cause. We 
 are resisting usurpation and oppression. We will 
 triumph ; we must triumph. Right is with us. A 
 great and fundamental principle of right, that lies 
 at the foundation of all things, is with us. We may 
 meet with impediments, and may meet with disas- 
 ters, and here and there a defeat ; but ultimately 
 Freedom's cause must triumph, for — 
 
 " Freedom's battle once begun, 
 Bequeathed from bleeding sire to son, 
 Though baffled oft, is ever won." 
 
 Yes, we must triumph. Though sometimes I 
 cannot see my way clear, in matters of this kind as 
 in matters of religion, when my facts give out, when 
 my reason fails me, I draw largely upon my faith. 
 My faith is strong, based on the eternal principles 
 of right, that a thing so monstrously wrong as is this 
 rebellion, cannot triumph. Can we submit to it ? 
 Can bleeding Justice submit to it ? Is the Senate, 
 are the American people, prepared to give up the 
 graves of Washington and Jackson, to be encircled 
 and governed and controlled by a combination of 
 traitors and rebels ? I say let the battle go on — it is 
 Freedom's cause — until the Stars and Stripes (God 
 bless them !) shall again be unfurled upon every 
 cross-road, and from every house-top, throughout the 
 Confederacy, North and South. Let the Union be 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 401 
 
 reinstated ; let the law be enforced ; let the Con- 
 stitution be supreme. 
 
 If the Congress of the United States were to give 
 up the tombs of Washington and Jackson, we should 
 have rising up in our midst another Peter the 
 Hermit, in a much more righteous cause, — for ours 
 is true, while his was a delusion, — who would 
 appeal to the American people and point to the 
 tombs of Washington and Jackson, in the possession 
 of those who are worse than the infidel and the 
 Turk who held the Holy Sepulchre. I believe the 
 American people would start of their own accord, 
 when appealed to, to redeem the graves of Wash- 
 ington and Jackson and Jefferson, and all the other 
 patriots who are lying within the limits of the 
 Southern Confederacy. I do not believe they would 
 stop the march, until again the flag of this Union 
 would be placed over the graves of those distin- 
 guished men. There will be an uprising. Do not 
 talk about Republicans now ; do not talk about 
 Democrats now ; do not talk about Whigs or Ameri- 
 cans now ; talk about your country and the Con- 
 stitution and the Union. Save that ; preserve the 
 integrity of the Government ; once more place it 
 erect among the nations of the earth ; and then if 
 we want to divide about questions that may arise in 
 our midst, we have a Government to divide in. 
 
 I know it has been said that the object of this war 
 is to make war on Southern institutions. I have 
 been in free States and I have been in slave States, 
 34* 
 
402 THE SPEECHES 
 
 and I thank God that, so far as I have been, there 
 has been one universal disclaimer of any such pur- 
 pose. It is a war upon no section ; it is a war upon 
 no peculiar institution ; but it is a war for the in- 
 tegrity of the Government, for the Constitution, and 
 the supremacy of the laws. That is what the nation 
 understands by it. 
 
 The people whom I represent appeal to the Gov- 
 ernment and to the nation to give us the constitu- 
 tional protection that we need. I am proud to say 
 that I have met with every manifestation of that 
 kind in the Senate, with only a few dissenting voices. 
 I am proud to say, too, that I believe old Kentucky 
 (God bless her !) will ultimately rise and shake off 
 the stupor which has been resting upon her ; and in- 
 stead of denying us the privilege of passing through 
 her borders, and taking arms and munitions of war 
 to enable a downtrodden people to defend themselves, 
 will not only give us that privilege, but will join us 
 and help us in the work. The people of Kentucky 
 love the Union ; they love the Constitution ; they 
 have no fault to find with it ; but in that State they 
 have a duplicate to the Governor of ours. When 
 we look all round, we see how the Governors of the 
 different States have been involved in this con- 
 spiracy, — the most stupendous and gigantic con- 
 spiracy that was ever formed, and as corrupt and as 
 foul as that attempted by Catiline in the days of 
 Rome. We know it to be so. Have we not known 
 men to sit at their desks in this Chamber, using the 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 403 
 
 Government's stationery to write treasonable letters ; 
 and while receiving their pay, sworn to support the 
 Constitution and sustain the law, engaging in mid- 
 night conclaves to devise ways and means by which 
 the Government and the Constitution should be 
 overthrown ? The charge was made and published 
 in the papers. Many things we know that we 
 cannot fully prove ; but we know from the regular 
 steps that were taken in this work of breaking up 
 the Government, or trying to break it up, that there 
 was system, concert of action. It is a scheme more 
 corrupt than the assassination planned and conducted 
 by Catiline in reference to the Roman Senate. 
 The time has arrived when we should show to the 
 nations of the earth that we are a nation capable of 
 preserving our existence, and give them evidence 
 that we will do it. 
 
 I have already detained the Senate much longer 
 than I intended when I rose, and I shall conclude 
 in a few words more. Although the Government 
 has met with a little reverse within a short distance 
 of this city, no one should be discouraged and no 
 heart should be dismayed. It ought only to prove 
 the necessity of bringing forth and exerting still 
 more vigorously the power of the Government in 
 maintenance of the Constitution and the laws. Let 
 the energies of the Government be redoubled, and 
 let it go on with this war, — not a war upon sections, 
 not a war upon peculiar institutions anywhere ; but 
 let ths Constitution and the Union be inscribed on 
 
404 THE SPEECHES 
 
 its banners, and the supremacy and enforcement of 
 the laws be its watchword. Then it can, it will, go 
 on triumphantly. We must succeed. This Gov- 
 ernment must not, cannot fail. Though your flag 
 may have trailed in the dust ; though a retrogade 
 movement may have been made ; though the banner 
 of our country may have been sullied, let it still be 
 borne onward ; and if, for the prosecution of this 
 war in behalf of the Government and the Constitu- 
 tion, it is necessary to cleanse and purify that banner, 
 I say let it be baptized in fire from the sun and 
 bathed in a nation's blood ! The nation must be 
 redeemed ; it must be triumphant. The Constitu- 
 tion — which is based upon principles immutable, 
 and upon which rests the rights of man and the hopes 
 and expectations of those who love freedom through- 
 out the civilized world — must be maintained. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 405 
 
 SPEECH ON THE PROPOSED EXPULSION 
 OF MR. BRIGHT. 
 
 DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, JAN. 31, 1862. 
 
 The Senate having under consideration the following reso* 
 lution, submitted by Mr. Wilkinson on the 16th of Decem- 
 ber, 1861, and which had been reported upon adversely by the 
 Committee on the Judiciary : — 
 
 Whereas, Hon. Jesse D. Bright heretofore, on the 1st 
 day of March, 1861, wrote a letter, of which the following is 
 a copy, — 
 
 My dear Sir : Allow me to introduce to your acquaint- 
 ance my friend Thomas B. Lincoln, of Texas. He visits your 
 capital mainly to dispose of what he regards a great improve- 
 ment in fire-arms. I recommend him to your favorable con- 
 sideration as a gentleman of the first respectability, and 
 reliable in every respect. 
 
 Very truly yours, JESSE D. BRIGHT. 
 
 To His Excellency Jefferson Davis, 
 
 President of the Confederation of States. 
 
 And whereas we believe the said letter is evidence of dis- 
 loyalty to the United States, and is calculated to give aid and 
 comfort to the public enemies : Therefore, 
 
 Be it resolved, That the said Jesse D. Bright is expelled 
 from his seat in the Senate of the United States. 
 
 Mr. Johnson said : — Mr. President, when this 
 resolution for the expulsion of the Senator from 
 Indiana was first presented to the consideration of 
 
406 THE SPEECHES 
 
 the Senate, it was not my intention to say a single 
 word upon it. Presuming that action would be 
 had upon it at a very early day, I intended to 
 content myself with casting a silent vote. But the 
 question has assumed such a shape that, occupying 
 the position I do, I cannot consent to record my 
 vote without giving some of the reasons that in- 
 fluence my action. 
 
 I am no enemy of the Senator from Indiana. I 
 have no personally unkind feelings towards him. 
 I never had any, and have none now. So far as 
 my action on this case is concerned, it will be con- 
 trolled absolutely and exclusively by public con- 
 siderations, and with no reference to partisan or 
 personal feeling. I know that since the discussion 
 commenced, an intimation has been thrown out, 
 which I was pained to hear, that there was a dis- 
 position on the part of some to hound down the 
 Senator from Indiana. Sir, I know that I have no 
 disposition to " hound " any man. I would to 
 God that I could think it otherwise than necessary 
 for me to say a single word upon this question, or 
 even to cast a vote upon it. So far as I know, 
 there has never been any unkind feeling between 
 the Senator and myself from the time we made our 
 advent into public life down to this moment. Al- 
 though party and party associations and party con- 
 siderations influence all of us more or less, — and 
 I do not pretend to be free from the influence of 
 party more than others, — I know, if I know myself, 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 407 
 
 that no such considerations influence me now. Not 
 many years ago there was a contest before the 
 Senate as to his admission as a Senator from the 
 State of Indiana ; we all remember the strugo-le 
 
 OCT 
 
 that took place. I will not say that the other side 
 of the House were influenced by party consider- 
 ations when the vote upon that question of admis- 
 sion took place ; but if my memory serves me cor- 
 rectly, there was upon one side of the Chamber 
 a nearly strict party vote that he was not entitled 
 to his seat, while on the other side his right was 
 sustained entirely by a party vote. I was one of 
 those who voted for the Senator's admission to a 
 seat upon this floor under the circumstances. I 
 voted to let him into the Senate, and I am con- 
 strained to say that, before his term has expired, 
 I am compelled to vote to expel him from it. In 
 saying this, I repeat that if I know myself, and I 
 think I do as well as ordinary men know them- 
 selves, I cast this vote upon public considerations 
 entirely, and not from party or personal feeling. 
 
 Mr. President, I hold that under the Constitution 
 of the United States we clearly have the power 
 to expel a member, and that, too, without our as- 
 suming the character of a judicial body. It is not 
 necessary to have articles of impeachment pre- 
 ferred by the other House ; it is not necessary to 
 organize ourselves into a court for the purpose of 
 trial ; but the principle is broad and clear, inherent 
 in the very organization of the body itself, that we 
 
408 THE SPEECHES 
 
 have the power and the right to expel any member 
 from the Senate whenever we deem that the public 
 interests are unsafe in his hands, and that he is unfit 
 to be a member of the body. We all know, and 
 the country understands, that provision of the Con- 
 stitution which confers this power upon the Senate. 
 Judge Story, in commenting upon the case of John 
 Smith, in connection with the provision of the Con- 
 stitution to which I have referred, used the follow- 
 ing language : — 
 
 " The precise ground of the failure of the motion does not 
 appear; but it may be gathered, from the arguments of his 
 counsel, that it did not turn upon any doubt that the power 
 of the Senate extended to cases of misdemeanor not done in 
 the presence or view of the body ; but most probably it was 
 decided upon some doubt as to the facts. It may be thought 
 difficult to draw a clear line of distinction between the right to 
 inflict the punishment of expulsion and any other punishment 
 upon a member, founded on the time, place, or nature of the 
 offence. The power to expel a member is not in the British 
 House of Commons confined to offences committed by the 
 party as a member, or during the session of Parliament ; but 
 it extends to all cases where the offence is such as, in the 
 judgment of the House, unfits him for parliamentary duties. 1 
 
 The rule in the House of Commons was un- 
 doubtedly in the view of the framers of our Con- 
 stitution ; and the question is, has the member un- 
 fitted himself, has he disqualified himself, in view 
 of the extraordinary condition of the country, from 
 discharging the duties of a Senator ? Looking at 
 
 1 Story's Commentaries on the Constitution. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 409 
 
 his connection with the Executive; looking at the 
 condition, and, probably, the destinies of the coun- 
 try, we are to decide — without prejudice, without 
 passion, without excitement — can the nation and 
 does the nation have confidence in committing its 
 destinies to the Senator from Indiana, and others 
 who are situated like him ? 
 
 If we were disposed to bring to our aid, and were 
 willing to rely upon, the public judgment, what 
 should we find ? When you pass through the 
 country, the common inquiry is, " Why has not 
 Senator Bright, and why have not others like him, 
 been expelled from the Senate ? " I have had the 
 question asked me again and again. I do not in- 
 tend, though, to predicate my action as a Senator 
 upon what may be simpty rumor and popular 
 clamor or popular indignation ; but still it is not 
 often the case that, when there is a public judg- 
 ment formed in reference to any great question be- 
 fore the country, that public judgment is not well 
 founded, though it is true there are sometimes ex- 
 ceptions. 
 
 Having shown our power in the premises to be 
 clear, according to the general authority granted 
 by the Constitution and the broad principle stated 
 by Judge Story in its elucidation, I next turn my 
 attention to the case itself. The Senator from In- 
 diana is charged with having written a letter on 
 the first of March last to the chief of the rebellion, 
 and this is the basis of this proceeding against him. 
 
 35 
 
410 THE SPEECHES 
 
 What was the condition of the country at the time 
 that letter was written? Did war then exist or 
 not ? for really that is the great point in the case. 
 On that point, allow me to read an extract from 
 the charge of Judge David A. Smalley to the 
 grand jury of the United States District Court for 
 the Southern District of New York, published in the 
 "National Intelligencer" of January 21, 1861: — 
 
 11 It is well known that war, civil war, exists in portions of 
 the Union ; that persons owing allegiance to the United States 
 have confederated together, and with arms, by force and 
 intimidation, have prevented the execution of the constitutional 
 acts of Congress, have forcibly seized upon and hold a custom- 
 house and post-office, forts, arsenals, vessels, and other property 
 belonging to the United States, and have actually fired upon 
 vessels bearing the United States flag and carrying United 
 States troops. This is a usurpation of the authority of the 
 Federal Government ; it is high treason by levying war. 
 Either one of those acts will constitute high treason. There 
 can be no doubt of it." 
 
 The judge here defines high treason, and he goes 
 on to say, — 
 
 "What amounts to adhering to and giving aid and comfort 
 to our enemies, it is somewhat difficult in all cases to define ; 
 but certain it is that furnishing them with arms," — 
 
 It really seems that, by some kind of intuition, 
 
 the judge had in his mind the precise case now 
 
 under our consideration, and had anticipated it last 
 January, — 
 
 — " certain it is that furnishing them with arms or munitions of 
 war, vessels or other means of transportation, or any materials 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 411 
 
 which will aid the traitors in carrying out their traitorous 
 purposes, with a knowledge that they are intended for such 
 purposes, or inciting and encouraging others to engage in or 
 aid the traitors in any way, does come within the provisions of 
 the act." 
 
 In this view, even if we were sitting as a court, 
 bound by the rules and technicalities of judicial 
 proceedings, should we not be bound to hold that 
 this case comes within this leo;al definition ? 
 
 " And it is immaterial," adds Judge Smalley, " whether such 
 acts are induced by sympathy with the rebellion, hostility to 
 the Government, or a design for gain." 
 
 In view of these authorities, let us look at the 
 letter. It was written on the 1st of March, 1861. 
 The opinion of Judge Smalley was published in 
 the " Intelligencer " of the 21st of January, 1861, 
 and must, of course, have been delivered before 
 that time. It would be doing the Senator's intel- 
 ligence great injustice to presume that he was not 
 as well informed on the subject as the judge was 
 who was charging the grand jury in reference to an 
 act of Congress passed at an early day in the history 
 of the Government. It would be doing him great 
 injustice to suppose that he was not familiar with 
 the statute. It would be doing him great injustice 
 to suppose that he had not observed the fact that 
 the attention of the country was being called by 
 the courts to the treason that was rampant through- 
 out the land. The letter complained of is as fol- 
 lows : — 
 
412 THE SPEECHES 
 
 Washington, March 1, 1861. 
 
 My dear Sir : Allow me to introduce to your acquaint- 
 ance my friend Thomas B. Lincoln, of Texas. He visits your 
 capital mainly to dispose of what he regards a great improve- 
 ment in fire-arms. I recommend him to your favorable con- 
 sideration as a gentleman of the first respectability, and reliable 
 in every respect. 
 
 Very truly yours, JESSE D. BRIGHT. 
 
 To His Excellency Jefferson Davis, 
 
 President of the Confederation of States. 
 
 According to the charge of Judge Smalley, 
 which I have already read, the flag of the United 
 States had been fired upon before the 21st of Jan- 
 uary, 1861, and war then did in fact exist. When 
 the rebels were taking our forts ; when they were 
 taking possession of our post-offices ; when they 
 were seizing our custom-houses ; when they were 
 taking possession of our mints and the depositories 
 of the public money, can it be possible that the 
 Senator from Indiana did not know that war 
 existed, and that rebellion was going on ? It is a 
 fact that the ordinance of the convention of Texas 
 seceding from the Union and attaching herself to 
 the Southern Confederacy, was dated back as far 
 as the 1st of February, 1861. Then, at the time 
 the letter was written, Thomas B. Lincoln was a 
 citizen of a rebel State ; a traitor and a rebel him- 
 self. He comes to the Senator asking him to do 
 what? To write a letter by which he could be 
 facilitated in his scheme of selling an improved 
 fire-arm, an implement of war and of death. Can 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 413 
 
 there be any mistake about it? He asks for a 
 letter recommending an improved fire-arm to the 
 President of the rebel States, who was then in 
 actual war ; the man who asked for this being him- 
 self from a State that was in open rebellion, and he 
 himself a traitor. 
 
 Now, sir, if we were a court, how would the case 
 be presented ? I know the Constitution says that 
 " no person shall be convicted of treason unless on 
 the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt 
 act, or on confession in open court." Here is an 
 overt act ; it is shown clearly and plainly. We 
 have the Senator's confession in open Senate that 
 he did write the letter. Shall we with this dis- 
 cretion, in view of the protection of this body and 
 the safety of the Government, decide the case upon 
 special pleas or hunt up technicalities by which the 
 Senator can escape, as you would quash an indict- 
 ment in a criminal court ? 
 
 The case of John Smith has already been stated 
 to the Senate. A true bill had been found against 
 him for his connection with Burr's treason, but 
 upon a technicality, the proof not being made out 
 according* to the Constitution, and Burr having 
 been tried first and acquitted, the bill against Smith 
 was quashed, as he was only an accomplice. He 
 was, therefore, turned out of court ; the proceed- 
 ings against him were quashed upon a technicality ; 
 but John Smith was a Senator, and he came here 
 to this body. He came again to take his seat in the 
 
 35* 
 
414 THE SPEECHES 
 
 Senate of the United States, and what did the 
 Senate do ? They took up his case ; they investi- 
 gated it. Mr. Adams made a report, able, full, 
 complete. I may say he came well-nigh exhausting 
 the whole subject. The committee reported a res- 
 olution for his expulsion, and how did the vote 
 stand ? It is true that Mr. Smith was not ex- 
 pelled for the want of some little formality in this 
 body, the vote standing 19 to 10. It only lacked 
 one vote to put him out by a two-thirds majority, 
 according to the requirements of the Constitution. 
 What was the judgment of the nation ? It was 
 that John Smith was an accomplice of Burr, and 
 the Senate condemned him and almost expelled him, 
 not narrowing itself down to those rules and tech- 
 nicalities that are resorted to in courts and by 
 which criminals escape. To show the grounds 
 upon which the action in that case was based, I beg 
 leave to read some extracts from Mr. John Quincy 
 Adams's report in that case : — 
 
 " In examining the question whether these forms of judi- 
 cial proceedings or the rules of judicial evidence ought to be 
 applied to the exercise of that censorial authority which the 
 Senate of the United States possesses over the conduct of its 
 members, let us assume as the test of their application either 
 the dictates of unfettered reason, the letter and spirit of the 
 Constitution, or precedents domestic or foreign, and your com- 
 mittee believe that the result will be the same : that the power 
 of expelling a member must in its nature be discretionary, and 
 in its exercise always more summary than the tardy process of 
 judical proceedings. 
 
 " The power of expelling a member for misconduct results, 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 415 
 
 on the principles of common sense, from the interests of the 
 nation that the high trust of legislation should be invested in 
 pure hands. When the trust is elective, it is not to be pre- 
 sumed that the constituent body will commit the deposit to the 
 keeping of worthless characters. But when a man, whom his 
 fellow-citizens have honored with their confidence on the 
 pledge of a spotless reputation, has degraded himself by the 
 commission of infamous crimes, which become suddenly and 
 unexpectedly revealed to the world, defective, indeed, would 
 be that institution which should be impotent to discard from its 
 bosom the contagion of such a member ; which should have no 
 remedy of amputation to apply until the poison had reached 
 the heart." 
 
 " But when a member of a legislative body lies under the 
 imputation of aggravated offences, and the determination upon 
 his case can operate only to remove him from a station of ex- 
 tensive powers and important trusts, this disproportion between 
 the interest of the public and the interest of the individual 
 disappears ; if any disproportion exists, it is of an opposite 
 kind. It is not better that ten traitors should be members of 
 this Senate, than that one innocent man should suffer expulsion. 
 In either case, no doubt, the evil would be great ; but in the 
 former, it would strike at the vitals of the nation ; in the latter 
 it might, though deeply to be lamented, only be the calamity 
 of an individual." 
 
 " Yet in the midst of all this anxious providence of legisla- 
 tive virtue, it has not authorized the constituent body to recall 
 in any case its representative. It has not subjected him to 
 removal by impeachment ; and when the darling of the 
 people's choice has become their deadliest foe, can it enter the 
 imagination of a reasonable man, that the sanctuary of their 
 legislation must remain polluted with his presence, until a 
 court of common law, with its pace of snail, can ascertain 
 whether his crime was committed on the right or on the left 
 
416 THE SPEECHES 
 
 bank of a river ; whether a puncture of difference can be 
 found between the words of the charge and the words of the 
 proof; whether the witnesses of his guilt should or should not 
 be heard by his jury ; and whether he was punishable, because 
 present at an over act, or intangible to public justice because 
 he only contrived and prepared it ? Is it conceivable that a 
 traitor to that country which has loaded him with favors, guilty 
 to the common understanding of all mankind, should be 
 suffered to return unquestioned to that post of honor and con- 
 fidence where, in the zenith of his good fame, he had been 
 placed by the esteem of his countrymen, and in defiance of 
 their wishes, in mockery of their fears, surrounded by the 
 public indignation, but inaccessible to its bolt, pursue the pur- 
 poses of treason in the heart of the national councils ? Must 
 the assembled rulers of the land listen with calmness and in- 
 difference, session after session, to the voice of notorious 
 infamy, until ihe sluggard step of municipal justice can over- 
 take his enormities ? Must they tamely see the lives and 
 fortunes of millions, the safety of present and future ages, 
 depending upon his vote, recorded with theirs, merely because 
 the abused benignity of general maxims may have remitted to 
 him the forfeiture of his life ? " 
 
 " Such, in very supposable cases, would be the unavoidable 
 consequences of a principle which should offer the crutches of 
 judicial tribunals as an apology for crippling the congressional 
 power of expulsion. Far different, in the opinion of your 
 committee, is the spirit of our Constitution. They believed 
 that the very purpose for which this power was given was to 
 preserve the Legislature from the first approaches of infection ; 
 that it was made discretionary, because it could not exist under 
 the procrastination of general rules. That its process must 
 be summary, because it would be rendered nugatory by delay." 
 
 Mr. President, suppose Aaron Burr bad been a 
 Senator, and after his acquittal he had come back 
 here to take his seat in the Senate, what would 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 4JJ 
 
 have been done ? According to the doctrine avowed 
 in this debate, that we must sit as a court and sub- 
 ject the individual to all the rules and technicali- 
 ties of criminal proceedings, could he have been 
 expelled ? And yet is there a Senator here who 
 would have voted to allow Aaron Burr to take a 
 seat in the Senate after his acquittal by a court and 
 jury ? No ; there is not a Senator here who would 
 have done it. Aaron Burr was tried in court, and 
 he was found not guilty ; he was turned loose ; but 
 was the public judgment of this nation less satis- 
 fied of his guilt than if he had not been acquitted ? 
 What is the nation's judgment, settled and fixed ? 
 That Aaron Burr was guilty of treason, notwith- 
 standing he was acquitted by a court and jury. 
 
 It is said by some Senators that the Senator 
 from Indiana wrote this letter simply as a letter of 
 friendship. Sir, just think of it ! A Senator of 
 the United States was called upon to write a letter 
 for a rebel, for a man from a rebel State, after the 
 courts of the country had pronounced that civil 
 war existed ; after the judicial tribunals had defined 
 what aiding and adhering to the enemies of the 
 country was ! Under such circumstances, what 
 would have been the course of loyalty and of pa- 
 triotism ? Suppose a man who had been your 
 friend, sir, who had rendered you many acts of 
 kindness, bad come to you for such a letter. You 
 would have asked where he was going with it. 
 You would have said : " There is a Southern Con- 
 
418 THE SPEECHES 
 
 federacy ; there is a rebellion ; my friend, you can- 
 not ask me to write a letter to anybody there ; they 
 are at war with the United States ; they are at war 
 with my Government ; I cannot write you a letter 
 giving you aid and assistance in selling your im- 
 proved fire-arm there." Why? "Because that 
 fire-arm may be used against my own country and 
 against my own fellow-citizens." Would not that 
 have been the language of a man who was willing 
 to recognize his obligations of duty to his country ? 
 What was the object of writing the letter ? It 
 certainly was to aid, to facilitate the selling of his 
 fire-arms, to inspire the rebel chief with confidence 
 in the individual. It was saying substantially, " I 
 know this man ; I write to you because I know 
 you have confidence in me ; I send him to you be- 
 cause I know you need fire-arms ; you need im- 
 proved fire-arms ; you need the most deadly and 
 destructive weapons of warfare to overcome this 
 great and this glorious country ; I recommend him 
 to you, and I recommend his fire-arms ; he is a man 
 in whom entire confidence may be placed." That, 
 sir, is the letter. I have already shown the cir- 
 cumstances under which it was written. If such 
 a letter had been written in the purest innocence 
 of intention, with no treasonable design, with no 
 desire to injure his own Government, yet, in view 
 of all the circumstances, in view of the facts which 
 had transpired, a Senator who would be so un- 
 thoughtful, and so negligent, and so regardless of 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 419 
 
 his country's interests as to write such a letter, is 
 not entitled to a seat on this floor. [Applause in 
 the galleries.] 
 
 The Presiding Officer. 1 Order ! order ! 
 Mr. Johnson. Then, Mr. President, what has 
 been the bearing and the conduct of the Senator 
 from Indiana since ? I desire it to be understood 
 that I refer to him in no unkindness, for God knows 
 I bear him none ; but my duty I will perform. 
 " Duties are mine, consequences are God's." What 
 has been the Senator's bearing generally ? Have 
 you heard of his being in the field? Have you 
 heard of his voice and his influence being raised 
 for his bleeding and distracted country ? Has his 
 influence been brought to bear officially, socially, 
 politically, or in any way for the suppression of the 
 rebellion ? If so, I am unaware of it. Where is 
 the evidence of devotion to his country in his 
 speeches and in his votes ? Where the evidence 
 of the disposition on his part to overthrow and put 
 down the rebellion? I have been told, Mr. Presi- 
 dent, by honorable gentlemen, as an evidence of 
 the Senator's devotion to his country and his great 
 opposition to this Southern movement, that they 
 heard him, and perhaps with tears in his eyes, re- 
 monstrate with the leaders of the rebellion that 
 they should not leave him here in the Senate, or 
 that they should not persist in their course after the 
 relations that had existed between them and him, 
 
 l Mr. Sherman. 
 
420 THE SPEECHES 
 
 and the other Democrats of the country ; that he 
 thought they were treating him badly. This was 
 the kind of remonstrance he made. Be it so. I 
 am willing to give the Senator credit for all he is 
 entitled to, and I would to God I could credit him 
 with more. 
 
 But do Senators remember that when this battle 
 was being fought in the Senate I stood here on this 
 side, solitary and alone, on the 19th day of Decem- 
 ber, 1860, and proclaimed that the Government 
 was at an end if you denied it the power to enforce 
 its laws ? I declared then that a government which 
 had not the power to coerce obedience on the part 
 of those who violated the law was no government 
 at all, and had failed to carry out the objects of its 
 creation, and was, ipso facto, dissolved. When I 
 stood on this floor and fought the battle for the 
 supremacy of the Constitution and the enforcement 
 of the laws, has the Senate forgotten that a bevy of 
 conspirators gathered in from the other House, and 
 that those who were here crowded around, with 
 frowns and scowls, and expressions of indignation 
 and contempt toward me, because I dared to raise 
 my feeble voice in vindication of the Constitution 
 and the enforcement of the laws of the Union ? 
 Have you forgotten the taunts, the jeers, the deri- 
 sive remarks, the contemptuous expressions that 
 were indulged in ? If you have, I have not. If 
 the Senator felt such great reluctance at the depart- 
 ure from the Senate of the chiefs of the rebellion, I 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 421 
 
 should have been glad to receive one encouraging 
 smile from him when I was fighting the battles of 
 the country. I did not receive one encouraging 
 expression ; I received not a single sustaining look. 
 It would have been peculiarly encouraging to me, 
 under the circumstances, to be greeted and encour- 
 aged by one of the Senator's talents and long stand- 
 ing in public life ; but he was cold as an iceberg, 
 and I stood solitary and alone amidst the gang of 
 conspirators that had gathered around me. So 
 much for the Senator's remonstrances and expres- 
 sions of regret for the retirement of those gentlemen. 
 The bearing of the Senator since he wrote this 
 letter has not been unobserved. I have not com- 
 pared notes ; I have not hunted up the record in 
 reference to it ; but I have a perfect recollection of 
 it. Did we not see, during the last session of Con- 
 gress, the line being drawn between those who 
 were devoted to the Union and those who were 
 not ? Cannot we sometimes see a great deal more 
 than is expressed ? Does it require us to have a 
 man's sentiments written down in burning and 
 blazing characters, before we are able to judge 
 what they are ? Has it not been observable all 
 through this history where the true Union heart 
 has stood? What was the Senator's bearing at 
 the last session of Congress ? Do we not know 
 that in the main he stood here opposed substan- 
 tially to every measure which was necessary to sus- 
 tain the Government in its trial and peril ? He 
 
 36 
 
422 THE SPEECHES 
 
 may perhaps have voted for some measures that 
 were collateral, remote, indirect in their bearing ; 
 but do we not know that his vote and his influence 
 were cast against the measures which were abso- 
 lutely necessary to sustain the Government in its 
 hour of peril ? 
 
 Some gentlemen have said, and well said, that 
 we should not judge by party. I say so, too. I 
 voted to let the Senator from Indiana into the body, 
 and as a Democrat my bias and prejudice would 
 rather be in his favor. I am a Democrat now ; I 
 have been one all my life ; I expect to live and die 
 one ; and the corner-stone of my Democracy rests 
 upon the enduring basis of the Union. Democrats 
 may come and go, but they shall never divert me 
 from the polar star by which I have ever been 
 guided from early life, — the great principle of De- 
 mocracy upon which this Government rests, and 
 which cannot be carried out without the preser- 
 vation of the Union of these States. The pretence 
 hitherto employed by many who are now in the 
 traitors' camp has been, " We are for the Union ; 
 we are not for dissolution ; but we are opposed to 
 coercion." How long, Senators, have you heard 
 that syren song ? "Where are now most of those 
 who sang those syren tones to us ? Look back to 
 the last session, and inquire where now are the men 
 who then were sinorincr that song in our ears? 
 Where is Trusten Polk, who then stood here so 
 gently craving for peace ? He is in the rebel camp. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 423 
 
 Where is John C. Breckinridge ? — a man for 
 whose promotion to the Presidency I did what I 
 could, physically, mentally, and pecuniarily ; but 
 when he satisfied me that he was for breaking up 
 this Government, and would ere long be a traitor to 
 his country, I dropped him as I would the Senator 
 from Indiana. He was here at the last session of 
 Congress ; and everybody could see then that he 
 was on the road to the traitors' camp. Instead of 
 sustaining the Government, he, too, was crying out 
 for peace ; but he was bitter against " Lincoln's gov- 
 ernment." Sir, when I talk about preserving this 
 great Government, I do not have its executive 
 officer in my mind. The executive head of the 
 Government comes in and goes out of office every 
 four years. He is the mere creature of the people. 
 I talk about the Government without regard to the 
 particular executive officers who have charge of it. 
 If they do well, we can continue them ; if they do 
 wrong, we can turn them out. Mr. Lincoln having 
 come in according to the forms of law and the 
 Constitution, I, loving my Government and the 
 Union, felt it to be my duty to stand by the Gov- 
 ernment, and to stand by the Administration in all 
 those measures that I believed to be necessary and 
 proper for the preservation and perpetuation of the 
 Union. 
 
 Mr. Polk has gone ; Mr. Breckinridge has gone ; 
 my namesake, the late Senator from Missouri, has 
 gone. Did you not see the line of separation at the 
 
424 THE SPEECHES 
 
 last session? Although Senators make speeches, 
 in which they give utterance to disclaimers, we can 
 see their bearing. It is visible now : and the obli- 
 gations of truth and duty to my country require me 
 to speak of it. I believe there are treasonable 
 tendencies here now; and how long it will be 
 before they will lead to the traitors' camp, I shall 
 not undertake to say. The great point with these 
 gentlemen is, that they are opposed to coercion and 
 to the enforcement of the laws. Without regard to 
 the general bearing of the Senator from Indiana 
 upon that point, let me quote the conclusion of his 
 letter of the 7th of September, 1861, to J. Fitch. 
 I will read only the concluding portion of the letter, 
 as it does him no injustice to omit the remainder : — 
 
 " And hence I have opposed, and so long as my present 
 convictions last shall continue to oppose, the entire coercive 
 policy of the Government. I hope this may be satisfactory to 
 my friends. For my enemies I care not." 
 
 Does not this correspond with the Senator's 
 general bearing? Has he given his aid or coun- 
 tenance or influence, in any manner, towards the 
 efforts of the Government to sustain itself? What 
 has been his course ? We know that great stress 
 has been laid upon the word " coercion," and it 
 has been played upon effectually for the purpose of 
 prejudicing the Southern mind, in connection with 
 the other term, " subjugation of the States," which 
 has been used so often. We may as well be honest 
 and fair, and admit the truth of the great proposi- 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 425 
 
 tion, that a government cannot exist — In other 
 words, it is no government — if it is without the 
 power to enforce its laws and coerce obedience to 
 them. That is all there is of it ; and the very 
 instant you take that power from this Government, 
 it is at an end ; it is a mere rope of sand that will 
 fall to pieces of its own weight. It is idle, Utopian, 
 chimerical, to talk about a Government existing 
 without the power to enforce its laws. How is the 
 Government to enforce its laws ? The Constitution 
 says that Congress shall have power " to provide 
 for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of 
 the Union, suppress insurrections, and repel inva- 
 sions." Let me ask the Senator from Indiana, 
 with all his astuteness, how is rebellion to be put 
 down, how is it to be resisted, unless there is some 
 power in the Government to enforce its laws ? 
 
 If there be a citizen who violates your post-office 
 laws, who counterfeits the coin of the United States, 
 or who commits any other offence against the laws 
 of the United States, you subject him to trial and 
 punishment. Is not that coercion ? Is not that en- 
 forcing the laws? How is rebellion to be put down 
 without coercion, without enforcing the laws ? Can 
 it be done? The Constitution provides that, — 
 
 " The United States shall guarantee to every State in this 
 Union a republican form of government, and shall protect 
 each of them from invasion ; and on application of the Legis- 
 lature, or of the Executive, (when the Legislature cannot be 
 convened,) against domestic violence." 
 
426 THE SPEECHES 
 
 How is this Government to put down domestic 
 violence in a State without coercion ? How is the 
 nation to be protected against insurrection without 
 coercing the citizens to obedience? Can it be 
 done? When the Senator says he is against the 
 entire coercive policy of the Government, he is 
 against the vital principle of all government. I 
 look upon this as the most revolutionary and de- 
 structive doctrine that ever was preached. If this 
 Government cannot call forth the militia, if it can- 
 not repel invasion, if it cannot put down domestic 
 violence, if it cannot suppress rebellion, I ask if the 
 great objects of the Government are not at an end ? 
 
 Look at my own State, by way of illustration. 
 There is open rebellion there ; there is domestic 
 violence ; there is insurrection. An attempt has 
 been made to transfer that State to another power. 
 Let me ask the Senator from Indiana if the Con- 
 stitution does not require you to guarantee us a 
 republican form of government in that State ? Is 
 not that your sworn duty ? We ask you to put 
 down this unholy rebellion. What answer would 
 he give us ? We ask you to protect us against 
 insurrection and domestic violence. What is his 
 reply ? "I am against your whole coercive pol- 
 icy ; I am against the enforcement of the laws." 
 I say that if that principle be acted on, your Gov- 
 ernment is at an end ; it fails utterly to carry out 
 the object of its creation. Such a principle leads 
 to the destruction of the Government, for it must 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 427 
 
 inevitably result in anarchy and confusion. " I 
 am opposed to the entire coercive policy of the 
 Government," says the Senator from Indiana. 
 That cuckoo note has been reiterated to satiety ; 
 it is understood ; men know the nature and char- 
 acter of their Government, and they also know that 
 to cry out against " coercion " and " subjugation " is 
 mere ad captandum, idle, and unmeaning slang- 
 whanging. 
 
 Sir, I may be a little sensitive on this subject 
 upon the one hand, while I know I want to do 
 ample justice upon the other. I took an oath to 
 support the Constitution of the United States. 
 There is rebellion in the land ; there is insurrection 
 against the authority of this Government. Is the 
 Senator from Indiana so unobservant or so obtuse 
 that he does not know now that there has been a 
 deliberate design for years to change the nature and 
 character and genius of this Government ? Do we 
 not know that these schemers have been deliber- 
 ately at work, and that there is a party in the 
 South, with some associates in the North, and even 
 in the West, that have become tired of free gov- 
 ernment, in which they have lost confidence ? 
 They raise an outcry against " coercion," that they 
 may paralyze the Government, cripple the exercise 
 of the great powers with which it was invested, and 
 finally to change its form and subject us to a Southern 
 despotism. Do we not know it to be so ? Why 
 disguise this great truth ? Do we not know that 
 
428 THE SPEECHES 
 
 they have been anxious for a change of Govern- 
 ment for years ? Since this rebellion commenced it 
 has manifested itself in many quarters. How long 
 is it since the organ of the government at Rich- 
 mond, the " Richmond Whig," declared that 
 rather than live under the Government of the 
 United States, they preferred to take the constitu- 
 tional Queen of Great Britain as their protector ; 
 that they would make an alliance with Great Britain 
 for the purpose of preventing the enforcement of 
 the laws of the United States ? Do we not know 
 this ? Why then play " hide and go seek " ? Why 
 say, " Oh, yes, I am for the Union," while every 
 act, influence, conversation, vote, is against it? 
 What confidence can we have in one who takes 
 such a course ? 
 
 The people of my State, down-trodden and op- 
 pressed by the iron heel of Southern despotism, 
 appeal to you for protection. They ask you to 
 protect them against domestic violence. They 
 want you to help them to put down this unholy 
 and damnable rebellion. They call upon this Gov- 
 ernment for the execution of its constitutional duty 
 to guarantee to them a republican form of govern- 
 ment, and to protect them against the tyranny and 
 despotism which is stalking abroad. What is the 
 cold reply ? "I am against the entire coercive pol- 
 icy ; I am not for enforcing the laws." Upon such 
 a doctrine Government crumbles to pieces, and 
 anarchy and despotism reign throughout the land. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 429 
 
 Indiana, God bless her, is as true to the Union 
 as the needle is to the pole. She has sent out her 
 " columns " ; she has sent her thousands into the 
 field, for what ? To sustain the Constitution and 
 to enforce the laws ; and as they march with strong 
 arms and brave hearts to relieve a suffering peo- 
 ple, who have committed no offence save devotion 
 to this glorious Union ; as they march to the res- 
 cue of the Constitution and to extend its benefits 
 again to a people who love it dearly, and who 
 have been ruthlessly torn from under its protect- 
 in o- geo-is, what does their Senator sav to them ? 
 " I am against the entire policy of coercion." Do 
 you ever hear a Senator who thus talks make any 
 objection to the exercise of unconstitutional and 
 tyrannical power by the so-called Southern Con- 
 federacy, or say a word against its practice of 
 coercion ? In all the speeches that have been de- 
 livered on that point, has one sentence against 
 usurpation, against despotism, against the exercise 
 of doubtful and unconstitutional powers by that 
 Confederacy, been uttered ? Oh, no ! Have you 
 heard any objection to their practising not only 
 coercion but usurpation ? Have they not usurped 
 government ? Have they not oppressed, and are 
 they not now tyrannizing over the people ? The 
 people of my State are coerced, borne down, trod- 
 den beneath the iron heel of power. We appeal to 
 you for protection. You stand by and see us 
 coerced ; you stand by and see tyranny triumphing, 
 
430 THE SPEECHES 
 
 and no sympathy, no kindness, no helping hand can 
 be extended to us. Your Government is paralyzed ; 
 your Government is powerless ; that which you 
 have called a government is a dream, an idle thing. 
 You thought you had a government, but you have 
 none. My people are appealing to you for protec- 
 tion under the Constitution. They are arrested by 
 hundreds and by thousands ; they are dragged away 
 from their homes and incarcerated in dungeons. 
 They ask you for protection. Why do you not 
 give it ? Some of them are lying chained in their 
 lonely prison-house. The only response to their 
 murmur is the rattling and clanking of the chains 
 that bind their limbs. The only response to their 
 appeals is the grating of the hinges of their dungeon. 
 When we ask for help under the Constitution, we 
 are told that the Government has no power to 
 enforce the laws. Our people are oppressed and 
 down-trodden, and you give them no remedy. They 
 were taught to love and respect the Constitution of 
 the United States. What is their condition to-day ? 
 They are hunted and pursued like the beasts of the 
 forest by the secession and disunion hordes who are 
 enforcing their doctrine of coercion. They are shot 
 or hung for no crime save a desire to stand by the 
 Constitution of the United States. Helpless chil- 
 dren and innocent females are murdered in cold 
 blood. Our men are hung and their bodies left 
 upon the gibbet. They are shot and left lying in 
 the gorges of the mountains, not even thrown into 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 431 
 
 the caves there to lie, but are left exposed to pass 
 through all the loathsome stages of decomposition, 
 or to be devoured by the birds of prey. We appeal 
 for protection, and are told by the Senator from 
 Indiana and others, " We cannot enforce the laws ; 
 we are against the entire coercive policy." Do 
 you not hear their groans ? Do you not hear their 
 cries ? Do you not hear the shrieks of oppressed 
 and down-trodden women and children ? Sir, their 
 tones ring out so loud and clear, that even listening 
 angels look from heaven in pity. 
 
 I will not pursue this idea further, for I perceive 
 that I am consuming more time than I intended to 
 occupy. I think it it clear, without going further 
 into the discussion, that the Senator from Indiana 
 has sympathized with the rebellion. The conclu- 
 sion is fixed upon my mind that the Senator from 
 Indiana has disqualified himself, has incapacitated 
 himself to discharge the duties in this body of a 
 loyal Senator. I think it is clear that, even if we 
 were a court, we should be bound to convict him ; 
 but I do not narrow the case down to the close rules 
 that would govern a court of justice. 
 
 But, sir, in the course of the discussion one pal- 
 liating fact was submitted by the distinguished Sen- 
 ator from New Jersey, 1 and he knows that I do not 
 refer to him in any spirit of unkindness. There 
 was more of legal learning and special pleading in 
 his suggestion than solidity or sound argument. He 
 
 1 Mr. Ten Eyck. 
 
432 THE SPEECHES 
 
 suggested that there was no proof that this letter 
 had ever been delivered to Jefferson Davis, and 
 that therefore the Senator from Indiana ought not 
 to be convicted. Well, sir, on the other hand, there 
 is no proof that it was not delivered. It is true, 
 the letter was found in Mr. Lincoln's possession ; 
 but who knows that Davis did not read the letter, 
 and han 1 it back to Lincoln ? It may have been 
 that, being from his early friend, a man whom he 
 respected, Lincoln desired to keep the letter and 
 show it to somebody else. We have as much right 
 to infer that the letter was delivered as that it was 
 not ; but be that as it may, does it lessen the culpa- 
 bility of the Senator from Indiana? He com- 
 mitted the act, and so far as he was concerned it 
 was executed. It would be no palliation of his of- 
 fence if the man did not deliver the letter to Davis. 
 The intent and the act were just as complete as if it 
 had been delivered. 
 
 During the war of the Revolution, in 1780, 
 Major Andrd, a British spy, held a conference with 
 Benedict Arnold. Arnold prepared his letters, six 
 in number, and they were handed over to Major 
 Andrd, who put them between the soles of his feet 
 and his stockings, and he started on his way to 
 join Sir Henry Clinton. Before he reached his 
 destination, however, John Paulding and his two 
 associates arrested Major Andre*. They pulled off 
 his boots and his stockings, and they got the papers ; 
 they kept them, and Major Andre* was tried and 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 433 
 
 hung as a spy. Arnold's papers were not delivered 
 to Sir Henry Clinton ; but is there anybody here 
 who doubts that Arnold was a traitor ? Has public 
 opinion ever changed upon that subject ? He was 
 not convicted in a court, nor were the treasonable 
 despatches which were to expose the condition of 
 West Point, and make the British attack upon it 
 easy and successful, ever delivered to Sir Henry 
 Clinton, and yet Andre was hung as a spy. Be- 
 cause Sir Henry Clinton did not receive the trea- 
 sonable documents, was the guilt of Benedict Arnold 
 any the less ? I do not intend to argue this ques- 
 tion in a legal way ; I simply mention this circum- 
 stance by way of illustration of the point which has 
 been urged in the present case, and leave it for the 
 public judgment to determine. 
 
 Sir, it has been said by the distinguished Senator 
 from Delaware 1 that the questions in controversy 
 might all have been settled by compromise. He 
 dealt rather extensively in the party aspect of the 
 case, and seemingly desired to throw the onus of the 
 present condition of affairs entirely on one side. 
 He told us that if so and so had been done these 
 questions could have been settled, and that now 
 there would have been no war. He referred par- 
 ticularly to the resolution offered during the last 
 Congress by the Senator from New Hampshire, 2 
 and upon the vote on that he based his argument. 
 I do not mean to be egotistical, but if he will give 
 
 1 Mr. Saulsbury. 2 Mr. Clark. 
 
 37 
 
434 THE SPEECHES 
 
 me his attention I intend to take the staple out of 
 that speech, and show how much of it is left on that 
 point. 
 
 The speech of the Senator from Delaware was 
 a very fine one. I have not the power, as he has, 
 to con over and get by rote, and memorize hand- 
 somely rounded periods, and make a great display 
 of rhetoric. It is my misfortune that I am not so 
 skilled. I have to seize on fugitive thoughts as 
 they pass through my mind, make the best appli- 
 cation of them I can, and express them in my own 
 crude way. I am not one of those who prepare 
 rounding, sounding, bounding rhetorical flourishes, 
 read them over twenty times before I tome into the 
 Senate Chamber, make a great display, and have it 
 said, " Oh, that is a fine speech ! " I have heard 
 many such fine speeches ; but when I have had 
 time to follow them up, I have found that it never 
 took long to analyze them, and reduce them to their 
 original elements ; and that when they were reduced, 
 there was not very much of them. [Laughter.] 
 
 The Senator told us that the adoption of the 
 Clark amendment to the Crittenden resolutions 
 defeated the settlement of the questions of contro- 
 versy ; and that, but for that vote, all could have 
 been peace and prosperity now. We were told 
 that the Clark amendment defeated the Crittenden 
 Compromise, and prevented a settlement of the 
 controversy. On this point I will read a portion 
 of the speech of my worthy and talented friend 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 435 
 
 from California, 1 and when I speak of him thus, T do 
 it in no unmeaning sense. I intend that he, not I, 
 shall answer the Senator from Delaware. I know 
 that sometimes, when gentlemen are fixing up their 
 pretty rhetorical flourishes, they do not take time 
 to see all the sharp corners they may encounter. 
 If they can make a readable sentence, and float on 
 in a smooth, easy stream, all goes well, and they 
 are satisfied. As I have said, the Senator from 
 Delaware told us that the Clark amendment was 
 the turning-point in the whole matter ; that from 
 it had flowed rebellion, revolution, war, the shoot- 
 ing and imprisonment of people in different States, 
 — perhaps he meant to include my own. This w T as 
 the Pandora's box that has been opened, out of 
 which all the evils that now afflict the land have 
 flown. Thank God, I still have hope that all will 
 yet be saved. My worthy friend from California, 1 
 during the last session of Congress, made one of 
 the best speeches he ever made. I bought five 
 thousand copies of it for distribution, bat I had no 
 constituents to send them to ; [laughter ;] and they 
 have been lying in your document-room ever since, 
 with the exception of a few, which I thought would 
 do good in some quarters. In the course of that 
 speech, upon this very point, he made use of these 
 remarks : — 
 
 " Mr. President, being last winter a careful eye-witness of 
 all that occurred, I soon became satisfied that it was a deliber- 
 
 1 Mr. Latham. 
 
436 THE SPEECHES 
 
 ate, wilful design, on the part of some representatives of 
 Southern States, to seize upon the election of Mr. Lincoln 
 merely as an excuse to precipitate this revolution upon the 
 country. One evidence, to my mind, is the fact that South 
 Carolina never sent her Senators here." 
 
 Then they certainly were not influenced by the 
 Clark amendment. 
 
 " An additional evidence is, that when gentlemen on this 
 floor, by their votes, could have controlled legislation, they 
 refused to cast them for fear that the very propositions sub- 
 mitted to this body might have an influence in changing the 
 opinions of their constituencies. Why, sir, when the resolu- 
 tions submitted by the Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. 
 Clark] were offered as an amendment to the Crittenden prop- 
 ositions, for the manifest purpose of embarrassing the latter, 
 and the vote taken on the 16 th of January, 1861, I ask, what 
 did we see ? There were fifty-five Senators at that time upon 
 this floor in person. The ' Globe ' of the second session, Thirty- 
 Sixth Congress, part 1, page 409, shows that upon the call of 
 the yeas and nays immediately preceding the vote on the sub- 
 stituting of Mr. Clark's amendment, there were fifty-five 
 votes cast. I will read the vote from the ' Globe ' : . 
 
 "'Yeas — Messrs. Anthony, Baker, Bingham, Cameron, 
 Chandler, Clark, Collamer, Dixon, Doolittle, Durkee, Fes- 
 senden, Foot, Foster, Grimes, Hale, Harlan, King, Seward, 
 Simmons, Sumner, Ten Eyck, Trumbull, Wade, Wilkinson, 
 and Wilson — 25. 
 
 " ' Nays — Messrs. Bayard, Benjamin, Bigler, Bragg, Bright, 
 Clingman, Crittenden, Douglas, Fitch, Green, Gvvin, Hemp- 
 hill, Hunter, Iverson, Johnson of Arkansas, Johnson of Ten- 
 nessee, Kennedy, Lane, Latham, Mason, Nicholson, Pearce, 
 Polk, Powell, Pugh, Rice, Saulsbury, Sebastian, Slidell, and 
 Wigfall— 30.' 
 
 "The vote being taken immediately after, on the Clark 
 proposition, was as follows : — 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 437 
 
 " * Yeas — Messrs. Anthony, Baker, Bingham, Cameron, 
 Chandler, Clark, Collamer, Dixon, Doolittle, Durkee, Fes- 
 senden, Foot, Foster, Grimes, Hale, Harlan, King, Seward, 
 Simmons, Sumner, Ten Eyck, Trumbull, Wade, Wilkinson, 
 and Wilson — 25. 
 
 " ' Nays — Messrs. Bayard, Bigler, Bragg, Bright, Cling- 
 man, Crittenden, Fitch, Green, Gwin, Hunter, Johnson of 
 Tennessee, Kennedy, Lane, Latham, Mason, Nicholson, 
 Pearce, Polk, Powell, Pugh, Rice, Saulsbury, and Sebas- 
 tian — 23.' 
 
 " Six Senators retained their seats and refused to vote, 
 thus themselves allowing the Clark proposition to supplant 
 the Crittenden resolution by a vote of twenty-five to twenty- 
 three. Mr. Benjamin of Louisiana, Mr. Hemphill and Mr. 
 Wigfall of Texas, Mr. Iverson of Georgia, Mr. Johnson of 
 Arkansas, and Mr. Slidell of Louisiana, were in their seats, 
 but refused to cast their votes." 
 
 I sat right behind Mr. Benjamin, and I am not 
 sure that my worthy friend was not close by, when 
 he refused to vote, and I said to him, " Mr. Ben- 
 jamin, why do you not vote ? Why not save this 
 proposition, and see if we cannot bring the country 
 to it ?" He gave me rather an abrupt answer, and 
 said he would control his own action without con- 
 sulting me or anybody else. Said I, " Vote, and 
 show yourself an honest man." As soon as the 
 vote was taken, he and others telegraphed South, 
 u We cannot get any compromise." Here were 
 six Southern men refusing to vote, when the amend- 
 ment would have been rejected by four majority 
 if they had voted. Who, then, has brought these 
 evils on the country ? Was it Mr. Clark ? He 
 
 37* 
 
438 THE SPEECHES 
 
 was acting out his own policy ; but with the help 
 we had from the other side of the Chamber, if all 
 those on this side had been true to the Constitution 
 and faithful to their constituents, and had acted 
 with fidelity to the country, the amendment of the 
 Senator from New Hampshire could have been 
 voted down, the defeat of which, the Senator from 
 Delaware says, would have saved the country. 
 Whose fault was it ? Who is responsible for it ? 
 Who did it ? Southern traitors, as was said in the 
 speech of the Senator from California. They did 
 it. They wanted no compromise. They accom- 
 plished their object by withholding their votes ; and 
 hence the country has been involved in the present 
 difficulty. Let me read another extract from this 
 speech of the Senator from California : — 
 
 "I recollect full well the joy that pervaded the faces of 
 some of those gentlemen at the result, and the sorrow man- 
 ifested by the venerable Senator from Kentucky, [Mr. Crit- 
 tenden.] The record shows that Mr. Pugh, from Ohio, 
 despairing of any compromise between the extremes of ultra 
 Republicanism and disunionists, working manifestly for the 
 same end, moved, immediately after the vote was announced, 
 to lay the whole subject on the table. If you will turn to 
 page 443, in the same volume, you will find, when, at a late 
 period, Mr. Cameron, from Pennsylvania, moved to reconsider 
 the vote, appeals having been made to sustain those who were 
 struggling to preserve the peace of the country, that the vote 
 was reconsidered ; and when, at last, the Crittenden proposi- 
 tions were submitted on the 2d day of March, these Southern 
 States having nearly all seceded, they were then lost by but 
 one vote. Here is the vote : — 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON". 439 
 
 " * Yeas — Messrs. Bayard, BIgler, Bright, Crittenden, 
 Douglas, Gwin, Hunter, Johnson of Tennessee, Kennedy, 
 Lane, Latham, Mason, Nicholson, Polk, Pugh, Rice, Sebas- 
 tian, Thomson, and Wigfall — 19. 
 
 ; " Nays — Messrs. Anthony, Bingham, Chandler, Clark, 
 Dixon, Doolittle, Durkee, Fessenden, Foot, Foster, Grimes, 
 Harlan, King, Morrill, Sumner, Ten Eyck, Trumbull, Wade, 
 Wilkinson, and Wilson — 20.' 
 
 " If these seceding Southern Senators had remained, there 
 would have passed, by a large vote, (as it did without them,) 
 an amendment, by a two-thirds vote, forbidding Congress 
 ever interfering with slavery in the States. The Crittenden 
 proposition would have been indorsed by a majority vote, the 
 subject finally going before the people, who have never yet, 
 after consideration, refused justice, for any length of time, to 
 any portion of the country. 
 
 " I believe more, Mr. President, that these gentlemen were 
 acting in pursuance of a settled and fixed plan to break up 
 and destroy this Government." 
 
 When we had it in our power to vote down the 
 amendment of the Senator from New Hampshire, 
 and adopt- the Crittenden resolutions, certain South- 
 ern Senators prevented it ; and yet, even at a late 
 day of the session, after they had seceded, the Crit- 
 tenden proposition was only lost by one vote. If 
 rebellion and bloodshed and murder have followed, 
 to whose skirts does the responsibility attach ? I 
 summed up all these facts myself in a speech during 
 the last session ; but I have preferred to read from 
 the speech of the Senator from California, he being 
 better authority, and having presented the facts 
 better than I could. 
 
 What else was done at the very same session ? 
 
440 THE SPEECHES 
 
 The House of Representatives passed, and sent 
 to this body, a proposition to amend the Consti- 
 tution of the United States, so as to prohibit Con- 
 gress from ever hereafter interfering with the in- 
 stitution of slavery in the States, making that 
 restriction a part of the organic law of the land. 
 That constitutional amendment came here after the 
 Senators from seven States had seceded ; and yet it 
 was passed by a two-thirds vote in the Senate. 
 Have you ever heard of any one of the States 
 which had then seceded, or which has since se- 
 ceded, taking up that amendment to the Constitu- 
 tion, and saying they would ratify it, and make 
 it a part of that instrument ? No. Does not the 
 whole history of this rebellion tell you that it was 
 revolution that the leaders wanted, that they started 
 for, that they intended to have ? The facts to 
 which I have referred show how the Crittenden prop- 
 osition might have been carried ; and. when the 
 Senators from the slave States were reduced to one 
 fourth of the members of this body, the two Houses 
 passed a proposition to amend the Constitution, so 
 as to guarantee to the States perfect security in re- 
 gard to the institution of slavery in all future time, 
 and prohibiting Congress from legislating on the 
 subject. 
 
 But what more was done ? After Southern Sen- 
 ators had treacherously abandoned the Constitu- 
 tion and deserted their posts here, Congress passed 
 bills for the organization of three new Territories, 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 441 
 
 Dakota, Nevada, and Colorado ; and in the sixth 
 section of each of those bills, after conferring, af- 
 firmatively, power on the Territorial Legislature, 
 it went on to exclude certain powers bj using a 
 negative form of expression ; and it provided, 
 among other things, that the Legislature should 
 have no power to legislate so as to impair the right 
 to private property ; that it should lay no tax dis- 
 criminating against one description of property in 
 favor of another; leaving the power on all these 
 questions not in the Territorial Legislature, but in 
 the people when they should come to form a State 
 constitution. 
 
 Now, I ask, taking the amendment to the Con- 
 stitution, and taking the three territorial bills, 
 embracing every square inch of territory in the 
 possession of the United States, how much of the 
 slavery question was left ? What better compro- 
 mise could have been made ? Still we are told that 
 matters might have been compromised, and that 
 if we had agreed to compromise, bloody rebellion 
 would not now be abroad in the land. Sir, South- 
 ern Senators are responsible for it. They stood 
 here with power to accomplish the result, and yet 
 treacherously, and, I may say, tauntingly, they 
 left this Chamber, and announced that they had 
 dissolved their connection with the Government. 
 Then, when we were left in the hands of those 
 whom we had been taught to believe would en- 
 croach upon our rights, they gave us, in the consti- 
 
442 THE SPEECHES 
 
 tutional amendment and in the three territorial bills, 
 all that had ever been asked ; and yet gentlemen 
 talk about compromise. Why was not this taken 
 and accepted ? 
 
 No ; it was not compromise that the leaders 
 wanted ; they wanted power ; they wanted to de- 
 stroy this Government, so that they might have place 
 and emolument for themselves. They had lost confi- 
 dence in the intelligence and virtue and integrity of 
 the people, and their capacity to govern themselves ; 
 and they intended to separate and form a govern- 
 ment, the chief corner-stone of which should be 
 slavery, disfranchising the great mass of the people, 
 of which we have seen constant evidence, and merg- 
 ing the powers of government in the hands of the 
 few. I know what I say. I know their feelings 
 and their sentiments. I served in the Senate here 
 with them. I know they were a close corporation, 
 that had no more confidence in or respect for the peo- 
 ple than has the Dey of Algiers. I fought that close 
 corporation here. I knew that they were no friends 
 of the people. I knew that Slidell and Mason and 
 Benjamin and Iverson and Toombs were the enemies 
 of free government, and I know so now. I com- 
 menced the war upon them before a State seceded ; 
 and I intend to keep on fighting this great battle 
 before the country for the perpetuity of free govern- 
 ment. They seek to overthrow it, and to establish 
 a despotism in its place. That is the great battle 
 which is upon our hands. The great interests of 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 443 
 
 civil liberty and free government call upon every 
 patriot and every lover of popular rights to come 
 forward and discharge his duty. 
 
 We see this great struggle ; we see that the exer- 
 cise of the vital principle of government itself is de- 
 nied by those who desire our institutions to be over- 
 thrown and despotism established on their ruins. 
 If we have not the physical and moral courage to 
 exclude from our midst men whom we believe to 
 be unsafe depositaries of public power and public 
 trust, — men whose associates were rolling off hon- 
 eyed accents against coercion, and are now in the 
 traitors' camp, — if we have not the courage to force 
 these men from our midst, because we have known 
 •them, and have been personal friends with them 
 for years, we are not entitled to sit here as Sena- 
 tors ourselves. Can you expect your brave men, 
 your officers and soldiers who are now in " the 
 tented field," subject to all the hardships and pri- 
 vations pertaining to a civil war like this, to have 
 courage, and to march on with patriotism to crush 
 treason on every battle-field, when you have not 
 the courage to expel it from your midst ? Set 
 those brave men an example ; say to them by your 
 acts and voice that you evidence your intention to 
 put down traitors in the field by ejecting them 
 from your midst, without regard to former associ- 
 ations. 
 
 I do not say these things in unkindness. I say 
 them in obedience to duty, a high constitutional 
 
444 THE SPEECHES 
 
 duty that I owe to my country ; yes, sir, that I 
 owe to my wife and children. By your failure to 
 exercise the powers of this Government, by your 
 failure to enforce the laws of the Union, I am sep- 
 arated from those most dear to me. Pardon me, 
 sir, for this personal allusion. My wife and chil- 
 dren have been turned into the street, and my house 
 has been turned into a barrack, and for what? 
 Because I stand by the Constitution and the in- 
 stitutions of the country that I have been taught 
 to love, respect, and venerate. This is my offence. 
 Where are my sons-in-law ? One to-day is lying 
 in prison ; another is forced to fly to the mountains 
 to evade the pursuit of the hell-born and hell-bound 
 conspiracy of disunion and secession ; and when 
 their cries come up here to you for protection, we 
 are told, " No ; I am against the entire coercive 
 policy of the Government." 
 
 The speech of the Senator from California the 
 other day had the effect in some degree, and 
 seemed to be intended to give the question a party 
 tinge. If I know myself, — although, as I avowed 
 before, I am a Democrat, and expect to live and 
 die one, — I know no party in this great struggle 
 for the existence of my country. The argument 
 presented by the Senator from California was, that 
 we need not be in such hot pursuit of Mr. Bright, 
 or those Senators who entertain his sentiments, 
 who are still here, because we had been a little 
 dilatory in expelling other traitorous Senators here- 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 445 
 
 tofore, and he referred us to the resolution of the 
 Senator from Maine, 1 which was introduced at the 
 special session in March last, declaring that certain 
 Senators having withdrawn, and their seats having 
 thereby become vacant, the Secretary should omit 
 their names from the roll of the Senate. I know 
 there seemed to be a kind of timidity, a kind of 
 fear, to make use of the word u expel " at that 
 time ; but the fact that we declared the seats vacant, 
 and stopped there, did not preclude us from after- 
 wards passing a vote of censure. The resolution, 
 which was adopted in March, merely stated the fact 
 that Senators had withdrawn, and left their seats 
 vacant. At the next session a resolution was in- 
 troduced to expel the other Senators from the se- 
 ceded States who did not attend in the Senate ; and 
 my friend 2 moved to strike out of that very resolu- 
 tion the word " expelled," and insert " vacated " ; 
 so that I do not think he ought to be much offended 
 at it. I simply allude to it to show how easy it is 
 for us to forget the surrounding circumstances that 
 influenced our action at the time it took place. We 
 know that a year ago there was a deep and abiding 
 hope that the rebellion would not progress as it has 
 done ; that it would cease ; and that there might 
 be circumstances which, at one time, would to some 
 extent justify us in allowing a wide margin which, 
 at another period of time would be wholly unjusti- 
 fiable. 
 
 1 Mr. Fessenden. 2 Mr. Latham. 
 
 38 
 
446 THE SPEECHES 
 
 All this, however, amounts to nothing. We have 
 a case now before us that requires our action, and 
 we should act upon it conscientiously in view of 
 the facts which are presented. Because we neg- 
 lected to expel traitors before, and omitted to have 
 them arrested, and permitted them to go away 
 freely, and afterwards declared their seats vacant 
 because they had gone, we are not now prevented 
 from expelling a Senator who is not worthy to be 
 in the Senate. I do not say that other traitors 
 may not be punished yet. I trust in God the time 
 will come, and that before long, when these traitors 
 can be overtaken, and we may mete out to them 
 condign punishment, such as their offence deserves. 
 I know who was for arresting them. I know who 
 declared their conduct to be treason. Here in their 
 midst I told them it was treason, and they might 
 make the best of it they could. 
 
 Sir, to sum up the argument, I think there is but 
 little in the point presented by the Senator from 
 New Jersey, of there being no proof of the reception 
 of the letter ; and I think I have extracted the sta- 
 ple commodity entirely out of the speech of the Sen- 
 ator from Delaware ; and go far as the force of 
 the argument, based upon the Senate having at one 
 session expelled certain members, while at the pre- 
 vious session it only vacated their seats, is concerned, 
 I think the Senator from California answers that 
 himself. As to the polished and ingenious state- 
 ment of the case made by the Senator from New 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 447 
 
 York, 1 I think I have answered that by putting the 
 case upon a different basis from the one presented 
 by him, which seems to control his action. 
 
 Mr. President. I have alluded to the talk about 
 compromise. If I know myself, there is no one who 
 desires the preservation of this Government more 
 than I do ; and I think I have given as much evi- 
 dence as mortal man could give of my devotion to 
 the Union. My property has been sacrificed ; my 
 wife and children have been turned out-of-doors ; 
 my sons have been imprisoned ; my son-in-law has 
 had to run to the mountains ; I have sacrificed a 
 large amount of bonds in trying to give some evi- 
 dence of my devotion to the Government under 
 which I was raised. I have attempted to show you 
 that, on the part of the leaders of this rebellion, there 
 was no desire to compromise : compromise was not 
 what they wanted ; and now the great issue before 
 the country is the perpetuation or the destruction 
 of free government. I have shown how the resolu- 
 tion of the venerable Senator from Kentucky 2 was 
 defeated, and that Southern men are responsible for 
 that defeat, — six sitting in their places and refusing 
 to vote. His proposition was only lost by two 
 votes ; and in the end, when the seceders had gone, 
 by only one. Well do I remember, as was described 
 by the Senator from California, the sadness, the 
 gloom, the anguish that played over his venerable 
 face when the result was announced ; and I went 
 
 i Mr. Hams. 2 Mr. Crittenden. 
 
448 THE SPEECHES 
 
 across the Chamber, and told him that here were 
 men refusing to vote, and that to me was adminis- 
 tered a rebuke by one of them for speaking to him 
 on the subject. 
 
 Now, the Senator from Delaware tells us that if 
 that compromise had been made, all these conse- 
 quences would have been avoided. It is a mere 
 pretence ; it is false. Their object was to overturn 
 the Government. If they could not get the control 
 of this Government, they were willing to divide the 
 country and govern a part of it. Talk not of com- 
 promise now. What, sir, compromise with traitors 
 with arms in their hands ! Talk about " our 
 Southern brethren" when they present their swords 
 at your throat and their bayonets at your bosoms ! 
 Is this a time to talk about compromise ? Let me 
 say, and I regret that I have to say it, that there is 
 but one way to compromise this matter, and that is 
 to crush the leaders of this rebellion and put down 
 treason. You have got to subdue them ; you have 
 got to conquer them ; and nothing but the sacrifice 
 of life and blood will do it. The issue is made. 
 The leaders of rebellion have decreed eternal separa- 
 tion between you and them. Those leaders must 
 be conquered, and a new set of men brought forward 
 who are to vitalize and develop the Union feeling in 
 the South. You must show vour courage here as 
 Senators, and impart it to those who are in the field. 
 If you were now to compromise, they would believe 
 that they could whip you one to five, and you could 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 449 
 
 not live in peace six months, or even three months. 
 Settle the question now ; settle it well ; settle it 
 finally; crush out the rebellion and punish the 
 traitors. I want to see peace, and I believe that is 
 the shortest way to get it. Blood must be shed, life 
 must be sacrificed, and you may as well begin at 
 first as last. I only regret that the Government has 
 been so tardy in its operations. I wish the issue 
 had been met sooner. I believe that if we had seen 
 as much in the beginning as we see to-day, this 
 rebellion would have been wound up and peace 
 restored to the land by this time. 
 
 But let us go on ; let us encourage the Army and 
 the Navy ; let us vote the men and the means ne- 
 cessary to vitalize and to bring into requisition the 
 enforcing and coercive power of the Government ; 
 let us crush out the rebellion, and anxiously look 
 forward to the day — God grant it may come soon 
 — when that baleful comet of fire and of blood that 
 now hovers over this distracted people may be chased 
 away by the benignant star of peace. Let us look 
 forward to the time when we can take the flag, the 
 glorious flag of our country, and nail it below the 
 cross, and there let it wave as it waved in the olden 
 time, and let us gather around it, and inscribe as our 
 motto, " Liberty and Union, now and forever, one 
 and inseparable." Let us gather around it, and 
 while it hangs floating beneath the cross, let us 
 exclaim, " Christ first, our country next." Oh, how 
 gladly rejoiced I should be to see the dove return- 
 
 38* 
 
450 THE SPEECHES 
 
 ing to the ark with the olive-leaf, indicating that 
 land was found, and that the mighty waters had 
 abated. I trust the time will soon come when we 
 can do as they did in the olden times, when the 
 stars sang together in the morning, and all creation 
 proclaimed the glory of God. Then let us do our 
 duty in the Senate and in the councils of the nation, 
 and thereby stimulate our brave officers and soldiers 
 to do theirs in the field. 
 
 Mr. President, I have occupied the attention of 
 the Senate much longer than I intended. In view 
 of the whole case, without personal unkind feeling 
 towards the Senator from Indiana, I am of opinion 
 that duty to myself, duty to my family, duty to the 
 Constitution, duty to the country, obedience to the 
 public judgment, all require me to cast my vote to 
 expel Mr. Bright from the Senate, and when the 
 occasion arrives I shall so record my vote. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 451 
 
 APPEAL TO THE PEOPLE OF TENNESSEE. 
 
 Fellow-Citizens : Tennessee assumed the form 
 of a body politic, as one of the United States of 
 America, in the year seventeen hundred and ninety- 
 six, at once entitled to all the privileges of the Fed- 
 eral Constitution, and bound by all its obligations. 
 For nearly sixty-five years she continued in the en- 
 joyment of all her rights, and in the performance 
 of all her duties, one of the most loyal and devoted 
 of the sisterhood of States. She had been honored 
 by the elevation of two of her citizens to the highest 
 place in the gift of the American people, and a third 
 had been nominated for the same high office, who 
 received a liberal though ineffective support. Her 
 population had rapidly and largely increased, and 
 their moral and material interests correspondingly 
 advanced. Never was a people more prosperous, 
 contented, and happy than the people of Tennessee 
 under the Government of the United States, and 
 none less burdened for the support of the authority 
 by which they were protected. They felt their 
 Government only in the conscious enjoyment of the 
 benefits it conferred and the blessings it bestowed. 
 
 Such was our enviable condition until within the 
 
452 THE SPEECHES 
 
 year just past, when, under what baneful influences 
 it is not my purpose now to inquire, the authority of 
 the Government was set at defiance, and the Con- 
 stitution and laws contemned, by a rebellious, armed 
 force. Men who, in addition to the ordinary privi- 
 leges and duties of the citizen, had enjoyed largely 
 the bounty and official patronage of the Government, 
 and had, by repeated oaths, obligated themselves 
 to its support, with sudden ingratitude for the 
 bounty and disregard of their solemn obligation, 
 engaged, deliberately and ostentatiously, in the ac- 
 complishment of its overthrow. Many, accustomed 
 to defer to their opinions and to accept their guid- 
 ance, and others, carried away by excitement or 
 overawed by seditious clamor, arrayed themselves 
 under their banners, thus organizing a treasonable 
 power, which, for the time being, stifled and sup- 
 pressed the authority of the Federal Government. 
 
 In this condition of affairs it devolved upon the 
 President, bound by his official oath to preserve, 
 protect, and defend the Constitution, and charged by 
 the law with the duty of suppressing insurrection 
 and domestic violence, to resist and repel this rebel- 
 lious force by the military arm of the Government, 
 and thus to reestablish the Federal authority. Con- 
 gress, assembling at an early day, found him en- 
 gaged in the active discharge of this momentous 
 and responsible trust. That body came promptly 
 to his aid, and while supplying him with treasure 
 and arms to an extent that would previously have 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 453 
 
 been considered fabulous, they, at tbe same time, 
 with almost absolute unanimity, declared " that this 
 war is not waged on their part in any spirit of 
 oppression, nor for any purpose of conquest or sub- 
 jugation, nor purpose of overthrowing or interfer- 
 ing with the rights or the established institutions of 
 these States ; but to defend and maintain the suprem- 
 acy of the Constitution and to preserve the Union, 
 with all the dignity, equality, and rights of the sev- 
 eral States unimpaired ; and that as soon as these 
 objects are accomplished, the war ought to cease.'' 
 In this spirit, and by such cooperation, has the Pres- 
 ident conducted this mighty conquest, until, as 
 Commander-in-Chief of the Army, he has caused the 
 national flag again to float undisputed over the eapi- 
 tol of our State. Meanwhile the State government 
 has disappeared. The Executive has abdicated ; the 
 Legislature has dissolved ; the Judiciary is in abey- 
 ance. The great ship of state, freighted with its 
 precious cargo of human interests and human hopes, 
 its sails all set, and its glorious old flag unfurled, has 
 been suddenly abandoned by its officers and muti- 
 nous crew, and left to 'float at the mercy of the winds, 
 and to be plundered by every rover upon the deep. 
 Indeed the work of plunder has already commenced. 
 The archives have been desecrated ; the public 
 property stolen and destroyed ; the vaults of the 
 State Bank violated, and its treasures robbed, in- 
 cluding the funds carefully gathered and consecrated 
 for all time to the instruction of our children. 
 
454 THE SPEECHES 
 
 In such a lamentable crisis the Government of 
 the United States could not be unmindful of its 
 high constitutional obligation to guarantee to every 
 State in this Union a republican form of govern- 
 ment, an obligation which every State has a direct 
 and immediate interest in having observed towards 
 every other State ; and from which, by no action on 
 the part of the people in any State, can the Federal 
 Government be absolved. A republican form of 
 government, in consonance with the Constitution of 
 the United States, is one of the fundamental con- 
 ditions of our political existence, by which every 
 part of the country is alike bound, and from which 
 no part can escape. This obligation the national 
 Government is now attempting to discharge. I have 
 been appointed, in the absence of the regular and 
 established State authorities, as Military Governor 
 for the time being, to preserve the public property 
 of the State, to give the protection of law actively 
 enforced to her citizens, and, as speedily as may be, 
 to restore her government to the same condition as 
 before the existing rebellion. 
 
 In this grateful but arduous* undertaking, I shall 
 avail myself of all the aid that may be afforded by 
 my fellow-citizens. And for this purpose I respect- 
 fully but earnestly invite all the people of Tennes- 
 see, desirous or willing to see a restoration of her 
 ancient government, without distinction of party 
 affiliations or past political opinions or action, to 
 unite with me, by counsel and cooperative agency, 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 455 
 
 to accomplish tliis great end. I find most, if not all 
 of the offices, both State and Federal, vacated, either 
 by actual abandonment, or by the action of the in- 
 cumbents in attempting to subordinate their func- 
 tions to a power in hostility to the fundamental law 
 of the State, and subversive of her national alle- 
 giance. These offices must be filled temporarily, 
 until the State shall be restored so far to its accus- 
 tomed quiet, that the people can peaceably assemble 
 at the ballot-box and select agents of their own 
 choice. Otherwise anarchy would prevail, and no 
 man's life or property would be safe from the desper- 
 ate and unprincipled. 
 
 I shall therefore, as early as practicable, designate 
 for various positions under the State and county 
 governments, from among my fellow-citizens, per- 
 sons of probity and intelligence, and bearing true 
 allegiance to the Constitution and Government of 
 the United States, who will execute the functions 
 of their respective offices until their places can be 
 filled by the action of the people. Their authority, 
 when their appointment shall have been made, will 
 be accordingly respected and observed. 
 
 To the people themselves the protection of the 
 Government is extended. All their rights will be 
 duly respected, and their wrongs redressed when 
 made known. Those who through the dark and 
 weary night of the rebellion have maintained their 
 allegiance to the Federal Government will be hon- 
 ored. The erring and misguided will be welcomed 
 
456 THE SPEECHES 
 
 on their return. And while it may become neces- 
 sary, in vindicating the violated majesty of the law, 
 and in reasserting its imperial sway, to punish intelli- 
 gent and conscious treason in high places, no merely 
 retaliatory or vindictive policy will be adopted. To 
 those especially who, in a private, unofficial capac- 
 ity, have assumed an attitude of hostility to the Gov- 
 ernment, a full and complete amnesty for all past 
 acts and declarations is offered, upon the one condi- 
 tion of their again yielding themselves peaceful citi- 
 zens to the just supremacy of the laws. This I advise 
 them to do for their own good, and for the peace and 
 welfare of our beloved State, endeared to me by the 
 associations of long and active years, and by the en- 
 joyment of her highest honors. 
 
 And appealing to my fellow-citizens of Tennessee, 
 I point you to my long public life as a pledge for 
 the sincerity of my motives, and an earnest for the 
 performance of my present and future duties. 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 457 
 
 INAUGURAL ADDRESS. 
 
 DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, MARCH 4, 1865. 
 
 Senators : I am here to-day as the chosen Vice- 
 President of the United States ; and as such, by 
 constitutional provision, I am made the presiding 
 officer of this body. I therefore present myself 
 here in obedience to the high behests of the Ameri- 
 can people, to discharge a constitutional duty, and 
 not presumptuously to thrust myself in a position so 
 exalted. May I at this moment — it may not be 
 irrelevant to the occasion — advert to the workings 
 of our institutions under the Constitution which our 
 fathers framed and Washington approved, as ex- 
 hibited by the position in which I stand before the 
 American Senate, in the sight of the American 
 people ? Deem me not vain or arrogant ; yet I 
 should be less than man if under such circum- 
 stances I were not proud of being an American 
 citizen, for to-day one who claims no high descent, 
 one who comes from the ranks of the people, stands, 
 by the choice of a free constituency, in the second 
 place of this Government. There may be those 
 to whom such things are not pleasing; but those 
 
 39 
 
458 THE SPEECHES 
 
 who have labored for the consummation of a free 
 Government will appreciate and cherish institu- 
 tions which exclude none, however obscure his 
 origin, from places of trust and distinction. The 
 people, in short, are the source of all power. You, 
 Senators, vou who constitute the bench of the 
 Supreme Court of the United States, are but the 
 creatures of the American people ; your exaltation 
 is from them ; the power of this Government con- 
 sists in its nearness and approximation to the great 
 mass of the people. You, Mr. Secretary Seward, 
 Mr. Secretary Stanton, the Secretary of the Navy, 
 and the others who are your associates, — you 
 know that you have my respect and my confidence, 
 — derive not your greatness and your power alone 
 from President Lincoln. Humble as I am, ple- 
 beian as I may be deemed, permit me in the pres- 
 ence of this brilliant assemblage to enunciate the 
 truth that courts and cabinets, the President and 
 his advisers, derive their power and their great- 
 ness from the people. A President could not exist 
 here forty-eight hours if he were as far removed 
 from the people as the autocrat of Russia is sepa- 
 rated from his subjects. Here the popular heart 
 sustains President and cabinet officers ; the popular 
 will gives them all their strength. Such an asser- 
 tion of the great principles of this Government may 
 be considered out of place, and I will not consume 
 the time of these intelligent and enlightened people 
 much longer ; but I could not be insensible to these 
 
OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 459 
 
 great truths when I, a plebeian, elected by the people 
 the Vice-President of the United States, am here 
 to enter upon the discharge of my duties. For those 
 duties I claim not the aptitude of my respected pred- 
 ecessor. Although I have occupied a seat in both 
 the House of Representatives and the Senate, I am 
 not learned in parliamentary law, and I shall be 
 dependent on the courtesy of those Senators who 
 have become familiar with the rules which are req- 
 uisite for the good order of the body and the dis- 
 patch of its business. I have only studied how I 
 may best advance the interests of my State and of 
 my country, and not the technical rules of order ; 
 and if I err I shall appeal to this dignified body of 
 representatives of States for kindness and indul- 
 gence. 
 
 Before I conclude this brief inaugural address in 
 the presence of this audience, — and I, though a 
 plebeian boy, am authorized by the principles of the 
 Government under which I live to feel proudly con- 
 scious that I am a man, and grave dignitaries are 
 but men, — before the Supreme Court, the represen- 
 tatives of foreign governments, Senators, and the 
 people, I desire to proclaim that Tennessee, whose 
 representative I have been, is free. She has bent 
 the tyrant's rod, she has broken the yoke of slavery, 
 and to-day she stands redeemed. She waited not 
 for the exercise of power by Congress ; it was her 
 own act, and she is now as loyal, Mr. Attorney- 
 General, as is the State from which you came. It 
 
460 THE SPEECHES OF ANDREW JOHNSON. 
 
 is the doctrine of the Federal Constitution that no 
 State can go out of this Union ; and moreover Con- 
 gress cannot reject a State from this Union. Thank 
 God, Tennessee has never been out of the Union ! 
 It is true the operations of her government were for 
 a time interrupted ; there was an interregnum ; 
 but she is still in the Union, and I am her represen- 
 tative. This day she elects her Governor and her 
 Legislature, which will be convened on the first 
 Monday of April, and again her Senators and Rep- 
 resentatives will soon mingle with those of her 
 sister States ; and who shall gainsay it ? for the Con- 
 stitution requires that to every State shall be guaran- 
 teed a republican form of government. 
 
 I now am prepared to take the oath of office, and 
 renew my allegiance to the Constitution of the 
 United States. 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, THIRTY-SIXTH CONGRESS, 
 SECOND SESSION, DECEMBER 13, 1860. 
 
 Mr. Johnson of Tennessee asked, and by unanimous con- 
 sent obtained, leave to bring in the following joint resolution ; 
 which was read and passed to a second reading, and ordered 
 to be printed. 
 
 JOINT RESOLUTION PROPOSING AMENDMENTS TO THE 
 CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES. 
 
 Whereas the fifth article of the Constitution of the 
 United States provides for amendments thereto, in the 
 manner following, viz: "1. Congress, whenever two 
 thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall pro- 
 pose amendments to this Constitution, or on the appli- 
 cation of the legislatures of two thirds of the several 
 States shall call a convention for proposing amendments, 
 which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and 
 purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by 
 the legislatures of three fourths of the several States, 
 or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one 
 or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by 
 Congress ; provided that no amendment which may be 
 made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and 
 eight, shall in any manner affect the first and fourth 
 clauses in the ninth section of the first article ; and that 
 39* 
 
462 APPENDIX. 
 
 no State, without its consent, shall be deprived of its 
 equal suffrage in the Senate " : Therefore, 
 
 Be it resolved by the Senate and House of Representa- 
 tives of the United States of America in Congress as* 
 sembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, That the 
 following amendments to the Constitution of the United 
 States be proposed to the legislatures of the several 
 States, which when ratified by the legislatures of three 
 fourths of the States, shall be valid to all intents and 
 purposes as part of the Constitution: — 
 
 That hereafter the President and Vice-President of 
 the United States shall be chosen by the people of the 
 respective States, in the manner following : — Each 
 State shall be divided, by the legislature thereof, in 
 districts equal in number to the whole number of Sen- 
 ators and Representatives to which such State may be 
 entitled in the Congress of the United States ; the said 
 districts to be composed of contiguous territory, and to 
 contain, as nearly as may be, an equal number of per- 
 sons entitled to be represented under the Constitution, 
 and to be laid off, for the first time, immediately after 
 the ratification of this amendment, and afterwards, at 
 the session of the legislature next ensuing the appor- 
 tionment of representatives by the Congress of the 
 United States: that, on the first Thursday in August, 
 in the year eighteen hundred and sixty-four, and on 
 the same day every fourth year thereafter, the citizens 
 of each State who possess the qualifications requisite 
 for electors of the most numerous branch of the State 
 legislatures, shall meet within their respective districts, 
 and vote for a President and Vice-President of the 
 United States; and the person receiving the greatest 
 
APPENDIX. 463 
 
 number of votes for President, and the one receiving 
 the greatest number of votes for Vice-President in each 
 district, shall be holden to have received one vote ; 
 which fact shall be immediately certified by the Gov- 
 ernor of the State, to each of the Senators in Congress 
 from such State, and to the President of the Senate 
 and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. The 
 Congress of the United States shall be in session on the 
 second Monday in October, in the year eighteen hun- 
 dred and sixty-four, and on the same day on every 
 fourth year thereafter; and the President of the Sen- 
 ate, in the presence of the Senate and House of Repre- 
 sentatives, shall open all the certificates, and the votes 
 shall then be counted. The person having the greatest 
 number of votes for President, shall be President, if 
 such number be equal to a majority of the whole num- 
 ber of votes given ; but if no person have such majority, 
 then a second election shall be held on the first Thurs- 
 day in the month of December then next ensuing, be- 
 tween the persons having the two highest numbers for 
 the office of President; which second election shall be 
 conducted, the result certified, and the votes counted, 
 in the same manner as in the first; and the person 
 having the greatest number of votes for President, 
 shall be President. But, if two or more persons shall 
 have received the greatest, and an equal number of 
 votes, at the second election, then the person who shall 
 have received the greatest number of votes in the great- 
 est number of States, shall be President. The person 
 having the greatest number of votes for Vice-President, 
 at the first election, shall be Vice-President, if such 
 number be equal to a majority of the whole number of 
 
464 APPENDIX. 
 
 votes given ; and if no person have such majority, then 
 a second election shall take place between the persons 
 having the two highest numbers, on the same day that 
 the second election is held for President ; and the per- 
 son having the highest number of the votes for Vice- 
 President, shall be Vice-President. But if there should 
 happen to be an equality of votes between the persons 
 so voted for at the second election, then the person 
 having the greatest number of votes in the greatest 
 number of States, shall be Vice-President. But when 
 a second election shall be necessary in the case of Vice- 
 President, and not necessary in the case of President, 
 then the S nate shall choose a Vice-President from 
 the persons having the two highest numbers in the 
 first election, as is now prescribed in the Constitution : 
 Provided, That the President to be elected in the year 
 eighteen hundred and sixty-four, shall be chosen from 
 one of the slaveholding States, and the Vice-President 
 from one of the non-slaveholding States; and, in the 
 year eighteen hundred and sixty-eight, the President 
 shall be chosen from one of the non-slaveholding States, 
 and the Vice-President from one of the slaveholding 
 States, and so alternating the President and Vice- 
 President every four years between the slaveholding 
 and the non-slaveholding States, during the continuance 
 of the Government. 
 
 Sec. 2. And be it further resolved, That article one, 
 section three, be amended by striking out the word 
 " legislature," and inserting in lieu thereof the following 
 words, viz : " persons qualified to vote for members of 
 the most numerous branch of the legislature," so as to 
 make the third section of said article, when ratified by 
 three fourths of the States, read as follows, to wit : — 
 
APPENDIX. 465 
 
 The Senate of the United States shall be composed 
 of two Senators from each State, chosen by the persons 
 qualified to vote for the members of the most numerous 
 branch of the legislature thereof, for six years, and each 
 Senator shall have one vote. 
 
 Sec. 3. And be it further resolved, That article three, 
 section one, be amended by striking out the words 
 " good behavior," and inserting the following words, 
 viz : " the term of twelve years." And further, that 
 said article and section be amended by adding the follow- 
 ing thereto, viz : " and it shall be the duty of the Presi- 
 dent of the United States, within twelve months after 
 the ratification of this amendment by three fourths of 
 all the States, as provided by the Constitution of the 
 United States, to divide the whole number of judges, 
 as near as may be practicable, into three classes. The 
 seats of the judges of the first class shall be vacated at 
 the expiration of the fourth year from such classifica- 
 tion ; of the second class, at the expiration of the eighth 
 year; and of the third class, at the expiration of the 
 twelfth year, so that one third may be chosen every 
 fourth year thereafter." 
 
 The article as amended will read as follows : — 
 
 Article 3. — Section 1. The judicial power of the 
 United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, 
 and in such inferior courts as the Congress, from time 
 to time, may ordain and establish. The judges, both 
 of the Supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their 
 offices during the term of twelve years, and shall, at 
 stated times, receive for their services a compensation, 
 which shall not be diminished during their continuance 
 in office. And it shall be the duty of the President of 
 
466 APPENDIX. 
 
 the United States, within twelve months after the rati- 
 fication of this amendment by three fourths of all the 
 States, as provided by the Constitution of the United 
 States, to divide the whole number of judges, as near 
 as may be practicable, into three classes. The seats 
 of the judges of the first class shall be vacated at the 
 expiration of the fourth year from such classification ; 
 of the second class, at the expiration of the eighth 
 year ; and of the third class, at the expiration of the 
 twelfth year, so that one third may be chosen every 
 fourth year thereafter: Provided, however, That all 
 vacancies occurring under the provisions of this section 
 shall be filled by persons, one half of whom shall be 
 chosen from the slaveholding States, and the other half 
 with persons chosen from the non-slaveholding States; 
 so that the Supreme Court will be equally divided 
 between the slaveholding and the non-slaveholding 
 States. 
 
 RECEPTION OF THE ILLINOIS DELE- 
 GATION. 
 
 On the 18th of April, 1865, a delegation of citizens of 
 Illinois paid their respects to President Johnson, at his 
 rooms in the Treasury Building. 
 
 Governor Oglesby presented the delegation, and made 
 the subjoined address : — 
 
 Mr. President : I take much pleasure in present- 
 ing to you this delegation of the citizens of Illinois, rep- 
 resenting almost every portion of the State. We are 
 drawn together by the mournful events of the past few 
 days, to give some feeble expression to the feelings we, 
 
APPENDIX. 467 
 
 in common with the whole nation, realize as pressing us 
 to the earth, by appropriate and respectful ceremonies. 
 We thought it not inappropriate before we should sepa- 
 rate, even in this sad hour, to seek this interview with 
 your Excellency, that, while the bleeding heart is pour- 
 ing out its mournful anguish over the death of our be- 
 loved late President, the idol of our State and the pride 
 of the whole country, we may earnestly express to you, 
 the living head of this nation, our deliberate, full, and 
 abiding confidence in you as the one who, in these dark 
 hours, must bear upon yourself the mighty responsibility 
 of maintaining, defending, and directing its affairs. In 
 the midst of this sadness, through the oppressive gloom 
 that surrounds us, we look to you and to a bright future 
 for our country. The assassination of the President of 
 the United States deeply depresses and seriously aggra- 
 vates the entire nation ; but under our blessed Constitu- 
 tion it does not delay, nor for any great length of time 
 retard, its progress ; does not for an instant disorganize 
 or threaten its destruction. The record of your whole 
 past life, familiar to all, the splendor of your recent gigan- 
 tic efforts to stay the hand of treason and assassination, 
 and restore the flag to the uttermost bounds of the Re- 
 public, assure that noble State which we represent, and, 
 we believe, the people of the United States, that we may 
 safely trust our destinies in your hands ; and to this end 
 we come, in the name of the State of Illinois, and, we 
 confidently believe, fully and faithfully expressing the 
 wishes of our people, to present and pledge to you the 
 cordial, earnest, and unremitting purpose of our State to 
 give your administration the strong support we have 
 heretofore given to the administration of our lamented 
 
468 APPENDIX. 
 
 late President, the policy of whom we have heretofore, 
 do now, and shall continue to endorse. 
 
 THE PRESIDENT'S REPLY. 
 
 President Johnson replied as follows : — 
 Gentlemen : I have listened with profound emotion 
 to the kind words you have addressed to me. The visit 
 of this large delegation to speak to me through you> 
 sir, these words of encouragement, I had not anticipated. 
 In the midst of the saddening circumstances which sur- 
 round us, and the immense responsibility thrown upon 
 me, an expression of the confidence of individuals, and 
 still more of an influential body like that before me, rep- 
 resenting a great commonwealth, cheers and strengthens 
 my heavily burdened mind. I am at a loss for words to 
 respond. In an hour like this, of deepest sorrow, were 
 it possible to embody in words the feelings of my bosom, 
 I could not command my lips to utter them. Perhaps 
 the best reply I could make, and the one most readily ap- 
 propriate to your kind assurances of confidence, would 
 be to receive them in silence. [Sensation.] The throb- 
 bings of my heart since the sad catastrophe which has 
 appalled us cannot be reduced to words ; and, oppressed 
 as I am with the new and great responsibility which has 
 devolved upon me, and saddened with grief, I can with 
 difficulty respond to you at all. But I cannot permit 
 such expression of the confidence reposed in me by the 
 people to pass without acknowledgment. To an indi- 
 vidual like myself, who has never claimed much, but 
 who has, it is true, received from a generous people, 
 many marks of trust and honor for a long time, an occa- 
 sion like this and a manifestation of public feeling so 
 
APPENDIX. 469 
 
 well-timed are peculiarly acceptable. Sprung from the 
 people myself, every pulsation of the popular heart finds 
 an immediate answer in my own. By many men in pub- 
 lic life such occasions are often considered merely formal. 
 To me they are real. Your words of countenance and 
 encouragement sank deep in my heart, and were I even 
 a coward I could not but gather from them strength to 
 carry out my convictions of right. Thus feeling, I shall 
 enter upon the discharge of my great duty firmly, stead- 
 fastly, [applause,] if not with the signal ability exhibited 
 by my predecessor, which is still fresh in our sorrowing 
 minds. Need I repeat that no heart feels more sensi- 
 bly than mine this great affliction ? In what I say on 
 this occasion I shall indulge in no petty spirit of anger, 
 no feeling of revenge. But we have beheld a notable 
 event in the history of mankind. In the midst of the 
 American people, where every citizen is taught to obey 
 law and observe the rules of Christian conduct, our 
 Chief Magistrate, the beloved of all hearts, has been as- 
 sassinated ; and when we trace this crime to its cause, 
 when we remember the source whence the assassin drew 
 his inspiration, and then look at the result, we stand yet 
 more astounded at this most barbarous, most diabolical 
 assassination. Such a crime as the murder of a great 
 and good man, honored and revered, the beloved and the 
 hope of the people, springs not alone from a solitary in- 
 dividual of ever so desperate wickedness. We can trace 
 its cause through successive steps, without my enumerat- 
 ing them here, back to that source which is the spring 
 of all our woes. No one can say that if the perpetrator 
 of this fiendish deed be arrested he should not undergo 
 the extremest penalty the law knows for crime ; none 
 40 
 
470 APPENDIX. 
 
 will say that mercy should interpose. But is he alone 
 guilty? Here, gentlemen, you perhaps expect me to 
 present some indication of my future policy. One thing 
 I will say. Every era teaches its lesson. The times 
 we live in are not without instruction. The American 
 people must be taught — if they do not already feel — 
 that treason is a crime and must be punished ; [ap- 
 plause ;] that the Government will not always bear with 
 its enemies ; that it is strong, not only to protect, but to 
 punish. [Applause.] When we turn to the criminal 
 code and examine the catalogue of crimes, we there find 
 arson laid down as a crime with its appropriate penalty ; 
 we find there theft and robbery and murder given as 
 crimes ; and there, too, we find the last and highest of 
 crimes, — treason. [Applause.] Wilh other and infe- 
 rior offences our people are familiar. But in our peace- 
 ful history treason has been almost unknown. The peo- 
 ple must understand that it is the blackest of crimes, and 
 will be surely punished. [Applause.] I make this allu- 
 sion, not to excite the already exasperated feelings of the 
 public, but to point out the principles of public justice 
 which should guide our action at this particular juncture, 
 and which accord with sound public morals. Let it be 
 engraven on every heart that treason is a crime, and 
 traitors shall suffer its penalty. [Applause.] While 
 we are appalled, overwhelmed at the fall of one man in 
 our midst by the hand of a traitor, shall we allow men — 
 I care not by what weapons — to attempt the life of a 
 State with impunity? While we strain our minds to 
 comprehend the enormity of this assassination, shall we 
 allow the nation to be assassinated ? [Applause.] I 
 speak in no spirit of unkindness. I leave the events of 
 
APPENDIX. 471 
 
 the future to be disposed of as they arise, regarding my- 
 self as the humble instrument of the American people. 
 In this, as in all things, justice and judgment shall be 
 determined by them. I do not harbor bitter or revenge- 
 ful feelings toward any. In general terms I would say 
 that public morals and public opinion should be estab- 
 lished upon the sure and inflexible principles of justice. 
 [Applause.] When the question of exercising mercy 
 comes before me it will be considered calmly, judicially, 
 — remembering that I am the Executive of the nation. 
 I know men love to have their names spoken of in con- 
 nection with acts of mercy ; and how easy it is to yield 
 to this impulse. But we must not forget that what may 
 be mercy to the individual is cruelty to the State. [Ap- 
 plause.] In the exercise of mercy there should be no 
 doubt left that this high prerogative is not used to relieve 
 a few at the expense of the many. Be assured that I 
 shall never forget that I aril not to consult my own feel- 
 ings alone, but to give an account to the whole people. 
 [Applause.] In regard to my future course I will now 
 make no professions, no pledges. I have been connected 
 somewhat actively with public affairs, and to the history 
 of my past public acts, which is familiar to you, I refer 
 for those principles which have governed me heretofore, 
 and will guide me hereafter. In general I will say I have 
 long labored for the amelioration and elevation of the 
 great mass of mankind. My opinions as to the nature 
 of popular government have long been cherished ; and 
 constituted as I am, it is now too late in life for me to 
 change them. I believe that government was made 
 for man, not man for government. [Applause.] This 
 struggle of the people against the mo t gigantic rebel- 
 
472 APPENDIX. 
 
 lion the world ever saw has demonstrated that the attach- 
 ment of the people to their Government is the strongest 
 national defence human wisdom can devise. [Applause.] 
 So long as each man feels that the interests of the Gov- 
 ernment are his interests, so long as the public heart 
 turns in the right direction, and the people understand 
 and appreciate the theory of our Government and love 
 liberty, our Constitution will be transmitted unimpaired. 
 If the time ever comes when the people shall fail, the 
 Government will fail, and we shall cease to be one of 
 the nations of the earth. After having preserved our 
 form of free government, and shown its power to main- 
 tain its existence through the vicissitudes of nearly a 
 century, it may be that it was necessary for us to pass 
 through this last ordeal of intestine strife to prove that 
 this Government will not perish from internal weakness, 
 but will stand to defend itself against all foes and punish 
 treason. [Applause.] In the dealings of an inscrutable 
 Providence and by the operation of the Constitution, I 
 have been thrown unexpectedly into this position. My 
 past life, especially my course during the present unholy 
 Rebellion, is before you. I have no principles to retract ; 
 I defy any one to point to any of my public acts at vari- 
 ance with the fixed principles which have guided me 
 through life. I have no professions to offer. Professions 
 and promises would be worth nothing at this time. No 
 one can foresee the circumstances that will hereafter 
 arise. Had any man, gifted with prescience four years 
 ago, uttered and written down in advance the events of 
 this period, they would have seemed more marvellous 
 than anything in the "Arabian Nights." I shall not 
 attempt to anticipate the future. As events occur, and 
 
APPENDIX. 473 
 
 it becomes necessary for me to act, I shall dispose of 
 each as it arises, deferring any declaration or message 
 until it can be written, paragraph by paragraph, in the 
 light of events as they transpire. 
 
 The members of the delegation were then severally 
 introduced to the President by Governor Oglesby. 
 
 RECEPTION OF THE BRITISH AMBAS- 
 SADOR. 
 
 On the 20th of April, 1865, Sir Frederick A. Bruce, 
 Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of 
 her Britannic Majesty to the United States Government, 
 presenting his credentials to the President, spoke as fol- 
 lows : — 
 
 Mr. President: It is with deep and sincere concern 
 that I have to accompany my first official act with expres- 
 sions of condolence. On Saturday last the ceremony 
 that takes place here to-day was to have been performed, 
 but the gracious intentions of the late lamented President 
 Mere frustrated by the events which have plunged this 
 country in consternation and affliction, and which will 
 call forth in Great Britain feelings of horror as well as 
 of profound sympathy. It becomes, therefore, my duty, 
 sir, to present the letter from my sovereign, of which I 
 am the bearer, to you, as President of the United States, 
 and it is with pleasure that I convey the assurances of 
 regard and good-will which her Majesty entertains to- 
 ward you, sir, as President of the United States. I am 
 further directed to express her Majesty's friendly dispo- 
 sition towards the great Nation of which you are Chief 
 
474 APPENDIX. 
 
 Magistrate, and her hearty good wishes for its peace, 
 prosperity, and welfare. Her Majesty has nothing more 
 at heart than to conciliate those relations of amity and 
 good understanding which have so long and so happily 
 existed between the two kindred nations of the United 
 States and Great Britain, and it is in this spirit that I 
 am directed to perform the duties of the important and 
 honorable post confided to me. Permit me, sir, to say, 
 that it shall be the object of my earnest endeavors to 
 carry out my instructions faithfully in this respect, and 
 to express the hope, sir, that you will favorably con- 
 sider my attempts to merit your approbation, and to give 
 effect to the friendly intentions of the Queen and of her 
 Majesty's Government. I have the honor to place in 
 your hands the letter of credence confided to me by her 
 Majesty. 
 
 THE PRESIDENT'S REPLY. 
 
 To which President Johnson replied : — 
 Sir Frederick A. Bruce : The very cordial and 
 friendly sentiments which you have expressed on the 
 part of her Britannic Majesty give me great pleasure. 
 Great Britain and the United States, by the extended 
 and various forms of commerce between them, the con- 
 tiguity of portions of their possessions, and the similarity 
 of their language and laws, are drawn into constant and 
 intimate intercourse. At the same time they are, from 
 the same causes, exposed to frequent occasions of mis- 
 understanding, only to be averted by mutual forbearance. 
 So eagerly are the people of the two countries engaged, 
 throughout almost the whole world, in the pursuit of similar 
 commercial enterprises, accompanied by natural rivalries 
 
APPENDIX. 475 
 
 and jealousies, that, at first sight, it would almost seem 
 that the two Governments must be enemies, or at best 
 cold and calculating friends. So devoted are the two 
 nations throughout all their domain, and even in their 
 most remote territory and colonial possessions, to the 
 principles of civil rights and constitutional liberty, that, 
 on the other hand, the superficial observer might errone- 
 ously count upon a continued concert of action and 
 sympathy, amounting to an alliance between them. Each 
 is charged with the development of the progress of the 
 human race, and each in its sphere is subject to difficul- 
 ties and trials not participated in by the other. The 
 interests of civilization and of humanity require that 
 the two should be friends. I have always know T n and 
 accounted as a fact honorable to both countries, that 
 the Queen of England is a sincere and honest well- 
 wisher to the United States. I have been equally frank 
 and explicit in the opinion that the friendship of the 
 United States toward Great Britain is enjoined by all 
 considerations of interest and of sentiment affecting the 
 character of both. You will, therefore, be accepted as a 
 Minister friendly and well-disposed to the maintenance 
 of peace and the honor of both countries. You will find 
 myself and all my associates acting in accordance with 
 the same enlightened policy and consistent sentiments, 
 and so I am sure that it will not occur in your case that 
 either yourself or this Government will ever have cause 
 to regret that such an important relationship existed at 
 such a crisis. 
 
476 APPENDIX. 
 
 RECEPTION OF THE DIPLOMATIC CORPS. 
 
 Soon after the reception of the British Minister, the 
 members of the Diplomatic Corps were presented to 
 President Johnson, when Baron von Gerolt addressed 
 the President as follows : — 
 
 Mr. President : The representatives of foreign na- 
 tions have assembled here to express to your Excel- 
 lency their feelings at the deplorable event of which they 
 have been witnesses ; to say how sincerely they share 
 the national mourning for the cruel fate of the late 
 President, Abraham Lincoln, and how deeply they sym- 
 pathize with the Government and people of the United 
 States in their great affliction. With equal sincerity we 
 tender to you, Mr. President, our best wishes for the 
 welfare and prosperity of the United States, and for 
 your personal health and happiness. May we be al- 
 lowed, also, Mr. President, to give utterance on this 
 occasion to our since rest hopes for an early reestablish- 
 ment of peace in this great country, and for the main- 
 tenance of the friendly relations between the Government 
 of the United States and the governments which we rep- 
 resent. 
 
 REPLY OF THE PRESIDENT. 
 
 To which the President replied : — 
 
 Gentlemen of the Diplomatic Body : I heartily 
 thank you, on behalf of the Government and people of 
 the United States, for the sympathy which you have so 
 feelingly expressed upon the mournful event to which 
 you refer. The good wishes also which you kindly offer 
 for the welfare and prosperity of the United States, and 
 
APPENDIX. 477 
 
 for my personal health and happiness, are gratefully 
 received. Your hopes for the early restoration of peace 
 in this country are cordially reciprocated by me, and you 
 may be assured that I shall leave nothing undone towards 
 preserving those relations of friendship which now r fortu- 
 nately exist between the United States and all foreign 
 powers. 
 
 ADDRESS TO LOYAL SOUTHERNERS. 
 
 During the same month a deputation of loyal men 
 from various Southern States waited on the President. 
 In reply to a brief address, he said : — 
 
 It is hardly necessary for me on this occasion to say 
 that my sympathies and impulses, in connection with this 
 nefarious Rebellion, beat in unison with yours. Those 
 who have passed through this bitter ordeal, and who par- 
 ticipated in it to a great extent, are more competent, as I 
 think, to judge and determine the true policy which should 
 be pursued. [Applause.] I have but little to say on 
 this question in response to what has been said. It enun- 
 ciates and expresses my own feelings to the fullest extent, 
 and in much better language than I can at the present 
 moment summon to my aid. The most that I can say is 
 that, entering upon the duties that have devolved upon 
 me under circumstances that are perilous and responsible, 
 and being thrown into the position I now occupy unex- 
 pectedly, in consequence of the sad event, the heinous 
 assassination which has taken place, — in view of all that 
 is before me and the circumstances that surround me, — 
 I cannot but feel that your encouragement and kindness 
 
478 APPENDIX. 
 
 are peculiarly acceptable and appropriate. I do not think 
 you, who have been familiar with my course, — you who 
 are from the South, — deem it necessary for me to make 
 any professions as to the future on this occasion, nor to 
 express what my course will be upon questions that may 
 arise. If my past life is no indication of what my future 
 will be, my professions were both worthless and empty ; 
 and in returning you my sincere thanks for this encour- 
 agement and sympathy, I can only reiterate what I have 
 said before, and, in part, what has just been read. As 
 far as clemency and mercy are concerned, and the proper 
 exercise of the pardoning power, I think I understand the 
 nature and character of the latter. In the exercise of 
 clemency and mercy, that pardoning power should be 
 exercised with caution. I do not give utterance to my 
 opinions on this point in any spirit of revenge or unkind 
 feelings. Mercy and clemency have been pretty large 
 ingredients in my composition, having been the Executive 
 of a State, and thereby placed in a position in which it was 
 necessary to exercise clemency and mercy. I have been 
 charged with going too far, being too lenient, and have 
 become satisfied that mercy without justice is.a crime, and 
 that when mercy and clemency are exercised by the Ex- 
 ecutive, it should always be done in view of justice, and 
 in that manner alone is properly exercised that great pre- 
 rogative. The time has come, as you who have had to 
 drink this bitter cup are fully aware, when the American 
 people should be made to understand the true nature 
 of crime. Of crime generally our people have a high 
 understanding, as well as of the necessity for its punish- 
 ment ; but in the catalogue of crimes there is one, and 
 that the highest known to the laws and the Constitution, 
 
APPENDIX. 479 
 
 of which, since the days of Jefferson and Aaron Burr, 
 they have become oblivious. That is — treason. In- 
 deed, one who has become distinguished in treason and 
 in this Rebellion said, that " when traitors become numer- 
 ous enough treason becomes respectable, and to become a 
 traitor was to constitute a portion of the aristocracy of 
 the country." God protect the people against such an 
 aristocracy. Yes, the time has come when the people 
 should be taught to understand the length and breadth, 
 the depth and height of treason. An individual occupying 
 the highest position among us was lifted to that position 
 by the free offering of the American people, — the highest 
 position on the habitable globe. This man we have seen, 
 revered, and loved, — one who, if he erred at all, erred 
 ever on the side of clemency and mercy, — that man we 
 have seen Treason strike, through a fitting instrument, and 
 we have beheld him fall like a bright star falling from its 
 sphere. Now, there is none but would say, if the ques- 
 tion came up, what should be done with the individual 
 who assassinated the Chief Magistrate of the nation, — 
 He is but a man — one man, after all. But if asked what 
 should be done with the assassin, what should be the pen- 
 alty, the forfeit exacted ? I know what response dwells 
 in every bosom. It is, that he should pay the forfeit with 
 his life. And hence we see there are times when mercy 
 and clemency, without justice, become a crime. The one 
 should temper the other, and bring about that proper 
 means. And if we should say this when the case was the 
 simple murder of one man by his fellow-man, what should 
 we say when asked what should be done with him, or them, 
 or those, who have raised impious hands to take away the 
 life of a nation composed of thirty millions of people ? 
 
480 APPENDIX. 
 
 What would be the reply to that question ? But while in 
 mercy we remember justice, in the language that has 
 been uttered, I say, justice toward the leaders, the con- 
 scious leaders ; but I also say amnesty, conciliation, clem- 
 ency, and mercy to the thousands of our countrymen whom 
 you and I know have been deceived or driven into this 
 infernal Rebellion. And so I return to where I started 
 from, and again repeat that it is time our people were 
 taught to know that treason is a crime, not a mere politi- 
 cal difference, not a mere contest between two parties, in 
 which one succeeded and the other has simply failed. 
 They must know it is treason ; for if they had succeeded, 
 the life of the nation would have been reft from it, — the 
 Union would have been destroyed. Surely the Constitu 
 tion sufficiently defines treason. It consists in levying war 
 against the United States, and in giving their enemies aid 
 and comfort. With this definition it requires the exer- 
 cise of no great acumen to ascertain who are traitors. It 
 requires no great perception to tell who have levied war 
 against the United States ; nor does it require any great 
 stretch of reasoning to ascertain who has given aid to the 
 enemies of the United States ; and when the Government 
 of the United States does ascertain who are the conscious 
 and intelligent traitors, the penalty and the forfeit should 
 be paid. [Applause.] I know how to appreciate the con- 
 dition of being driven from one's home. I can sympa- 
 thize with him whose all has been taken from him, — with 
 him who has been denied the place that gave his children 
 birth. But let us, withal, in the restoration of true gov- 
 ernment, proceed temperately and dispassionately, and 
 hope and pray that the time will come, as I believe, when 
 all can return and remain at our homes, and treason and 
 
APPENDIX. 481 
 
 traitors be driven from our land, — [applause,] — when 
 again law and order shall reign, and the banner of our coun- 
 try be unfurled over every inch of territory within the area 
 of the United States. [Applause.] In conclusion, let me 
 thank you most profoundly for this encouragement and 
 manifestation of your regard and respect, and assure you 
 that I can give no greater assurance regarding the set- 
 tlement of this question, than that I intend to discharge 
 my duty, and in that way which shall, in the earliest pos- 
 sible hour, bring back peace to our distracted country. 
 And I hope the time is not far distant when our people 
 can all return to their homes and firesides, and resume 
 their various avocations. 
 
 SPEECH TO THE INDIANA DELEGATION. 
 
 At the close of the month of April, 1865, the Presi- 
 dent spoke as follows, in response to an address from a 
 delegation from the State of Indiana : — 
 
 As my honorable friend [Governor Morton] knows, I 
 long since took the ground that this Government was sent 
 upon a great mission among the nations of the earth ; that 
 it had a great work to perform, and that in starting it, it 
 was started in perpetuity. Look back for one single mo- 
 ment to the Articles of Confederation, and then come 
 down to 1787, when the Constitution was formed, — what 
 do you find ? That we, " the People of the United States, 
 in order to form a more perfect government," etc. Pro- 
 vision is made for the admission of new States, to be 
 added to the old ones embraced within the Union. Now, 
 41 
 
482 APPENDIX. 
 
 turn to the Constitution ; we find that amendments may 
 be made by a recommendation of two thirds of the mem- 
 bers of Congress, if ratified by three fourths of the 
 States. Provision is made for the admission of new 
 States ; no provision is made for the secession of old 
 ones. The instrument was made to be good in perpe- 
 tuity, and you can take hold of it, not to break up the 
 Government, but to go on perfecting it more and more as 
 it runs down the stream of time. We find the Govern- 
 ment composed of integral parts. An individual is an 
 integer, and a State itself is an integer, and the various 
 States form the Union, which is itself an integer, they 
 all making up the Government of the United States. 
 Now we come to the point of my argument, so far as 
 concerns the perpetuity of the Government. We have 
 seen that the Government is composed of parts, each 
 essential to the whole, and the whole essential to each 
 part. Now, if an individual [part of a State] declare 
 war against the whole, in violation of the Constitution, 
 he, as a citizen, has violated the law, and is responsible 
 for the act as an individual. There may be more than 
 one individual ; it may go on until they become parts of 
 States. Sometimes the rebellion may go on increasing 
 in number till the State machinery is overturned, and the 
 country becomes like a man that is paralyzed on one 
 side. But we find in the Constitution a great panacea 
 provided. It provides that the United States (that is the 
 great integer) shall guarantee to each State (the integers 
 composing the whole) in this Union a republican form of 
 government. Yes, if rebellion has been rampant, and set 
 aside the machinery of a State for a time, there stands 
 the great law to remove the paralysis, and revitalize it 
 
APPENDIX. 483 
 
 and put it on its feet again. When we come to under- 
 stand our system of government, though it be complex, 
 we see how beautifully one part moves in harmony with 
 another; then we see our Government is to be a perpe- 
 tuity, there being no provision for pulling it down, the 
 Union being its vitalizing power, imparting life to the 
 whole of the States that move around it like planets 
 around the sun, receiving thence light, and heat, and mo- 
 tion. Upon this idea of destroying States, my position 
 has been heretofore well known, and I see no cause to 
 change it now, and I am glad to hear its reiteration on the 
 present occasion. Some are satisfied with the idea that 
 States are to be lost in territorial and other divisions ; are 
 to lose their character as States. But their life-breath 
 has only been suspended, and it is a high constitutional 
 obligation we have to secure each of these States in the 
 possession and enjoyment of a republican form of govern- 
 ment. A State may be in the Government with a pecu- 
 liar institution, and by the operation of rebellion lose 
 that feature ; but it was a State when it went into rebel- 
 lion, and when it comes out without the institution, it is 
 still a State. I hold it a solemn obligation in any one of 
 these States where the rebel armies have been beaten 
 back or expelled, I care not how small the ship of state, 
 I hold it, I say, a high duty to protect and to secure to 
 them a republican form of government. This is no new 
 opinion. It is expressed in conformity with my under- 
 standing of the genius and theory of our Government. 
 Then, in adjusting and putting the Government upon its 
 legs again, I think the progress of this work must pass 
 into the hands of its friends. If a State is to be nursed 
 until it again gets strength, it must be nursed by its 
 
484 APPENDIX. 
 
 friends, not smothered by its enemies. Now, permit me 
 to remark, that while I have opposed dissolution and dis- 
 integration on the one hand, on the other I am equally 
 opposed to consolidation, or the centralization of power 
 in the hands of a few. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 ♦— 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Ableman vs. Booth, case of. 201 
 
 Adams, John Quincy. See Veto. 
 
 Alabama, the admission of into the Union 231 
 
 American State Papers quoted 115 
 
 Anderson, Robert, General, notice of 282 
 
 Andre', John, Major, the case of, cited 432 
 
 Aristocracy, a dangerous class 37 
 
 Arnold, Benedict, General, the case of, cited 432 
 
 Assassination suggested in the Senate 173 
 
 " Beauty and Booty," watchwords of the English 187 
 
 Benjamin, Judah P., Senator, remarks on the cession of 
 
 Louisiana 180 
 
 quotation from a speech at San Francisco 194 
 
 Boyce, W. W., his opinion of secession 252 
 
 Breckinridge, John C, speech on the act approving the ac- 
 tion of President Lincoln 331 
 
 Bright, Jesse D., the expulsion of. 405 
 
 Brown, Albert G., senator from Mississippi 221 
 
 Browning, , senator from Illinois, quoted 380 
 
 Bruce, Sir Frederick A., speech to President Johnson 473 
 
 Buchanan, James, on the acquisition of Cuba 13G 
 
 " pledged to secession " 145 
 
 Buell, D. C, General, evacuates Southern Tennessee. . . . xxvi 
 Burr, Aaron, trial of, noticed 413 
 
 Campbell, David, Judge 270 
 
 Carrington, E 103 
 
 Carter, Langdon. See Frankland 270 
 
 Castle Pinckney, S. C, seizure of 369 
 
 41* 
 
486 INDEX. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Charleston, S. C, surrender of, in 1779 207 
 
 petition of the inhabitants of, to Sir Henry Clinton, &e. 210 
 
 United States arsenal at, seized 369 
 
 Clay, C. C, speech on the Lecompton Constitution 51 
 
 reply to a speech of 55 
 
 Clingman, , Senator 12 
 
 Cobb, Howell, his opinion of the extent of the war 393 
 
 Cockrill, Mack xxxvii 
 
 " Coercion," noticed 95 
 
 Cobens vs. Virginia, case of 105 
 
 Collamer, Jacob, remarks on the personal-liberty laws 97 
 
 Compromise considered 433 
 
 Condorcet a democrat from philosophy 62 
 
 Congress, power of, to give away lands 21 
 
 Constitution of the United States, amendments to, proposed 77 
 
 " a creature of the will of the people " 106 
 
 formed for perpetuity 112 
 
 growth of the country under the 350 
 
 joint resolution proposing amendments to the 461 
 
 Constitutional monarchy considered 277 
 
 Conway, Elias K, governor of Arkansas 142 
 
 " Cotton is King " 140 
 
 Crittenden, John J., Senator from Kentucky 200 
 
 cause of the defeat of the resolutions of 436 
 
 Cuba, the acquisition of 136 
 
 Davis, Jefferson, his remarks on a speech of Mr. Johnson. . 253 
 
 his education, &c 285 
 
 his reception at Montgomery, Ala 375 
 
 issues letters of marque 380 
 
 De Bow's Review on the institution of government 366 
 
 Declaration of Independence quoted 56 
 
 Democracy, James Madison's opinion of 53 
 
 Lamartine's view of 58 
 
 a permanent element of progress 60 
 
 definition of 62 
 
 the duty of, in 1860-61 170 
 
 Douglas, Stephen A., discussion with Abraham Lincoln 195 
 
INDEX. 487 
 
 PAGE 
 
 East, Edward H xxvi 
 
 East Tennessee, loyalty of 395 
 
 address of the people of J 395 
 
 sufferings of the citizens of 430 
 
 Elliot's Debates quoted 63 
 
 Emigrant Aid Society 14 
 
 England, the policy of 141 
 
 Etheridge, Emerson xxii 
 
 Excise law of 1798 sustained 114 
 
 Eayetteville, N. C, arsenal at, seized 369 
 
 Fessenden, W. P., senator from Maine 445 
 
 Fitch, J., noticed 424 
 
 Florida, consideration of the acquisition of 131 
 
 Fort Barrancas, Flor., seizure of 370 
 
 Fort Caswell, N. C, seizure of 370 
 
 Fort Jackson, Ga., seizure of 369 
 
 Fort Jackson, La., seizure of 370 
 
 Fort Johnson, N. C, seizure of 870 
 
 Fort Macon, N. C, seizure of 369 
 
 Fort McRae, Flor., seizure of. 370 
 
 Fort Morgan, Ala., seizure of 369 
 
 Fort Moultrie, S. C, seizure of 369 
 
 Fort Pike, La., seizure of 370 
 
 Fort Pulaski, Ga., seizure of 369 
 
 Fort St. Philip, seizure of. 370 
 
 Frankland, account of the State of 266 
 
 Friends, arrested during the Revolution of 1776 333 
 
 Fugitive-Slave Law noticed 97 
 
 its enforcement in Boston 202 
 
 Garrison, William Lloyd, quoted 261 
 
 Gentry, Meredith P x 
 
 Gist, , governor of South Carolina, message of 144 
 
 Government the trustee of the people I 80 
 
 212 
 Gregg, Maxcy r" 
 
 " Gulf Confederacy," the 2uU 
 
488 INDEX. 
 
 TAGE 
 
 Habeas Corpus, writ of, suspended during the Revolution of 
 
 1776 337 
 
 Hamilton, Alexander, noticed 91-229 
 
 Hammond, , Senator, speech on the Lecompton Bill. 64 
 
 Harding, W. D., General xxxvii 
 
 Harris, Ira, senator from New York 447 
 
 Harris, Isham G., Governor, noticed 357 
 
 Hartford Convention, considered by the "Richmond En- 
 quirer " 203 
 
 treason in the 205 
 
 Henderson, Thomas, Editor " Raleigh Gazette," i 
 
 Henry, Gustavus A x 
 
 Henry, Patrick, views of democracy 62 
 
 Hereditary constitutional monarchy proposed by the rebels. 156 
 
 Homestead Bill, speech on the, May 20, 1858 12 
 
 history of the 14 
 
 Andrew Jackson's opinion of 18 
 
 first introduced into the Congress of the United States . 19 
 
 Washington's opinion of 21 
 
 intentions of the 26 
 
 increases the receipts of the public treasury 27 
 
 effect of the 28 
 
 moral effect of the 33 
 
 nationalizing effect of 38 
 
 Homesteads in Illinois 20 
 
 Hunter, R. M. T., senator from Virginia 196 
 
 Illinois, homesteads in 20 
 
 reception of the delegates from, April 18, 1865, 466 
 
 Indiana, the loyalty of 429 
 
 Jackson, A. Burt 281 
 
 Jackson, Andrew. See Veto-Power 7 
 
 See Homestead 18 
 
 fine refunded to xvi 
 
 prophecy of, in 1833 xxxiii 
 
 on nullification 107 
 
 proclamation of 1833 108 
 
 Jefferson, Thomas, exercises the veto-power 6 
 
INDEX. 489 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Jefferson, Thomas, See Homestead Bill 19 
 
 the democratic principles of » • • • 57 
 
 inaugural address of 58 
 
 letter to Col. Monroe 102 
 
 letter to E. Carrington 108 
 
 quoted 36, 198 
 
 Johnson, Andrew, biographical notice of i 
 
 proclamation in reference to guerrillas xxiii 
 
 assesses the rebels of Nashville, &c xxvi 
 
 nominated for the vice-presidency xxx 
 
 address at Nashville xxx 
 
 letter accepting the nomination for the vice-presidency xxxi 
 
 speech at Logansport, Ind xxxv 
 
 address to the colored people of Nashville xxxv 
 
 the " Moses speech " xxxvi 
 
 inaugurated Vice-President xliii 
 
 speech of April 3d, 1865 xliii 
 
 inauguration as President xlvii 
 
 speech on the veto-power, August 2, 1848 1 
 
 speech on the Homestead Bill, May 20, 1858 12 
 
 remarks on slavery 67 
 
 speech on the constitutionality and rightfulness of seces- 
 sion, Dec. 18 and 19, 1860 77 
 
 proposes amendments to the Constitution 77 
 
 defines his position SI 
 
 remarks on Vermont personal-liberty laws 98 
 
 opposed to consolidation 150 
 
 opinion of a monarchy 100 
 
 speech on the state of the Union, delivered February 
 
 5th and 6th, 1861 177 
 
 reply to Senator Benjamin 178 
 
 dialogue with Senator Wigfall 208 
 
 reply to Senator Lane 214 
 
 war not an element of his mind 218 
 
 remarks on the territorial question 240 
 
 his confidence in the people 249 
 
 remarks on the speech of W. W. Boyce 252 
 
 reply to Jefferson Davis 253 
 
4:90 . INDEX. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 an " ally of every man who loves his country " 256 
 
 remarks on the " abolitionists " and " milliners " 259 
 
 prefers " black republicans " to " red " ones 264 
 
 remarks on the attack on Fort Sumter 282 
 
 refers to the education of Jefferson Davis 285 
 
 apostrophe to the Union 286 
 
 speech in reply to Senator Lane, March 2, 1861 290 
 
 refers to the " homestead " policy 298 
 
 speech at Cincinnati, Ohio, June 19, 1861 316 
 
 speech on the war for the Union, July 27, 1861 328 
 
 remarks on the proclamation of President Lincoln call- 
 ing for 75,000 men 341 
 
 his faitli in woman 355 
 
 his course during the presidential election of 1860 386 
 
 remarks on the action of J. C. Breckinridge 391 
 
 predicts an uprising of the people 401 
 
 speech on the expulsion of Jesse D. Bright 405 
 
 stands by the administration of Mr. Lincoln 423 
 
 His opinions of " coercion " 427 
 
 considers " compromise " 433 
 
 reply to Senator Saulsbury 434 
 
 appeal to the people of Tennessee 451 
 
 inaugural address, March 4, 1865 457 
 
 his joint resolution proposing amendments to the Con- 
 stitution of the United States 461 
 
 speech to the Illinois delegation, April 18, 1865 468 
 
 speech to the English Ambassador, April 20, 1865 474 
 
 reply to the diplomatic corps 476 
 
 address to loyal Southerners 477 
 
 speech to the Indiana delegation, April, 1865 481 
 
 Keitt, L. M., speech at Columbia, S. C 145 
 
 King, Rufus, quoted 53 
 
 Lamartine, views of democracy 58 
 
 Lane, " Joe," speech of 216 
 
 speech at Concord, N. H., quoted 301 
 
 speech on the 24th May, 1861, quoted 303 
 
INDEX. 491 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Latham, , senator from California, speech of 445 
 
 quoted 435 
 
 Lecompton Bill 64 
 
 Lecompton Constitution 51 
 
 Legare, Hugh, views of democracy 63 
 
 Lincoln Abraham, discussion with Douglas 195 
 
 the assassination of xlvi 
 
 Lincoln, Thomas B., of Texas 405 
 
 Livingston, Edward, letters on the Louisiana Treaty 184 
 
 Louisiana, the acquisition of 128 
 
 See Mississippi River 130 
 
 treaty for the cession of 171 
 
 condition of, in 1803 186 
 
 how " oppressed " by the United States 189 
 
 Loyal Southerners^ President Johnson's address to 477 
 
 Madison, James. See Veto-Power 
 
 remarks on " pure democracies " 51 
 
 resolutions of 1798 85 
 
 letter to N. P. Trist, 1832 87 
 
 letter on State Rights 89 
 
 notice of 229 
 
 " Marion," seizure of the 370 
 
 Marshall, John, Chief Justice, views of democracy 63 
 
 his opinion of secession 105 
 
 Martial law, its existence during the Revolution of 1776 333 
 
 Mason, James M., remarks on slavery in the South 70 
 
 Mason, J. T., on the acquisition of Cuba 136 
 
 Massachusetts Anti-Sfavery Society 260 
 
 Massachusetts, the secession of 264 
 
 May nard, Horace xxii 
 
 Mississippi River, navigation of the 130 
 
 Senator Lane's remarks on the navigation of 233 
 
 Mobile, Ala., arsenal at, seized 369 
 
 Monroe, James. See Veto-Power. 
 
 Morris, Gouverneur, opinion of " homesteads" 54 
 
 Morton, Governor of Indiana 481 
 
 Moultrie, William, General, his Memoirs quoted 207 
 
 '* Mud-sills," use of the term 35, 65 
 
492 index. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Napoleon I., his " pure good will " towards the United 
 
 States 184 
 
 New York, pauperism in 34, 66 
 
 Nullification at the North 98 
 
 Oglesby, Richard J., Gov., speech to President Johnson 466 
 
 Pauperism 34 
 
 Pennsylvania, rebellion in 118 
 
 Perkins, John, noticed 362 
 
 Personal-liberty bills 95 
 
 Petersburg, Va., the fall of xlvi 
 
 Phillips, Wendell, quoted 260 
 
 Pickens, F. W., Gov. of S. C, dispatch of, Jan. 19, 1861. . . 280 
 
 Poinsett, Joel R., address to the people of Charleston, S. C. 286 
 
 Politicians, " the Goths and Vandals " 249 
 
 Polk, James K. See Veto-Power 8 
 
 Polk, Tristen, speech on the war quoted 371 
 
 Post-offices and post-roads, rights of Congress to establish. . 120 
 
 Powell, senator from Kentucky, quoted 372 
 
 Property, " the main object of society " 53 
 
 Public lands, the value of 40 
 
 grants to railroads 45 
 
 unsold lands in, June, 1856 46 
 
 Railroads, grants of public lands to 45 
 
 Resolution of 1798 85 
 
 Richmond, Va., the fall of xlvi 
 
 Rives, W. C ! 90 
 
 Russell, William Howard, correspondent of the "London 
 Times," quoted 353 
 
 Saulsbury, senator of Delaware 433 
 
 Schenck, R. C, Senator 9 
 
 Secession, the constitutionality and rightfulness of 77 
 
 the effect on a State after it is committed 124 
 
 no remedy for the South 252 
 
index. 493 
 
 PAGB 
 
 Sevier, John. See Frankland 269 
 
 Sherman, John, Senator 419 
 
 Slave, definition of 57 
 
 Slavery, the death of xxx 
 
 remarks of Senator Hammond on 65 
 
 the effect of, at the South 67 
 
 how guaranteed in the United States 164 
 
 not prohibited in the territories 348 
 
 Slaves, Jeff. Davis's resolution for the protection of 220 
 
 Slave-trade, L. W. Spratt's letter on the, quoted 362 
 
 Slidell, John, noticed 389 
 
 Smalley , David A., Judge 410 
 
 Smith, John. See Aaron Burr 413 
 
 Society, property the main object of 63 
 
 Soule, Pierre, on the acquisition of Cuba 136 
 
 South wants a " dictator " 356 
 
 South Carolina, white population of 69 
 
 operations in 69 
 
 cedes lands to the United States for fortifications 121 
 
 has no cause for complaint 166 
 
 neutrality of, proposed during the Revolution of 1776. . 208 
 
 the secession of, " not an event of a day " 212 
 
 decides against slave protection in the territories 241 
 
 legislature, necessary qualifications for the 360 
 
 Spratt, L. W., letter on the slave-trade 362 
 
 " Star of the West," steamer, fired on 370 
 
 State Rights defined 88 
 
 noticed 92 
 
 Stephens, A. H., quoted 287 
 
 Swasey, J. B., quoted 261 
 
 Ten Eyck, , senator from New Jersey 431 
 
 Tennessee, the restoration of xxix 
 
 See Mississippi River 130 
 
 " not born of secession " 266 
 
 admitted to the Union 274 
 
 appeal to the people of , . 451 
 
 Texas, the acquisition of, considered 127 
 
 The " Remembrancer " quoted 210 
 
494 INDEX. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Tipton, John. See Frankland 269 
 
 Toombs, Robert, prefers the British Government 354 
 
 Treason, what it is 205 
 
 must be punished 470 
 
 •Trist, N. P., letter from James Madison 87 
 
 Tyler, John. See Veto-Power 7 
 
 Union, the cause of the destruction of 247 
 
 Vattel, " Law of Nations," quoted 15 
 
 Vermont, nullification laws of 98 
 
 Veto-power, speech on the 1 
 
 origin of the 2 
 
 in England , 4 
 
 in France 5 
 
 in Norway 5 
 
 in the American colonies 6 
 
 Virginia, resolutions of the legislature of 176 
 
 ratification of the Constitution by 226 
 
 receives the brunt of the war 392 
 
 Von Gerolt, Baron, address to President Johnson. 476 
 
 Wade, F., Senator 255 
 
 "Washington, George, exercises the veto-power 6 
 
 opinion of the Homestead Bill 21 
 
 message relative to the Whiskey Insurrection 114 
 
 exercises martial law during the Revolution. ., 337 
 
 Webster, Daniel 90-101 
 
 on the State of Frankland 269 
 
 Wheaton, Henry, Reports quoted 106 
 
 " Elements of International Law," quoted 234 
 
 Wheeler's History of North Carolina quoted 266 
 
 Whiskey Insurrection noticed .... 114 
 
 Washington's message on 115 
 
 Wigfall, L. T., senator from Texas 208 
 
 " William Aiken," revenue-cutter, seized 369 
 
 Workingmen the strength of a nation 36 
 
 Yulee, , senator from Florida 133 
 
 % *