Glass _Ea$3 Book >3\(«°? SECESSION AND SLAVERY: OR, THE EFFECT OF SECESSION ON THE RELATION OF THE UNITED STATES TO THE SECEDED STATES AND TO SLAVERY THEREIN ; a CONSIDERED AS A QUESTION OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, CHIEFLY UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF DECISIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT. JOEL PRENTISS BISHOP, AUTHOR OF " COMMENTARIES ON THE LAW OF MARRIAGE AND DIVORCE,'' " COMMENTARIES ON THE CRIMINAL LAW," ETC. BOSTON: PROOF SHEET — NOT PUBLISHED. 18 63. k-4- - 7BLz> h*~ Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1863, by JOEL PRENTISS BISHOP, in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of Massachusetts. Is Bxohango Cornell Univ. 2 Feb 06 cambridoe: Alien and Farnham, Stereotypers and Printers. jl m » o INTRODUCTORY NOTE. This pamphlet is divided into six chapters, as follows : Chap. I. Historical Sketch. II. The Direct Consequences resulting' from the Act of Secession. III. Some Radical Views considered. IV. The Effect of Contract between the seceded States returning-, and the United States. V. The Emancipation Proclamation. VI. Concluding Summary. As originally written, the pamphlet contained also a chapter entitled, " The Consequences resulting from the War which Secession creates.^ But finding that the in- sertion of this chapter would make the pamphlet too long, while the chapter itself was too short for an adequate dis- cussion of its subject, I determined to omit it; and, whether it will be hereafter given to the public in an enlarged form or not, the public will learn in due time. The pamphlet here presented embodies a discussion of the question, which, more than any other, perplexes, at the present moment, the people of this country. Will the people read ? Will they reflect ? W T ill they hear a voice which speaks the language of the law, and not the language of the politician ? These are questionsVhich will be all an- swered in the affirmative, before the durable peace we seek, descends to us. tBEBra © © © © © mm © © u © m © oss © © ui © ra( iv INTRODUCTORY NOTE. The views which this pamphlet contains, were written out in a somewhat different form before the present civil war had assumed any large proportions. But it was evident that, if published, they would be received with indifference or with scorn by those who should be benefited by them. So the manuscript lay upon my shelves unused. In like manner, this pamphlet has lain by, stereotyped, for several weeks, since it was put into this permanent shape in type- metal. Am I still too early ? He who rules all things knows ; I do not. I sent out,, in my " Thoughts for the Times," the first dove ; but it returned. Will this one come back ? or, if it does, will it bring the olive leaf ? Many readers will object, that this pamphlet is written in a style which lacks gravity, and that it does not so soberly consider serious questions of law as it ought. There are serious legal questions — difficult ones — connected with our present national troubles, but the questions dis- cussed in this pamphlet are of another class. There is, indeed, the serious question, — Shall we obey the law ? but there is no difficulty as to what the law is. Politicians may shed darkness upon the matter ; but posterity will say, that, among the topics handled in these pages, there is no one which deserved a graver consideration than it has here received. And the great question which this nation is answering, in the presence of earth and of heaven, is, not what the law is, not whether the Constitution which our forefathers made is a wise one, not whether the law of our Constitution ought not to bo amended ; but it is, whether the people of this country shall continue to put forth falsehood about a Constitution ivhich they will not either amend or obey. J. P. B. Boston, December, 18G3. n, if she can convert the country over to her views, let a new Constitution for the country be adopted ; but, while the old Constitution stands, let it be obeyed. Still, as radicalism is the form of things which most prevails among us, I cannot well avoid giving, in this pamphlet, some space to the consideration of a few of the more prominent radical views. In my "Thoughts for the Times," I briefly spoke of the radicalism of the administration of the late Presi- dent Buchanan, which administration set up some glittering theories, as to how the rebelling States were to be won back, in the place of obeying the law of the land which required, that the heavy arm of the nation's power should be laid upon the in- cipient rebellion to smother it before it had grown strong. I am now about to speak of what happened more under the direction of the Republican party, — that is, it seems to have so happened, simply be- cause the Republican party was in power j but it 64 SECESSION AND SLAVERY. was done with the concurrence also of the Demo- cratic party, and in compliance with its demand. It is this, that, as already observed, the national Congress failed, session after session, to provide for the establishment of new republican governments in the seceded States, in violation of the clause of the Constitution we have been considering, in conse- quence of some higher-law notions which seem to have pervaded that body and the public at large. Had there been a disposition simply to follow the law of the land, there would have been passed an act authorizing all persons in the seceded States, not disloyal to the general government, — includ- ing, of course, those who were theretofore held as slaves, — to organize, as fast as the President, who is commander-in-chief of the army, should deem pru- dent and practicable, new State governments in place of the old ones which the rebels had cast off. But this course, though it was what the law of the Constitution required, was rejected ; the reasons for the rejection being various. Many, perhaps the majority, of those who partici- pated in thus violating the Constitution, were un- doubtedly influenced therein by their strong attach- ment to the doctrines of our Church of the Cursers. These persons may not have been openly members of the church ; they may even have denied the church, as did Charles II. of England, who partook of its extreme unction only, and of this merely in private, when the world was shut out, and death and the priest were barred in with him. They may even have pronounced as many oaths against SOME RADICAL VIEWS CONSIDERED. 65 the Church of the Cursers as had Charles II. against the Church of Rome; for the crown of political demagogism in this country is office, - in the heaven which the church promises to her followers, all wear crowns,- and there have been lovers of the crown here, the same as in England. Where heretics vote, whether a man shall avow his church connection, or not, depends sometimes on the strength of his love o?-the crown. But if the Cursers of Ham nourish as greenly in heaven as they do in this coun- try, undoubtedly God, who pities the infirmities of his saints, will, when they get to heaven, and he sees the tear of repentance in their eyes, take it and therewith wash away the stain from their souls Another reason for the refusal to obey the Consti- tution was this: The fact was plain, that, whatever law should be enacted by Congress, it could not be carried into practical effect in the establishment of new State governments in the seceded States, faster than the victorious Union arms cleared the way tor the work. Now, there were persons who said,— "Why should I obey the Constitution, unless I can see the uses of obedience clearly attendant upon the act f " And they thought, that, by putting off obey- ing long enough, they might perhaps escape the duty to obey altogether. This form of radicalism is one of the most com- mon forms; it is known in every country. With us, the business of Congress is to enact laws; the business of the army is to fight. And the private opinion of any man, that there will be no immediate use for a law which the Constitution requires Con- 66 SECESSION AND SLAVERY. gress to enact, " because," saith the private opinion, " the army will not get through with its work of fighting until another Congress sits, is no legal an- swer to the legal duty to enact the law. I have already recognized necessity as excusing the perform- ance of a duty ; but here there is no necessity oper- ating in the case. The rebel bayonets may obstruct the passage of the army, but they cannot obstruct the passage of statutes, so long as no rebel power holds a seat in Washington, and our law-makers do hold seats there. There can be no ranker radical- ism than that which says: "My private judgment as to whether it will do any good to obey the laws shall stand in the place of obedience." When this kind of radicalism becomes universal, there is an end of all order, and anarchy is king. " Then," says the radical, " let me shape the matter thus : Inasmuch as the seceded States are inhabited by men who have declined to carry on republican governments within the States, and by men who have not declined, I deem it to be best to direct, that the new governments shall be conducted by the former class, the same as were the old ones. When the former class are subdued," continues the radical, u they will be obliged to set up the new governments, and they will be more willing to do it if they can at the same time trample the latter class down as here- tofore ; therefore, as I must do something, I shall follow the dictate of policy, thus putting the rule back into the hands of the men who have renounced the right to rule, and followed up their renunciation by the commission of treason." SOME RADICAL VIEWS CONSIDERED. 67 Well, I am inquiring after the law, — Will the radical tell me by what law, in this country, traitors are to be made office-holders and voters, and espe- cially to the exclusion of men who have never been disloyal? I know there is such a thing as pardon, but any attempted remission which precedes or ac- companies the offence is not pardon, it is license. Does the radical pretend, that it would be competent for Congress to enact as follows, — " Whoever com- mits treason in an attempt to destroy the Constitu- tion and government of the United States, shall ever thereafter be deemed innocent of any offence, and shall still be entitled to all the privileges of an unoffending citizen ? " At the time, therefore, when the Constitution re- quires the enactment of a law for giving to the seceded States new State governments, those who led the States out of the Union, so far as States can go out, — that is, who denuded them of their former State governments under the Constitution, — are rebels in arms. Yet the radical says, " Let the law provide for making them the voters, and for exclud- ing from the ballot, and even from personal liberty, those who have never rebelled." Well, I cannot find any clause in the Constitution sanctioning such a procedure ; I can find nothing in any decision of any judicial tribunal sanctioning it ; nothing in the law of nations; nothing anywhere, unless it be among the mysterious and unwritten things belonging to our Church. On the other hand, such a procedure — I mean, of course, such a pro- cedure taken while no pardon has gone out to the 68 SECESSION AND SLAVERY. rebels — would be contrary to all the laws and all the usages of the civilized world ; contrary to the reason of the case; contrary to the spirit of our Constitution ; and contrary to any fact practicable, since it would be only providing that the rebels might do what they had refused to do, and volun- tarily vote under the United States Constitution at the point of the bayonet ! " Then," says the radical, " one more course remains for me. There are a very few white persons in the seceded States who have not taken part in the gen- eral treason of the whites there. I will vote to or- ganize an oligarchy in those States ; making, in this new form of government, the few loyal whites the rulers both over the disloyal whites, and, with the title of master superadded, over the blacks also." This proposition sounds well, but it is not the propo- sition of the Constitution. By the Constitution, the United States is not to guarantee to the seceded States oligarchies, but republican forms of govern- ment. It might be doubted, as indeed it has been, whether, as an original question, any government is republican wherein a large proportion of the people are slaves; but, assuming, as I cheerfully do, that, under our Constitution, interpreted by the compari- son of clause with clause, and by bringing the light of the circumstances in which it was formed to illu- mine the whole, such a government for a State may answer the description of " republican," as the word is used in the clause now under consideration, still the oligarchy proposed by our radical is a thing entirely different from this. The circumstances which shed SOME RADICAL VIEWS CONSIDERED. 69 the illuminating light now, are diametrically opposite to those in which the Constitution was originally formed. The illuminating other clauses point, in this instance, differently from what they do in the other ; and there is a difference between a government car- ried on by a mere handful of the whites, and one carried on by the mass of them. If the government proposed by our radical is to be deemed, under the circumstances now existing, republican, then there is no such thing known on earth as a government which is not republican. • At the same time it must be acknowledged, that there is laid up among the mysteries of the Church of the Cursers, one gleamy, blessed tenet, out of which, when it is gently pressed, there flows some- thing milky and white, bearing a resemblance to this white doctrine, as thus in-milked by our radi- cal babe ; and, in fairness, I cannot pass on without calling the reader's attention to it. Not easy is it for sinful speech to describe a thing so saintly ; but I will try, and see what words can do on this occa- sion. Turning, therefore, this milky whiteness into speech, it flows thus : " A negro is an heir of heaven, but he cannot be an heir of earth ; that is, though he can have a seat among the blest above, he has, in the language of the earthly law, no ' hereditable ' quality below. Therefore a negro is a thing alto- gether of the sky ; he is not taken into the ' account ' here ; he is not ' counted ' here ; he is heaven's 4 treasure,' not earth's ; he is to be considered as an outlaw below, for the glory of the negro is to shine above." 70 SECESSION AND SLAVERY. When this heavenly milk is turned into earthly law, the result is, that, according to the milk, a negro is nothing in law ; therefore, though there should be in a State two hundred thousand loyal negroes, and twenty loyal whites, the case must be considered as though there were but twenty loyal persons, the negroes not being counted. Now, whether, not counting the negroes, the twenty loyal whites could in such a case carry on what would amount to " a republican form of gov- ernment," in a State, within the meaning of the phrase as used in the Constitution, I shall not here undertake to argue. And the reason why I do not, is, that, by the Constitution, negroes are not nothings, — negroes do enter into the account, — negroes are counted. That the radical babe is right, looking at the matter as one pertaining to the mysteries of the Church, I cheerfully concede ; but the object of this pamphlet is to consider the question as one pertaining to the Constitution of the United States. Very difficult do I find it, so to separate the one from the other of these two things, as to enable the church members, among my readers, to look at the constitutional doc- trines without having their eyes made at the same time blind by the simultaneous glare emitted from the tenet. I would pause, and explain how it is, that, under our Constitution, negroes are not nothings, negroes are taken into the account, negroes count, and the like ; but I cannot in this pamphlet say every thing which might be said, so, asking the reader to consult the Constitution for himself, I pass on. SOME RADICAL VIEWS CONSIDERED. 71 Suppose the radical doctrines which I have thus far discussed in this chapter are all admissible, still they go only to show, that it is in the discretion of Congress, if its members please, not to give freedom to the slaves in the seceded States. The power to exercise the discretion the other way, and to grant this freedom, still remains. And there is another point, which acids to the force of this. It has been said, and so often said as to have become wrought into the beliefs of many of the people as though it were a part of the Constitu- tion, that the Constitution and government of the United States were made exclusively for white men, not at all for negroes. To me, I confess, it seems somewhat strange, that a Constitution and govern- ment should have been established on this continent for the benefit of a part only of the native-born people, on the one hand ; and, on the other hand, for the benefit, 1n conjunction with this part, of all the people of Europe. Because it is a notorious fact, that, when any person comes here from Europe, he is, after a short residence, and a process of natural- ization, entitled to substantially all the privileges flowing to the best class of citizens born in this country. But not to debate this matter, supposing the proposition above stated to be correct, it follows, that our Constitution and government are griev- ously antagonistic to our great and honored Church of the Cursers of Ham. During most of this war, we have been giving the life's blood of the white part of our nation to be drank up by treason steel, 72 SECESSION AND SLAVERY. in order that the negro might stand especially pro- tected, and especially blest, under the folds of the Constitution. If the Constitution was not made for him, in God's name, why not let him be shot at and bayoneted, instead of my son or my brother? I had supposed that the Constitution was deemed to have been made, — such indeed is the doctrine prac- tically enforced by the church, enforced under the penalty of its anathema, excluding him who should disobey from association with the sanctified here, and from the heaven of office there, — much more for negroes than for white men ; else, why do we imperil the freedom of the whites in order that we may continue to the negroes the full blessings of slavery as of yore ? Not made for the negroes ! Rejoice, all ye sons of Ham, the day which you seek for, but ought never to find, wherein you shall be free, has come ! It was because we thought the Constitution was made for you, Sons of Ham, that we were ready to pour out our money, our blood, our good name, our hon- esty, and our truth, to be licked up by the dogs of war, and by the whelps which guard the courts of the despots of the earth, rather than yield to the necessities of the times, and permit you to join with us in one common effort to subdue the foe of our country. So, when we said the Constitution tuas made for you, more than for the white man, and that we should violate it if we did not spurn you from the ranks of the free, we lied — did we ? and the Constitution, after all, was not made for you ! Rejoice, then, white men ! If the Constitution SOME RADICAL VIEWS CONSIDERED. 73 no longer requires us to give the blood and the treasure of the country to the work of keeping down the negroes of the seceded States, but leaves this to the care of the Church alone — rejoice ! Whenever this proposition comes to be believed throughout the country, whenever it is generally understood in the loyal States that the Constitution was made solely for white men, and not at all for keeping negroes in bondage, not only will this war cease, but a brighter and happier peace will descend upon our country than she ever knew before. Concede, then, that the Constitution was made solely for the whites, not at all for the blacks, and we have arrived at the conclusion to which I have been all along striving to conduct the reader. It still stands true, for so it has been decided by our highest tribunal, and by the practice of some of the States, that, for the benefit of the whites, negroes may be permitted to participate in carrying on State governments. For the benefit of the whites, then, they may spring up as freemen in the seceded States, and hold these States against the waves of treason. For the benefit of the whites, they may mingle their blood with the blood of the whites on the battle-field. And I hope I shall not be accused of any disrespect to those holy members of our Church of the Cursers, who, to preserve to the negroes' souls the blessings of the discipline of slavery on earth, are ready to sacrifice their own souls and the souls of their children on the altar of slavery, when I address an observation to an- other class, whose motives are not so pure. You, 74 SECESSION AND SLAVERY. then, who so hate negroes that you are unwilling they should fight with us to preserve the freedom of our country of whites, on any terms which shall leave them free afterward, should rejoice that the negroes are not such graceless, brainless, scoundrels as yourselves ! Should they not be willing to make themselves free, except on conditions which shall leave you slaves, where will you stand, where will our country stand, hereafter ? Men may say what they will in their moments of passion, yet every man of cool brain knows, that, if the negroes and the whites in the seceded States join hands, and the negroes do not come to our help, the permanent restoration of the Union is as impossible as it would be now to reach out and draw down the moon to mingle her masses with those of our earth. I am not speaking of what may be done by way of temporary conquests. I am speaking of a perma- nent restoration of the Union. And those few white men of the South whose love for the Union surpasses their love for the Church, know this truth quite as well as do you, Mr. Reader, or as I do. And when another class of the white men of the South, namely, those who, not possessing the heroism of martyrs, desire peace and worldly prosperity more than they desire either the prosperity of the church in her present unfoldings under the care of the rebel gov- ernment, on the one hand, or the restoration of the Union, on the other hand, see the loyal country standing clearly, and, as they believe, immovably, on ground which shall attach to us the mass of the blacks of the South, and shall not put the present SOME RADICAL VIEWS CONSIDERED. 75 rebels into such a position as will enable them to domineer over either the blacks or the minority of the whites, — when, in short, they perceive that civil justice is to be administered in their States in place of the religious discipline of the Cursers, they will then, but not before, discover safety in a full and unreserved espousal of the cause of the Union. It is not within the purpose of this pamphlet to enter into a discussion of questions of mere govern- mental policy ; yet I cannot forbear adding to what I have just said, the one thought, that, if the restora- tion of the Union means simply the lifting up of the old stars and stripes to float over the temple of the Cursers, while the priests within still carry on, protected by the Union arms, the same baptism of blood which during these two and more years of the war has been filling heaven with the souls of true lovers of the Union, — what hope can now light up a Union man's face at the South, even though the face be white ? Why should any white man there raise his hand against the powers which now be, if the only thing which the Union army is to effect is to change the print-block whereon an overhanging rag is to be made red ? If encouragement is to be given to men at the South in espousing the cause of the Union, it must be in the form of some reason- able assurance of protection for the future. The northern branch of the Church of the Cursers de- mands the performance of a thing impossible, — im- possible, because the two parts of the thing are directly repugnant one to the other; namely, that Southern white men shall be encouraged to espouse 76 SECESSION AND SLAVERY. the Union cause, and that at the same time they shall be set where they see the power of their own neighbor-haters of the Union descending slowly and surely upon them to crush them to death! I must mention one more point upon which radi- calism, disregarding the law, has wrought much mis- chief. It is this. The law, as all who are familiar with such matters know, provides, that, as stated in brief in the last chapter, whenever a discretionary power is given to a man, or to a body of men, the man or the men who are to exercise the power, in distinc- tion from any third person or persons, must deter- mine the mode of its exercise. In pursuance of this principle, it is held by the Supreme Court, that, when Congress would act upon any power conferred upon this body by the Constitution of the United States, it is for Congress to select her own methods whereby she shall carry out the power. For authority sus- taining this position, see, among other cases, Mc Cul- loch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316. This is the case in which the Supreme Court held the Bank of the United States to be constitutional; and, although the opinion did not satisfy the judgment of .the en- tire country upon the main point, I am not aware that any doubt was entertained of the correctness of this proposition, which is mere matter of familiar law. Said Marshall, C. J., speaking for the whole court : " The government which has a r^ht to do an act, and has imposed on it the duty of performing that act, must, according to the dictates of reason, be allowed to select the means." If this privilege of selection were not given to it, but to another, the SOME RADICAL VIEWS CONSIDERED. 77 other might, by refusing to select, defeat the act So if our seceded States, speaking through the same voters whose mandate was executed in the passage of their secession ordinances, were to select the means whereby Congress should clothe them anew in State governments under the Constitution of the Union, how long, pray, would they be in making the selection? And, as they have not selected, shall Congress wait, or select for them? .\ The radical says, "Let Congress ask, not the oya neople of the seceded States, but the same disloyal voters who took the States out of their position in the Union, to prescribe the time and the means by which these States shall be brought back ; for con- tinues the radical, "I do not like the law which per- mite the party doing an act, in pursuance of a duty expressed in general terms, to do it in his own way. I think, that, if a thief is to be caught, the first duty of the officer put on his track ought to be to inquire of the thief, how and when he will please order the catching process to be executed." Now, it does happen, that, in our tree country, when a man has committed no offence against the laws, he goes and comes at his own pleasure ; though, it is also true, that, if he has offended, be is to be eaught by such means as the administrators of he laws may direct. There are persons who deem, that any catching of an offender is a wrongful violence done to his liberty. But I am not aware that any man has claimed, until our green young radical sprang up. since this war began, that it is the right of the thief to direct the steps of his pursuer, while 78 SECESSION AND SLAVERY. at the same time it is the right of the pursuer to catch the thief. Therefore, according to the law of the land, differ- ing herein from those doctrines of the Cursers into which our green young radical has been just bap- tized, when Congress proceeds to execute the guar- anty of a republican State government to seceded States, she is not to ask, before she takes her steps, those persons in the States who committed the act of secession, by what means the act shall be undone, but she is to choose, so far as she can, her own way. And she is, therefore, to determine which of the various forms of republican government known to our Constitution shall be established in these States. Were it not for the special facts of the case, she might, perhaps, elect that the new governments be those wherein slavery is protected ; but, as we have seen, these special facts preclude her from this choice, since the only willing voters existing in any suffi- cient numbers are those who were formerly slaves; and, when they are intrusted with the duties of freemen, there is not left in the States the material out of which to make slaves; unless, indeed, the democratic doctrine of " rotation in office " should prevail, and the late masters should take their turn in sitting, in the place of the blest, under the drop- pings of the Cursers' sanctuary. In ordinary circumstances, the people of a State proceed of their own motion to dress themselves in such republican garbs as they choose ; hence we say, that they determine for themselves what their domestic institutions, as slave or free, shall be. But SOME RADICAL VIEWS CONSIDERED. 79 the case of secession is not the ordinary one ; there- fore in this case, as we have seen, since Congress is to take the initiative and dress the State, she, and not the seceding rebels, determines the kind of dress to be put on. Now, the green young radical here presents himself, grown into the full proportions of a bloated demagogue, and he speaks and says: "It is the established doctrine, fellow-citizens, that each State is to determine for herself what shall be her domestic institutions ; therefore, shut your ears, fel- low-citizens, do not listen to a fanatic who tells of the power of Congress to abolish slavery in the seceded States. Unless our southern brethren see, fellow-citizens, that we are ready to walk by the Constitution now, they will not, fellow-citizens, lay down their arms, and come up cheerfully and cast their votes for me for the next presidency, or for any one who will appoint me to office." But why trace the windings of the snake, whose head is radicalism, whose tail is demagogism, and whose crooked betweens would be the sport of boys rather than men, did not men know that the snake is the scourge of the country ? Adieu, then, to this part of my subject. In the following chapters, I shall look at the matter involved in this discussion, from other and different points of view. 80 SECESSION AND SLAVERY. CHAPTER IV. THE EFFECT OF CONTRACT BETWEEN THE SECEDED STATES RETURNING, AND THE UNITED STATES. The Constitution of the United States provides, Art. I. § 10, that " no State shall, without the con- sent of Congress .... enter into any agreement or compact with another State, or with a foreign power." There is no other clause of the Constitu- tion whicli in any way impairs the right of the States to bind themselves by contract. An earlier part of this section, however, provides, that "no State shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confed- eration ; grant letters of marque and reprisal ; coin money ; emit letters of credit ; make any thing but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts ; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts." The result of these provisions is, that any State can enter into any contract which is not a " treaty," or other thing mentioned in the last quoted words ; with this exception, that, if the contract is with an- other State of the Union, or with a foreign power, it must, to be valid, be accompanied with the consent of Congress. There have been several cases before the Supreme Court wherein these provisions were CONTRACT BY RETURNING STATES. 81 considered ; suffice it, however, to say, that the right of the States to enter into contracts has been, in these cases, fully recognized ; and thus made, if ju- dicial decisions can add to the force of the plain letter of the Constitution, established law. But while, with the exception just mentioned, the States can enter into contracts, they cannot, having entered into them, annul them. To do so would be to violate the clause declaring, that they shall not make any "law impairing the obligation of con- tracts." There are several cases bearing upon this particular question ; but I need here refer only to a single series of them. The legislature of the State of Ohio passed, in 1845, a general banking act, wherein, according to the construction put upon the act by the Supreme Court of the United States, there was contained the provision, operating in the nature of a contract with the banks to be organized under it, that they should be subject to no higher taxation than a per centage of their profits therein mentioned. Afterward the legislature of Ohio, in the exercise of the great prerogative right of every State so to tax all property found within its domin- ions as to make the tax fully meet the expenses of the government, enacted a new tax law, under which these banks would have to pay a higher rate than the one specified in the original charter. This new law the Supreme Court of the United States held to be unconstitutional, as violating a valid contract made by the State with the banks. State Bank of Ohio v. Knoop, 16 How. U. S. 369. The Supreme Court of Ohio had deemed, that the provision in the charter did 82 SECESSION AND SLAVERY. not amount to a contract such as would relieve the banks from a further tax if the necessities of the State so required ; but, in the case just cited, and in subsequent cases, the Supreme Court of the United States adjudged otherwise, and enforced its own construction of what was claimed to be a contract. Finally the State of Ohio changed its constitution; and, by a new constitutional provision, imposed the higher tax on the banks. Yet the Supreme Court of the United States held, that the contract could not even in this way be got rid of; but that the con- stitution, as well as the statute, of Ohio, in so far as it impaired the obligation of the contract, was void. Jefferson Branch Bank v. Shelly, 1 Black, 436. See also Franklin Branch Bank v. The Staie of Ohio, 1 Black, 474. Here was an attempt, by the State, put forth first in the way of a legislative act, and afterward by a sol- emn change of the State constitution, to exercise, in opposition to its contract, the high sovereign right of taxation, a right which has no more been surren- dered to the United States than has the hio;h sover- eign right to make slaves of men ; yet the Supreme Court held, that there was a provision of the Consti- tution which reached the case, namely, the one which prohibited the State from impairing the obligation of its contract. Therefore we may set it down as established law, established by the adjudications of the tribunal of highest resort, as well as by the plain language of the Constitution, that, when a State has entered into any contract, she cannot, even by a change of her constitution, annul the contract. It is binding CONTRACT BY RETURNING STATES. 83 upon her still, and the Supreme Court of the United States will so hold, whenever a case, involving the question, is brought before it. If, therefore, one of these seceded States comes back into the Union, under an agreement entered into with Congress, that, in consideration of being thus received back, or in consideration of any remis- sion of the penalty of treason incurred by any ot her citizens, or in consideration of any thing else, she will thenceforward hold certain classes, or all, of her inhabitants to be freemen, the agreement be- comes immediately binding upon her as a contract which, by no act, can she afterward impair. There is no need that I should trace this matter out into any further detail. It is, I am aware, one of the relio-ious tenets of our most respectable sect, the Cursera of Ham, that, should Congress undertake to do away with slavery in the present seceded States, those States could, Congress or no Congress, as matter of right, after returning into the Union, reestablish it. Now, should Congress be so silly, or so addled by the doctrines of the Cursers, as to take back the States by acknowledging the new State governments, without this precaution of a contract with them, the cursing doctrine might prevail. I do not say it would, but that Congress would be very recreant to her duty did she not exercise the precaution. 84 SECESSION AND SLAVERY. CHAPTER V. THE EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION. On the 22d day of September, 1862, the Presi- dent of the United States put forth a Proclamation of which the following are the material parts : " That on the first clay of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, all persons held as slaves within any State or designated part of a State, the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States, shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free ; and the Executive Government of the United States, including the military and naval authority thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of such persons, and will do no act or acts to repress such persons, or any of them, in any efforts they may make for their actual freedom." He then states, that on the first day of January next ensuing he shall issue another proclamation, designating the portions of the rebellious country to which this provision shall apply, and closes in the following words : " And the Executive will in due time recommend, that all citi- zens of the United States who shall have remained loyal thereto throughout the rebellion shall (upon the restoration of the consti- tutional relation between the United States and their respective States and people, if that relation shall have been suspended or disturbed) be compensated for all losses by acts of the United States, including the loss of slaves." .THE EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION. 85 The Proclamation contains some other matters not entering so directly as these into the subject of this chapter. On the 1st day of January, 1863, the President put forth another Proclamation, in pursuance of the promise made in this one, whereof the material parts are as follows : " I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, by virtue of the power in me vested as commander-in-chief of the army and navy of the United States, in time of actual armed rebellion against the authority and government of the United States, and as a fit and necessary war measure for suppressing said rebellion, do, on this first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, and in accordance with my purpose so to do, publicly proclaimed for the full period of one hundred days .... order and designate the States and parts of States wherein the people thereof, respectively, are this day in rebellion against the United States, [to be] the following, to wit: Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana [with certain excepted parishes, including, as excepted, the city of New Orleans], Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia [excepting substantially that part of Virginia which has since been formed in- to the State of West Virginia, and Norfolk, with its neighborhood]. " And by virtue of the power and for the purpose aforesaid, I do order and declare that all persons held as slaves within said desig- nated States and parts of States are, and henceforward shall be, free ; and that the Executive Government of the United States, including the military and naval authorities thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of said persons. " And I hereby enjoin upon the people so declared to be free to abstain from all violence, unless in necessary self-defence ; and I recommend to them that, in all cases when allowed, they labor faithfully for reasonable wages. l ' And I further declare and make known that such persons, of suitable condition, will be received into the armed service of the 86 SECESSION AND SLAVERY. United States to garrison forts, positions, stations, and other places, and to man vessels of all sorts in said service. " And upon tins act, sincerely believed to be an act of justice, warranted by the Constitution upon military necessity, I invoke the considerate judgment of mankind and the gracious favor of Al- mighty God." These two proclamations are generally spoken of as one, — the Emancipation Proclamation, — and as such I shall speak of them in my further observa- tions. The Proclamation was put forth at a time when our national cause had become very nauseous to the people and powers abroad. There was, in the first place, intense hatred to this country abroad ; growing out, in part, of the fact that our civil and political institutions are not like those of Europe, and that the governing classes there fear their in- fluence upon the opinions and conduct of the people whom they govern ; and, in remaining part, out of the fact, that, until our secession war came, we seemed to be a very compact, while we were a rapidly increasing, power, — exciting the jealousy of rivalship in those who, in Europe, deemed them- selves to be the true masters of the world. In the next place, there existed an intense anti-slavery feel- ing in Europe, and particularly in England; pro- duced in part by a sincere belief, that the doctrines of the Church of the Cursers of Ham belonged to the class of spurious, and not of true, Christianity ; and in part by the fact, that European despots had all along found it convenient to point to our slavery as showing the baleful effects of republican forms of government. THE EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION. 87 There were, therefore, real enemies and real friends to our country abroad. But when our coun- try's friends abroad saw, that, while the South had made war in order to gain what she deemed to be a firmer base whereon to rear block after block, in addition to her former edifice of slavery, and to strengthen the hated edifice itself, the North, in giving back the proffered battle, showed as much regard for the old edifice as the South, and chose to run mighty risks of not succeeding rather than suffer the edifice to fall, they at first marvelled, then be- came disgusted, then vomited out their contempt. At this sick crisis in those who else would restrain the European governments from laying violent hands upon us, came the President's Emancipation Proclamation. It operated as a restorative to our else expiring friends in Europe ; and, though it did not cure our enemies of their hate, it left them com- paratively powerless for harm. At home, the effect of the Proclamation was to strengthen some in the loyal cause, and to madden others. Those who, at the North, ministered to our great Ebon Deity in the Temple of the Cursers, — why, they were not mad, because saints never get mad; but holy wrath boiled within them, and the incense — that is, the steam — went up ! Fanatics, not of the church, gave thanks to God ; and Ham danced in his shoes. But the genuine politicians were as cool as cu- cumbers in August. Those who partook of the u supper " in the inner holy place of the Church of the Cursers went out and said: "This sacrilegious 88 SECESSION AND SLAVERY. act of the President so violateth the Constitution of the country, that it hath become the duty of all true patriots to leave off fighting the enemy of the country, and go to fighting the President." On the other hand, there were other politicians, not so holy as these, who said: "Let this act of the President stand for the present, it has saved us from a foreign war ; it will delude the negroes into helping us, for they are no brighter than are our white friends abroad ; and, when we have put the rebels down, we can then repudiate the Proclamation, and put down' the negroes and the fanatics together ! " The for- mer class of politicians were connected chiefly with the Democratic party ; the latter, with the Republi- can. There were in both parties men who were not politicians, and other men who were politicians of less unction than these. In both parties, and espe- cially in the Republican, there were many more — I trust, amounting to the large majority of the people connected with each of the parties — who recognized as true the proposition, that public faith is better kept than broken, even if the faith has been pledged without the previously-obtained sanction of the Church. Yet it is but a little while ago I saw, in a news- paper, an article copied from a very leading journal of the Republican party, in which the editor asserted, in the most confident language, that there was no considerable number of people in the Republican party who were not willing to repudiate the public faith pledged in the President's Proclamation, and restore all the slaves to their former status of slavery, THE EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION. 89 if the seceded States could be induced, on these terms, to come back ! He said (what is true, and properly true), that the war was not carried on by the general government to promote emancipation; therefore (what is not properly true), that the gov- ernment ought to repudiate its debt of promised freedom, contracted in subduing the rebellion, when- ever the seceded States expressed a willingness to return to their allegiance, on the basis of such repu- diation. He told his readers, that he should like to see the man who would have the hardihood to step forward and object to this proposition ; such a man, should one be found, would be quickly branded and hooted down ! This editor, let me suggest, should at once lay by the quill editorial, and enter into the service of the government as a negotiator of loans. Should he be able to impress capitalists with the idea which he strove to impress on all his readers, that, since this war is carried on, not to pay debts, but to subdue the rebellion, there is no man, unless he be some insio-nificant outcast from the Church, who would not urge the government to embrace the Jeff. Davis doctrine of repudiation, as the foundation whereon the Union should be restored, whenever Davis and his companions could be made willing to agree to these terms, — surely the ex-editorial, political nego- tiator of loans would be blessed with a success which would be most satisfactory to the southern portion of our country, however it might be to the northern ! Yet such a course, in regard to the slaves, is cer- tainly in accordance with the "precedents" which 8* 90 SECESSION AND SLAVERY. are by some attempted to be inwoven, in these days, into the law of nations. The "precedent" of Napoleon and the Russian serfs, before alluded to in these pages, has been already sufficiently dis- cussed in the newspapers. It was his first down- ward step toward the gloomy exile in which he died ; and, if our government would but take the same step, the result would surely be gratifying to the southern portion of the country, if not to the northern. Yet Napoleon was not herein a repu- diator; so this precedent does not come quite up to the point at which it would be completely " apt." An apter precedent, one quite in point, is the case of Jehovah v. Pharaoh, alluded to also some pages back. If we follow that precedent, we shall surely gratify the southern portion of our country, — I mean, the disloyal whites there, — if not the northern. The " case " is reported at length in the book wherein we read, "Cursed be Canaan." It is as follows: * There was a ruler over a certain country called Egypt, and the ruler's name was Pharaoh. A pesti- lent fellow, one Moses, troubled Pharaoh with appeals in behalf of a hated set of slaves, whose color did not suit the people of Egypt. It is thought, more- over, that their odor was not good. At length, trouble came ; Moses pretended, that the trouble came from God. But be this as it may, it came so thick and hard that Pharaoh was at last induced, as a matter of pure military necessity, in fighting off this trouble, to issue a much-talked-of Emancipation Proclamation. When the proclamation was fully THE EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION. 91 out, and had done its work, the trouble abated. Then said Pharaoh, " I did not go into this war with the trouble for the sake of freeing the slaves ; the trouble is over, and the masters consent to keep the slaves, — I should like to see the man who will say, that I will not condescend to make peace by with- drawing the Emancipation Proclamation. The pro- clamation is withdrawn ; the status quo is restored." Well, the godly in all ages are doomed to suffer ; so was this godly ruler, Pharaoh. Once more came the trouble, and it came in a form worse than at the former time. I need not extract the whole report, the reader knows where to find it ; he has seen it often when searching for those blessed words, "Cursed be Canaan;" let him look at it once more for himself. The end, like the end of all saintship, was sublime. That swim in the Red Sea ! who can paint its beauties and its glory? That song of triumph and of thanksgiving which went up on the other side of the sea ! who has read it without emo- tion ? Let me turn to the record here : " The Lord is a man of war : the Lord is his name. Pharoah's chariots and his host hath he cast into the sea : his chosen captains also are drowned in the Red Sea. The depths have covered them : they sank into the bottom as a stone." Leaving the " precedents " here, let us turn back and look again at the Proclamation of President Lincoln. In estimating the Proclamation, we have to con- sider two things, — What were the powers of the President ? — What did the President attempt ? 92 SECESSION AND SLAVERY. It is obvious, on a mere outside view without any minute examination of the matter, that the President, as the chief of the nation, was authorized to pledge the nation's faith to the performance of those duties which the Constitution enjoins upon it. We have seen, that one of those duties was to give liberty to the slaves in the seceded States, and incorporate them into the body politic there. And although the Proclamation is not in express terms based on a recognition of this duty, and although it does not promise a complete per- formance of the duty, yet, on a principle familiar to the legal profession, it is nevertheless good as such promise as far as it goes, and a recognition of the duty may be considered to be implied in the promise. Plainly such a promise was highly important, not to say necessary, at the time it was made. The very active and vigilant Church of the Cursers of Ham had its priests and its ministers abroad throughout this whole country, and its missionaries abroad in foreign lands, proclaiming everywhere, that the Creed and the Constitution were one, therefore that the Constitution forbade the doing of the thing which we have seen it expressly enjoins. Congress had neglected to perform its part by the enactment of a statute to meet the case, and the inference was strong, and the wicked world without took it to be irresistible, that the church had in league with her herein the whole governmental power of the coun- try. Well, therefore, did the President fulfil his office, when, by proclamation, he dissipated this im- THE EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION. 93 posture. The Constitution, Art, II. § 3, provides, that " he shall from time to time give to the Con- gress information of the state of the Union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient? He had not recom- mended to Congress the passing of any law in obe- dience to the duty of clothing the seceded States — that is, the States which had denuded themselves by the act of secession — in those new governmental State garments, which, because of the necessity produced by the rebellion of the whites, must be woven, at least in part, of ebon-colored wool. Neither had Congress taken action upon this sub- ject. Yet both the President and Congress had called up the military power to subdue the rebel- lion ; and to the President it seemed fitting — so we may reason from the act itself — that he should an- nounce to the country, and especially to those not- disloyal persons in the southern part of the country whose services were needed, the governmental de- termination to obey, in the degree pointed out, the behests of the Constitution. There are few questions, outside the dominion of mathematical truth, upon which some differences of opinion, varying in degree, are not entertained by different persons. In the previous pages of this pamphlet, and in my pamphlet entitled " Thoughts for the Times," I have expressed my own clear con- viction, that it was the duty of Congress to provide, in the beginning of the war, for this new clothing of the revolted States. Nevertheless, the fact stands out in clear relief, that new State governments can- 94 SECESSION AND SLAVERY. not be practically organized in these States, except as fast and as far as the Union's war-power over- comes the rebel arms. My view of this matter is, that the members of Congress should attend strictly to the duty of making the laws, and the soldiers in the field should attend strictly to the duty of fight- ing. Neither the soldier nor the congressman — such is my opinion — should rest, while any thing remains to be done belonging to his particular- de- partment. If the law for reclothing these denuded States could not be made available in the shape of clothes actually put on, until the stern hands which are wielded by our country's war-arm had taken up the wool, picked it, carded it, spun it, and woven it in our all-glorious freedom-loom, still this is no rea- son why the vote to have the clothing-work done should be withheld, as though the voters hoped for the opportunity to dodge the vote. Yet in the actual state of this world, it is not wonderful that the President and Congress should have adopted the course which was pursued. Too few are the men who are content simply to do, and to do promptly, their own duty ; and who, when this duty is done, can look up and " read their title clear to mansions in the skies," unappalled by the fear of being pulled down to perdition by the sins of some wicked neighbor. I showed, in my " Thoughts for the Times," that this war would not have been, but for the saintly horror of the South at our loose hold- ins:, in the North, of the tenets of the Church of the Cursers; and our unwillingness to be bound by all the new bands which the southern Cursers, THE EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION. 95 more orthodox than the northern, kept continu- ally forging for their heretically-inclined northern brethren. Had the more saintly southern branch been content to go alone with its negroes to heaven, leaving the erring North to its chosen outer darkness, there to be howled over only by un- earthly demons, the Nation had not now been drenched in blood. So, had Congress been content simply to perform her duty under the Constitution, not demanding to be let off until the army had first done its part, she would not only have pursued the wiser course, but her members would also have ful- filled the obligation of their several oaths of office. Yet, as man is, it could hardly be expected that the men of whom our national legislature is composed, should have done otherwise than they did. I look, therefore, upon the President's Proclama- tion, as embodying — I am not now saying how much more it embodies — the nation's pledge, that she will carry out the requirements of the Constitu- tion substantially in accordance with the interpreta- tion of it given in the foregoing pages. When the Proclamation was completed by the issuing of the part which was dated January 1, 1863, the two houses of Congress were in session ; and, though their attention was called to the matter by un- happy members who disapproved of it, no resolu- tion or act of dissent was or could be passed by either House. Therefore, although a negative is not generally, in legislation, equivalent to its oppo- site affirmative, yet this negative may be deemed to amount to an expression of the opinion of the legis- 96 SECESSION AND SLAVERY. lative body, that the President was competent to pledge, in this way, the faith of the nation, and that Congress concurred with him in giving this particular pledge. There is, as the reader knows, another view of the Proclamation ; and, according to this other view, it is an act in the nature of military legislation ; done, by competent authority, in the course of legitimate military operations. This other view appears, even more distinctly than the one I have just presented, upon the face of the instrument ; but it is not within the scope of this pamphlet to discuss the Proclama- tion in this other aspect. Yet equally in this other aspect as in the one before mentioned, it is a pledge of the nation's faith. Some persons there are who profess to regard this Proclamation as a thing of no validity of any sort; and who are not ashamed to say, that they shall rejoice, when, at some future time, three million negroes are rebound in chains which they were told by a white President, a white Congress not contra- dicting, had been broken ; and the status quo is re- stored in the midst of the hissings and hootings of a civilized world. If ever such a carnival of hell is held in this country, may I not " be there to see ! " Were I a negro, though of an age and physical con- stitution not adapted to war, still I would enter this war as a soldier, not dreading the previously-an- nounced determination of the southern white power to play the barbarian toward me, by murdering or enslaving me, if captured, in disregard of the most sacred rules of all civilized warfare; I would fight THE EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION. 97 as a good and obedient soldier under my white officers ; but if, after I had helped in overcoming the enemy, the United States should make up with the conquered rebels on the condition of reducing me or my kindred or my color to slavery, in violation of the promise contained in this Proclamation of the President — some white lawyer, or judge, or bench of judges, having pronounced it unconstitutional, — I, too, would then play, in turn, the barbarian. Being placed outside the Constitution, I should not regard i^ as binding upon me. Being denied any rights under it, I should acknowledge to it no alle- giance. The North and the South having become alike barbarians as to me, I should make myself a barbarian as to them. While I could cling to life, I would slay by poison, by the hatchet, by any thing, whatever wore a white face ! And if innocent babes fell with the guilty aged ones, so let it be ! My every exertion should be to slay ! to slay ! And when at last I fell, I would gather up, in the skies, the souls of my slain ; and wear them as gems in a coronet of glory, which I would put upon my head ! Blessed angels should hover around me, and sing to me their lays of war and of love. Peaceful music should float to me from the bowers of bliss. God should bless me ; and all his universe of happy ones should shout amen ! amen ! as the smoke of the torment of my persecutors rose up forever and ever. 98 SECESSION AND SLAVERY. CHAPTER VI. CONCLUDING SUMMARY. The reader perceives, that there are two classes of authority relating to the questions discussed in this pamphlet ; namely, the authority of oujf revered Church of the Cursers of Ham, and the authority of the Constitution of the United States as expounded by our Supreme Court. But for the teachings of the church on this subject, no doubt would be en- tertained by any person as to what are the teachings of the Constitution. And the reason why I have been compelled to fill a hundred pages with what would be sufficiently plain stated in a single page is, that, whenever the voice of Law speaks, it falls upon ears filled with the roar of the hallelujahs of our church. Could I obtain, but for a single moment, the ear of the most devout worshipper of the church, being likewise the most determined detester of the law, when the ear was swept clean of this hallelujah roar, I could, even in this short space of time, impart to him more wisdom concerning our Constitution than I expect any son of the church to derive from this entire pamphlet. Let me, therefore, close by setting in contrast the Catechism of the Church, used for infant .minds, with a brief Catechism concerning the Constitution : CONCLUDING SUMMARY. 99 CATECHISM OF THE CHURCH. Question. Can you tell me, child, who made the United States ? Answer. Not the great God who made heaven and earth. Ques. Who, then, made the United States ? Ans. The several States, and the people thereof. Ques. Who made the Constitution of the United States ? Ans. The several States, and the people thereof. Ques. Who made slavery in the slave States ? Ans. The great God who made heaven and earth. Ques. Why did God make slavery in the slave States, yet did not make the United States ? Ans. This is a mystery which he has withheld from the wise and prudent, but has revealed unto babes. Matt. 11: 25. Ques. Please explain the mystery ? Ans. God makes all the good and bright things, but leaves all other things to be made by inferior workmen. Ques. Is this the reason why God did not make the United States, but made slavery in the slave States ? Ans. It is, most reverend sir. Ques. Is this the reason why God made slavery in the slave States, but did not make the Constitution of the United States ? Ans. It is, most reverend sir. Ques. When the things which men make, and the things which God made, come into collision, which must give way ? Ans. The things which men make, most reverend sir. Ques. When slavery and the government of the United States come into collision, which must give way ? Ans. The government of the United States, most reverend sir. Ques. When slavery and the Constitution of the United States come into collision, which must give way ? Ans. The Constitution of the United States, most reverend sir. Ques. When the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States, and the decisions of the priesthood who minister to the Cursers, come into collision, which must give way ? Ans. The decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States, most reverend sir. Ques. What are the tenets of the Holy Church of the Cursers upon the question of submitting to earthly governments ? I cf C. 100 SECESSION AND SLAVERY. Ans. There are no earthly governments over the church, but the church sometimes governs earthly governments. Ques. What is the rule which the church enjoins upon its mem- bers concerning their own personal submission to earthly govern- ments ? Ans. The member of the church is to submit to the earthly government as far as that government is governed by the church. Ques. What is the rule, when the earthly government is not governed by the church ? Ans. The higher law of the church then prevails, reverend sir. Ques. What is the rule where the people seem to be attached to the earthly government, yet the earthly government does a thing not previously sanctioned by the church ? Ans. It is to blacken the thing, reverend sir. Ques. Please explain the meaning of this term " blacken ? " Ans. " Blacken," reverend sir, is a word which takes its signifi- cance from that blest emblem of the church, a bowed negro clasp- ing a crushed spirit which the church has in training for heaven. Ques. To what is the term " blacken " or " black " applied ? Ans. It is applied to all negroes, as I have just mentioned. Ques. To what else is it applied ? Ans. To whatever else the church wishes to crush. Ques. What is the vulgar term which the ungodly sometimes use to signify the same thing as blacken ? Ans. Lie, reverend sir. Ques. Is it ever right to use this ungodly word, when speaking of the saints ? Ans. Never. ,It is not only wicked, but it is also highly im- polite. Ques. Name some things which the church blackens ? Ans. The Emancipation Proclamation, put forth by that heretic, Lincoln, is one of the things. Ques. Name other things ? Ans. The church blackens all persons who do not join her in blackening the Proclamation. Ques. What does the church teach concerning those who sustain the Proclamation ? Ans. The teachings of the church are always twofold ; first, her CONCLUDING SUMMARY. 101 teachings to the saints ; secondly, her teachings to the outside, heretical world. Ques. What are her teachings to the saints concerning those who sustain the Proclamation ? Am. She teaches them, that, unless these heretics are destroyed, the church will be put down ; and, with the fall of the church, will fall the power of her Confederate government. Qaes. What are her teachings on this subject to the outside world ? Ans. She teaches the outside world, that these heretics are fa- natics, who would destroy the Constitution of the United States, pervert the war from its original purpose of suppressing rebellion, and never bring it to a successful conclusion. Ques. What teaches the church to the outside world concerning the duty of this country in such an emergency as this ? Ans. She teaches to the outside world two things ; namely, first, that the church is the only expounder of the Constitution of the United States, and that it is not safe for the common people even to read it ; secondly, that the people must stand by the Constitution as the church expounds it, and spend their strength in supporting it, as thus expounded, but give no strength to the government in its struggle to save the Constitution from being rent in twain by the church's blest Confederacy. Ques. Does the church, when addressing the outside world, speak of her Confederacy in the language which you, babe, have just employed ? Ans. When the church addresses the outside world, — that is, the world of heretics and of sinners, — she uses holy guile in her speech ; therefore, in order to save her reputation, so as to secure an influence with those whom she would win, she describes her Confederacy as only a combination of an abused people striving, unwisely perhaps, to defend and protect menaced rights. Ques. What are the teachings of the church to the saints con- cerning their duty to the Constitution of the United States ? Ans. She teaches the saints, that it is the first duty to overthrow the Constitution of the United States. Ques. Wbat is the teaching of the church to the outside world concerning that clause of the Constitution which says : " The United 9* 102 SECESSION AND SLAVERY. States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican form of government ? " Ans. Her teachings to the outside world, upon this subject, vary with the persons addressed. Here, she would be all things to all men, that she might by all means save some. 1 Cor. 9 : 22. Ques. Give some examples of her teachings on this subject ? Ans. To the very ignorant, she asserts that the Constitution contains no such provision. Ques. What saith she to such of the outside world as have read the Constitution, and know this provision is in it ? Ans. To some she saith, that it doth not contemplate any such state of affairs as exists in the United States at the present time. Ques. When these reply, that, this being so, and it not being incumbent on the United States to guarantee to the seceded States republican forms of government, it is best for the United States to govern these States as conquered provinces, or as territories, — what saith the church then to such heretics ? Ans. She doth not condescend to reason with heretics who have become so vile ; but she saith to the rest of the outside world, that inasmuch as, plainly, beyond all scope for discussion, the duty of the United States is, not to govern the seceded States as conquered provinces or as territories, but to give them republican forms of government, — a point expressly guaranteed in the Constitution itself, — those heretics who proposed such a gross outrage ought to be roasted over slow fires, then burnt to crisp, and then their ashes given to the saints to be used for snuff, seeing this unholy war hath made tobacco dear. Ques. Hath the church other methods of dealing with such vile heretics ? Ans. She proposeth, that, when this war is over, all, heretics be burned, and thereby peace be secured to the country. Ques. What saith the church to the class of heretics who would take the church at her own word, and give again to the seceded States republican forms of government ? Ans. She saith, that, by the Constitution, traitors who have un- dertaken to overthrow the government of the country, their treason having been prompted by their great love for the church, are not, for this reason, disqualified to be voters under the Constitution ; but CONCLUDING SUMMARY. 103 that fanatics, and negroes, and all such creatures, who have not known enough to be disloyal to the government, are, by the Consti- tution, disqualified : so the United States must give to the seceded States governments based on treason. Ques. Which, of all the answers made by the church to the heretically -inclined outside world, is deemed to be the most con- vincing ? Ans. The point of making snuff has hitherto been the most powerful point put by the church. Ques, Is this point always to be deemed the most powerful ? Ans. The church hath a prophetic vision, that this point is to be superseded by the point put a little way back ; namely, that none but traitors know enough to carry on republican forms of government, therefore that they must be selected in the seceded States to carry on such forms. Ques. If the negroes knew enough to carry on republican forms of government, would there be any objection to permitting them, and loyal white persons, in combination, to carry on such forms to the exclusion of the traitors ? Ans. Seeing the traitors will not carry on such forms, there would be one objection only, which is, that it would be impossible any government could stand, which is not built upon the rock of the church. Ques. Why could not the government of the' United States stand, without resting on the rock of the church ? Ans. There are many reasons, most reverend sir ; but the reason which this babe can give is, that the government could not stand without a Constitution, that there can be no constitution without an expounder thereof, and that the church permits none but herself to expound the Constitution of the United States. Ques. What would be the effect of the church's permitting out- side sinners to expound the Constitution of the United States ? Ans. It would be equally disastrous as if she permitted fanatics and heretics to expound it. Ques. What would be the effect of permitting fanatics and her- etics to expound the Constitution of the United States ? Ans. There are no words adequate to convey the idea of the effect ; it would be terrible. 104 SECESSION AND SLAVERY. Qaes. What would be the effect of totally overthrowing the church in this country? Ans. The effect is one which could not be contemplated ; in the first place, the Constitution would be killed ; that is, the constitu- tion of the church. Ques. What amount of knowledge is it necessary, by the Con- stitution of the United States, as expounded by the church, a voter should possess ? Ans. He need not possess any worldly knowledge ; but he ought, properly, to possess that knowledge which consists in understand- ing the catechism of the church. Ques. Does the question of freedom or slavery depend upon how much the person who is to be made a freeman or a slave, knows ? Ans. It does not ; but here is a point, very nice indeed, not given to babes to explain. It is taught to the saints, that all persons who do not understand the mysteries of the church, and all persons who earn their bread by the sweat of their brows, — brow-sweat being detrimental to true religion, — ought to be made slaves. Here is a mystery which this babe cannot fully explain. Ques. Suppose the negroes do not know enough to vote, is that a reason why they should not be made free, so as to lend their sup- port, though not as voters, to the republican governments to be established in the seceded States in the place of those which the rebellious people overthrew ? Ans. No, that is not the reason ; but the reason is, that the tenets of the church do not permit negro slaves to be made free. Ques. Is there any provision, corresponding to this blessed tenet of the church which forbids freedom, to be found in the Con- stitution of the United States ? Ans. The church teaches, that all her tenets are so many dis- tinct parts of the United States Constitution ; otherwise, there is in the Constitution no such provision. Ques. Does not the Constitution guarantee, that, though a State secedes, still slavery shall be permitted to stand in the State ? Ans. This is a provision, reverend sir, clearly laid down in the articles of our holy church. Ques. Are not the articles of our holy church deemed by all saints to be superior to the articles of the Constitution ? CONCLUDING SUMMARY. 105 Ans. They are, reverend sir. Ques. Is it to be tolerated for a moment, that the Constitution should ever be set up above the church ? Ans. Never, for a moment, reverend sir. Ques. If any man attempts to set up the Constitution above the church, what does the church do ? Ans. Blackens him, most reverend sir. Ques. What saith the church about such a man ? Ans. She saith that he is a fanatic. Ques. What else saith the church ? Ans. She saith that he is a radical, reverend sir. Ques. What else saith the church ? Ans. She saith that he is an enemy to the Constitution, reverend sir. Ques. What more, saith the church ? Ans. She saith, that, when this war is over, the man is to be crushed, reverend sir. Ques. Is the church always to triumph ? Ans. Prophecy telleth of a beast that is to make war with the saints and to overcome them. Rev. 13 : 1, 7. I perceive that the Catechism is quite too long to be inserted entire in these pages. There are few demagogues who do not know it all by heart ; and the specimen here given will serve for those read- ers who are not instructed in the demagogic trade. CATECHISM OF THE CONSTITUTION. Question. Are the seceded States now States within the Union, or are they out of the Union ? First possible Answer. They are out of the Union. [The result of this answer, the reader sees, is, that we should let them go. This is what the rebels claim.] Second possible Answer. They are in the Union, but they are no longer States. [Then they should be governed as conquered 106 SECESSION AND SLAVERY. provinces, or as territories. This is a result which all persons among us who call themselves " conservatives," have hitherto scouted, as a political heresy almost as bad as secession itself.] Third possible Answer. They are yet States in the Union, and they have State governments. [Then their senators and repre- sentatives sit in the Capitol at Washington, their State officers are sworn to support the Constitution, and so on. This is what every- body knows is not true in fact, it is not recognized as fact by the authorities at Washington, or by any other authorities or people on earth ; therefore this answer is not admissible.] Fourth possible Answer. The seceded States are still States in the Union, but they are denuded of their State governments. [This is the position of the present pamphlet.] Question Second. This fourth answer to the first question being assumed to be correct, — Is it the duty of the United States to clothe these denuded States in governments republican in form ? First possible Answer. It is not. Neither Art. IV. § 4, of the Constitution, nor any other clause, applies to the case. [Then the conservative part of the country has been, from the first, in the wrong. There is no limit, therefore, to the power which the United States government has over the seceded States. As there are no governments in these States, the full governmental authority, as known in public law, is in the United States ; since the existence of any portion of the country without government is a thing not admissible in theory, and not possible in fact.] Second possible Answer. It is for the seceded States to clothe themselves, of their own motion, in loyal governments, under the Constitution of the United States. [This is what the particular persons, in the seceded States, who took the States out of the Union* have refused, and still refuse, to do. Other persons in these States are willing. This answer, then, brings us to the doctrine maintained in this pamphlet, namely, that the willing should be permitted — by congressional act authorized — to execute their desire.] Third possible Answer. The negroes are too ignorant to carry on State governments. [This answer takes us into a field of dis- cussion not lying within the province of this pamphlet. The Con- stitution of the United States has not declared them to be too igno- rant, and the object of this pamphlet is to discover what is the law. CONCLUDING SUMMARY. 107 The Supreme Court of the United States holds, that they are not dis- qualified by reason either of ignorance or of any thing else. As "a question of fact, negroes carry on governments in Hayti, in Liberia, and in other places. Whether they are too ignorant or not, is mat- ter of private opinion, not of law. According to the opinion of the dominant classes in the Old World, common white people are too ignorant. Our laws have discarded that opinion, and discarded also the same opinion as applied to negroes. Yet, in fact, should the negroes be permitted to exercise civil rights in the seceded States, the governments would not be negro governments ; for the white element would, even then, be the controlling one. There is a much stronger probability, that, under our naturalization laws, the people of some foreign country will become the governors of our native-born people, than that, under the law of our Constitu- tion, enforced in the seceded States, the negroes will become the rulers over the whites.] Fourth possible Answer. The United States must clothe these States in republican governments under the Constitution ; taking for the purpose, the material which presents itself, namely, the negroes, and the loyal whites. This last answer brings us again to the doctrine which this pamphlet maintains. It is what the writer believes to be the doctrine of the law. And in all the discussions which the times have brought out, no man has yet appeared to controvert, on any basis of legal authority, this doctrine. Those who have combated the assumed right of the United States government to give freedom to the slaves in the seceded States, have directed their arguments against other views of the Constitution than those put forth in this pamphlet, not against these views. Ye ministers of the Church of the Cursers ! bring now on your learned lore. Present one authority 108 SECESSION AND SLAVERY. recognized in our law, against some one proposition, TfflP be by yourselves selected, out of the many legal propositions laid down in this pamphlet; or else ac- knowledge, that the doctrines of your church are not the doctrines of the law and the Constitution of this country. It is not for me to say, what a Curser can find when he turns over the books of our law. I will close this pamphlet with this statement, namely, that it has been my almost constant study, since the mutterings of the coming tempest of war were first heard among us, to ascertain what the law, as actu- ally adjudged by our courts, and held by writers of authority, taught concerning the matters discussed in the pages of this pamphlet, and concerning the other legal questions involved in our present troubles, and that I have not — I now speak par- ticularly of that part of the pamphlet which fol- lows the first chapter — found one line written by any judge, whether on or off the bench, or by any writer of recognized correctness of opin- ion, contradicting any one proposition stated herein to be law. If another man finds what I have failed to find, let him announce his discovery to the pub- lic ; but, until he does, let him beivare hoio he attempts to lie down the truth. •g'12