V .V ^^ Ir* V i«v:* iJ^.. . ^^'^S=3 , % v^ .^^^^„^- ^o ■%. ^?'' ,^' ._<^ '>>' #/ ^V' '^•- .A^ V .V I • • , "•^•. ^-** •^o. ^^^-^ .#' \,' .^' ^^ "Z*^ .0 .^^" V •> ^ • "' ..■; ,-^^ m »v-^, «?^^^c^^; , :^ V • ^0' v V-^^ o V iO-vl. ^v^O^ .0 ./, '^m-/ \'-f>X-A'' %-.>f?fr-/ ;^j??^\y %^ ^» %<^^ /Ji^'^ \...^"' ym^^ \,^' * Ay A • 0" / SPEECH OF HOF. AI^DREW JOHTsTSOjN:, OF TENNESSEE, ON THE WAR FOR THE UNION; DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, JULY 27, 1861. WASHINGTON: PRINTED AT THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE OFFICE. 18GI. c "*^r^ ci6^ V. ft? SPEECH "The Senate having under consideration tlsc joint ro:*olii- tton (S. No. 1) to approve and confirm certain act? of tlie President of the United States for suppressing insurrection ■and rebellion — Mr. JOHNSON, of Tennessee, said; Mr. Presioext: When I came from my home to the seat of Government, in compliance with the proclamation of the President of the United •States culling us together in extra session, it was not my intention to engage in any of the discus- sions t'nat might transpire in this body; {)ut since the session bi',gan, in consequence of the course that things have taken, I feel unwilling to allow the Senate to adjourn without saying a few words in respon.se to many things that have been sub- Riittetlto the So'iiate since its session comn\enced. What little I shall say to-day will be without much method or order. I shall present the sug- gestions that occur to my mind, and shall en- deavor to «peak of the condition of the country as it is, Gn returning here, we find ourselves, as we were when we adjourned last sprino;, in the midst of a civil war. That war is now progressing, without much ijope or prospect of a speedy termination. It seems to me, Mr. President, that our Govern- ment has reached one cf three periods through which all Governments must pass. A nation, or a people, have first to pass through a fierce ordeal in obtaining theirindepeiidenceorseparaiion from the Government to which they were attached. In some instances this is a severe ordeal. We passed through such an one in the Revolution; we were seven years in effecting the separation, and in taking our position at^nongst the nations of the earth as a so]iarate and distinct Power, Then, -after luiving succeeded in establishing its inde- pendence, and taken its position among the nations of the earth, a nation must show its ability to maintain that position, that separate and distinct independi^nee against other Powers, against for- eign foes. In 1812, in the history of our Govern- ment, 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 homo; against those who have no confidence in its integrity, or in the institutions that may be established under its organic law. We are in the midst of this third ordeal, and the problem 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 Govern- ment; whether we can succeed in nutting down traitors and treason, and in establisliing the great fact that we have a Government with sufficient strength to maintain its existence against what- ever combination may be presented in opposition to it. This brings me to a proposition laid down by the Executive in his recent message to the Con- gress of the United States. In that message the President said: " This is essentially a people's contest. On the side of the Union, it is n struggle l(jr maintaining in the world, that form and substance of Government, wliose Iciding o'ljc'ot is to clt^vate tlie condition of men ; to lift artificial vvuights from all shoulders ; to clear the paths of laudahle pnrswit for all ; to afford all an luifettered start, and a fair chance in the race of life. Yielding to partial and tempo- rary 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 thtir purity of character, suf- ficient to govern themselves. I think this is the true issue; and the time has now arrived when the energiesof the nation must be put forth, when there must be union and concert on the part of all those who agree in man's capability of self- government, without regard to their former di- visions or party prejudices, in order to demon- strate that great pro[)osition. Since this discussion commenced, it has been urged and argued, by Senators on one side, that there was a disposition to change the nature and 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 ihrownout that it would result in a consolidation of the Gov- ernment or a dictatorship. We find, in the speech delivered by the distinguished Senator from Ken- tucky, [Mr. Breckinridge,] the other day, the following paragraph, alluding to what will be the effect of the passage of this joint resolution approv- ing the action of the President: " Here ii> Washington, in Kentucky, in Missouri, every- wiiere vvliere tlie auttiority of the President extends, in liis discretion he will feel himself warranted by the action of Congress upon this resolution to subordinate the civil to the military power; to imprison citizens without warrant of law ; to suspend the writ of habeas corpus; to establish mar- tial 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 Uni- ted States, the power of a dictator." Then, in reply to the Senator from Oregon, [Mr. Baker,] he seems to have great apprehen- sion of a radical change in our form of Govern- ment. 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 strug- gle; whether we are to be called upon to follow the fiag over the ruins of the Constitution.' Without questioning the motives of any, I believe that the whole tendency of the present proceedings is to establish a Government with- out 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 making this great effort. The Senator alludes in his speech to a con- versation he had with some very intelligent gen- tleman 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 divis- ions and States will ultimately be rubbed out, and we shall have a Government strong and pow- erful enough." The Senator 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 cojT^tts 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 some of his points in their order, and speak of them as I think they deserve to be spoken of. The Senator says: "The civil authorities of the country are paralyzed, and a practical martial law i.s being established all over the land. The like never happened in this country beibre, 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 cainiot conduct the Government three months without resorting to it." The Senator puts great stress on the point, and epeaks 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, members of the Society of Friends in Philadelphia were arrested on suspicion of being disaffected to the cause of American 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 whom they were amenable, and they could only hope to avail themselves of the intervention of some civil authority. " Tlie 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 liave 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 conijneraent in the Mason's Lodge, in Phil.adelphia. " On tlie minutes of Congress of .3d September, 1777, it appears that a letter was received by them from George liryan. Vice President of the Supreme Executive Council, dated 2d September, stating that arrests had been made of persons inimical to the American States, and desiring the advice of Congress particularly whether Augusta and Win- chester, in Virginia, would not be proper places at wliich to secure prisoners." * * * * * * " Congress must have been aware that it was becoming a case of very unjust suflTering, for they passed their reso- lution of 6th September, 1777, as follows : " ' That it be recommended to ihe Supreme Executive Council of the State of Pennsylvania to hear what the said remonstrants can allege to remove the suspicions of their being disaflected or dangerous to the United States.' " But the Supreme Executive Council on the same day, referring to the above, " ' Resolved, Tliat 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 forthe departure of the prisoners.' " " As the recommendation of Congress of the 6th of Sep- tember, to give the prisoners a hearing, was refused by the Supreme Executive Council, the next minute made by Con- gress was as follows : '"In Congress, 8th September, 1777. " ' Resolved, Tliat it would be improper for Congress to enter into a hearing of the remonstrants or other prisoners in the Mason's Lo(Jge, they being inhabitants of Pennsylvania; and therefore, as the Council declines givii.g them a hear- ing 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 afiirm allegiance to the State of Pennsylvania, to Staunton, in Virginia. " The remonstrances made to Congress, and to the Su- preme 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 tlie judicial court by writs oC 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 dispatches 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 liciiig proscntrd to tlio Chief Justice, were marked liy liim, 'Allowed ipv 'I'lioiiins McKciiii,' and they were served on tlie otl'iccrs wlio liad tlie prisoners in eiistody, when tliey liaus has I been suspended: the question arises whether it was 1 not a justifiable suspension at the time; and dught we not now to indorsesimply what we would have done if we had been here ourselves at the time the power was exercised .' The impression is sought to be made on the public mind that this is the first and only case where the power hasbeen exercised. I haveshown that there is one tenfold more striking, that oc- curred during our struggle for independence. Is this the first time that persons in the United States have 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 malcing Judge Hall submit to it.^ I know that General Jackson submitted to be arrested, tried, and fined $1,000; but what did Congress do in tliat case.' It did just what we are called on to do in this case. By the restora- tion of his fine — an act passed byan overwhelming majority in the two Houses of Congress — the nation said " we approve what you did." Sup- pose, Mr. President, (and it may have been ihe case,) that the existence of the Government de- [lendcd upon the protection and successful defense of New Orleans; and suppose, too, it was in vio- lation of the strict letter of the Constitution for General Jackson to place New Orleans under martial law, but without placing it under martial i^iw the Government would have been overthrown: is there any reasonable, any intelligent man in or out of Congress who would not indorse and ac- knowledge 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 vio- lated, and the Government tramjded under foot; and when it becomes necessary to prevent this, even by exercising a power that comes in conflict with the Constitution in lime of peace, it should and ought to be exercised. If General Jackson had lost the city of New Orleans, and the Government 6 \ had been overthrown by a refusal on Iiis 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 in- stitutions 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 flickering, to question too nicely, to scan too critically, its acts in the very midst of that crisisjwhen the Government is likely to be overthrown, is to make war upon it, and to try to paralyze its energies. If war js to be made upon those wiio seem to violate the laws of the United States in their efforts to preserve the Gov- ernment, 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. 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. The opinion of the court was delivered by Judge Story. Let me read from the opinion of the court: " It has not been denied here that the act of 1795 is within the constitutional authority of Congress, or that Congress may not lawtiilly provide for cases of imminent danger of invasion, as well as for cases where !*n 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 pro- vide against the attempt and danger of invasion, as the necessary and proper means to etfectnate the object. One of the best means to repel invasion is to provide the requi- site force for action before the invader liimself has reaclied the soil. " The power thus confided by Congress to the PresidenJ is, doubtless, of a very high and delicate nature. A free people are naturally jealous of the exercise of military power; and the powerto call the militia into actual service is certainly felt to be one of no ordinary magnitude. But it is nor a power which can be executed without a corre- spondent responsibility. It is, in its terms, a limited power, confined to eases 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 of and decided.' Is the President the sole and exclusive 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 ex- igency 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 oc- casions of state, and under circumstances which may be vital to the existence of the U)iion. A prompt and unlies- itating obedience to orders is indispensable to the complete attainment of the object. The service is a military service, and the command of a military nature ; and in such cases' every delay and every obstacle to an efficient and immedi- ate compliance necessarily tend to jeopard the public in- terests." — Martin vs. Mott, 12 Wheaton's Reports, p. 29. We see, then, tl-tat the f)ower is clear as to- calling out the militia; we see that we have pre- cedents 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, in these two instances, 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 judg- ment, the crisis demanded for the maintenance of the existence of the Government itself. The sim- ple question — if you condemn the President for acting in the absence of law — is, do you condemn the propriety of his course; do you condemn the increase of the Army; do you condemn the in- crease of the Navy? If you oppose the measure simply upon the ground that the Executive called them forth anticipating law, 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 condemn the exercise of the power of the Executive in the absence of law, what will you do noviT, as the law-making power, when it is manifest that the Army and Navy shotted be increased? You make war upon the Executive for anticipating the action of Congress. What do gentlemen do now, when called upon to sup- port the Government? Do they do it? They say the President a,nticipated the action of Con- gress. Does not the Government need an in- crease of the Army and the Navy? Where do gentlenien 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 ap- parent, 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 apparent, Mr. President. We had enemies of the Government here last winter; in my opinion, we have eneiiiics of the Government here now. I said that I agreed with the Senator from Ken- tucky that there was a design — a deliberate de- termination — to change the nature and character of our Government. Yes, sir, it has been the de- sign for a long time. All the talk about slavery, and compromise has been but a jiretext. We had a long disquisition, and a very feeling one, frorn. the Senator from Kentucky. He became pathetic in the hopelessness of compromises. Did not the Senator from California [Mr. Latham] the other day show unmistakably that it was not compro- mise 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 com^ promise could be made. At first, their cry was. peaceable secession and reconstruction. They talked not of compromise; andji repeat^ their. greatest d rend and fcfir was, that snmet!iinf» would be aijrocd U|>()ii; lluit llioir last niul only pretf'xt would be swept from iindLT tl\eiu, and that tliey would stand before the country naked and ex- posed. The Senator from California pointed out to you a number of them who stood here and did not vote for certain propositions, and those proposi- tions were lost. AVhat was the action l)cfore the committee of thirteen ? Why did not that com- mittee 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 provitle that Congress in the future never should interfere with the subject of slavery. Tiie com- mittee failed to agree, and some of its members at once telegraphed to their States that they must go out of tile Union at once. Hut after all that transjiired in the early part of the session, what was done? We know 'what the argument has been; in times gone by I met it; I have heard it j again and again. It has been said that one great object 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 Constitution, they would amend the Constitution so as to give Con- gress power to legislate upon tlic subject of sla- very in the States, and expel it from the States in which it is now. Has not that been the argu- ment? Now, how does the matter stand ? At the last session of Congress seven States withdrew, 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 M'ould be overthrown. This has been thcargument; it has been repeated again andagain; and hence the great struggle about the Territories. The argument was, we wanted to prevent the cre- ation of free States; we did not want to be reduced down 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; tliis has been the rampart; this has been the very point to which it has been urged that the free States wanted to pass. Now, how does the fact stand ? Let us •' render unto Casar the things that are Cmsar'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 amend- ment to the Constitution of the United States con- ferring 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 Representative!: of the United States of America in Coni^rcss assonhtcd, TliiU till! following article be proposcil to tlie l,ri;isl;iMiri;s of the sevenil Slates, as an aineiuliiK'!it to tli.j ("oiisliuuioii of the United States, whicii, when ratiried by three fourths of said I.pgixIntiirPM, flinll (if vnlfil, (o ntl Intent* and purpoup*, u part of (lie said ('oii-llliMluii, vi/. : "AiiT. i;t. No aiiP'iiilmi'iil nliiill Ijp mad"- to Uh* Coiii'tl- tiuloii wlilrli will aiillioriy.r or glvf lo CoiiKn-Bit tin- powrr to abolish, or Inli-rli-n-, Wllhlii any ."^Inlr. with llic donnnllc Institnlioiis tliiTrof, Ini'liidlni; that of pirmunK held to iicr- vice ur labor by the law^t of Hald Stuti!." Is not that very conclusive .' Here is an amend- ment to the Constitution of the United States to make the Constitution uifam<'iulai>l<- Ujion tliut subject, as it is upon some othe-r sulgrcts; ihiit Congress, in the future, should havi? no power to legislate on the subject of slavery witliin ilie States. Talk about " compromise," and about the settle- ment of this rjuistion; how can you settle it more substantially? How can you get a guarantee that is more binding than such an ami'iidiiP'Ml 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 " re- construction" and "compromise" luid "guarnn- tecs," taken up this amr; mime nt to the Constitution and adopted it? Soirie Stateshaveadopted it. How many southern States have done so? Take my own State, for instance. Instead of accepting guar- antees protecting them in all future tiine against the legislation of Congress on the subject of sla- very, they undertake to pas.s ordinances violating the Constitution of the country, and taking the State out of the Union and into the southern con- federacy. It is evident to me that with many the talk about compromise and the settlemeut of this question is mere pretext, especially with tiiose who understand the question. What more was done at the last session of Congress, when the North had the power? Let us tell the truth. Three territorial bills were brought forward and passed. You remember in 1847, when the agitation arose in reference to the Wilmot proviso. You remember in 185Uthe con- test about slavery prohibition in the Territories. You remember in 1854 the excitement in reference to the Kansas Nebraska bill, and the power con- ferred on the Legislature by it. Now we have a constitutional amendment, proposed at a time when the Republicans have the power; and at the same time they come forward with three territo- rial bills, and in neither of those bill* can be found any prohibition, so far as slavery is concerned, in the Territories. Colorado, Nevada, and Dakota, are organized without any prohibition of slavery. Rut what do you find in these bills? Mark, Mr. President, that there is no slavery prohibition; mark too, the languge of the sixth section, confer- ring power upon the Territorial Legislature: "Skc.6. And he it further enacted, That the legislative power of the Territory shall extend to all ri^ditfnl snbjrt-ts of legislation consistent with the Constitution of the United States and the provisions of this act ; but no law shall be passed iiUcrlVring with the primary disposal of the soil; no tax shall be imposed upon the property of the United Slates ; nor shall the lands or other property of non-residents be taxed hishcr than the lands or other properly of residents ; nor sliaM any law be passed iinpairinj; the ri^-hls of private property ; nor shall any discrimination be made In taxing dill'erent kinds of property ; but all property subject to tax- ation shall be in proportion to tlie value of the property ta.\ed." Can there be anything more clear and conclu- sive? First, there is no prohibition; next, the 8 Legislature sliall have no power to legislate so as to impair the riglits of private property, and shall not tax one description of property higher than another. Now, Mr. President, right here I ask any reasonable, intelligent man throughout the Union, to take the amendment to the Con- stitution, 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.' Yetwehear 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 .' There is no slavery prohibition by Congress, and the Territorial Legislatures are expressly forbid- den from legislating so as to impair the rights of property. 1 know there are some who are sin- cere in this talk about compromise; but there are Others who arc 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 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 territory we have got; and here is an amend- ment to the Constitution embracing 'the whole question, so far as the States and the public lands of the United States are concerned. 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 it head. A distinguished Sen- ator from Georgia once said, " when traitors be- come numerous enough, treason becomes respect- able." 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 treason, and in behalf of the Government which was constructed by our fathers, I intend to continue it to the end. [Ap- plause in the galleries.] The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Order! Mr. JOHNSON, of Tennessee. Mr. President, we are in the midst of a civil war; blood lias been shed; life has been sacrificed. Who commenced it? Of that we will speak hereafter. I am speak- ing now of the talk about compromise. Traitors and rebels are standing with arms in theirhands, and it is said that we must go forward and com- promise with them. They are in the wrong; they are making war upon the Government; they are trying to upturn and destroy our free institutions. I say to them that the comjiromise I have to make under the existing circumstances is, "ground your arms; obey the laws; acknowledge the su- ijremacy of the Constitution — when you do that, [ will talk to you about compromises." All the compromise that I have to make is the compro- mise of the Constijtution of the United States. It is one of the best compromises that can be made. We lived under it from 1789 down to the 20lh of December, 1860, when South Carolina undertook logo outof the Union. Weprospered; we advanced in wealth, in commerce, in agricul- ture, in trade, in manufactures, in all the arts and sciences, and in religion, more than any people upon the face of God's earth had ever done be- fore in the same time. What better compromise do you want.' You lived under it until 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 de- rived all your greatness, and which v/as made by the fathers of your country. It will protect you in all your rights. But it is said that we had better divide the coun- try and make a treaty and restore peace. If, under the Constitution which v/as framed by Washing- ton and Madison and the patriots of the Revolu- tion, we cannot live as brothers, as we have in times gone by, I ask can we live quietly under a treaty, separated as enemies? The same causes will exist; our geographical and physical position will remain just the same. Suppose you make a treaty of peace and division: if the same causes of irritation, if the same causes of division con- tinue to exist, and we cannot live as brothers 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 under a treaty? It cannot be done; it is imprac- ticable. 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 Government. He seemed to be apprehensive of a dictatorship. Pie feared there might be a change in the nature and character of our institutions. I could, if I chose, refer to many proofs to estab- lish 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 Mont- gomery Daily Advertiser, one of the organs of the so-called southern confederacy, says: " Has it been a precipitate revolution.'' It lias not. With coolness and deliberation the subject bas been tliought of lor forty years ; for ten years it has been the all-absorbing tlicnie in political circles. From Maine to Mexico all the ditl'erent phases and forms of the question have been pre- sented 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 philantiiropists who, believin^in man's capacity for self-government, believed, therefor^ in spite of so many failures, in tlie 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 gener- 9 ntion, " it seems their only resort must be to a constitutional monarchy." Hence you sec the Senator and myself begin to agree in the propo- sition that the nature and character of the Gov- ernment are to bo clianged. William Howard Russcdl, the celebrated cor- respondent of the London Times, spent some time in boutii Carolina, and he writes: " From all (luartois liavc ponie to my oars tlie Rclioes ot' the saini.' voiei,'; it may hi; Iclgned, l)iit lliort; is no dlccord in tlic note, and it sounds in uotidtrfnl strmiKtli and mo- notony all over tliu c-oLintry. t^hadcs oC GeorKf IJI, ol' North, oCJoliiison, of all who contended ajainst the (;rroug;ht about since the adjournment of the hist Coiii;re.ss — since the 4tli of March ; indeed, since the 15th of April. Congress has declared no war. The Conslilution of the United States says ' tliat Congress shall be authorized to declare war;' and yet, sir, though Con- gress has declared no war, we are in the midst of a war monstrous in its character, and hugely monstrous in its pro- portions. That war has been brought on by the President of the United States since the 4tli of March, of his own motion and of his own wrong; and under what circum- stances .' 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 liad on the loth 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 rei'used to pass bills having this direction, or having any purpose of coercion. Now, sir, how has this war been brought on .' 1 have said that, in my judgment, it h.as been brought on by the President of the United States; and a portion of the jjrocedure which has resulted in it is named in the pream- b'le of this joint resolution, which it is proposed that we shall approve and legalize." The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. Powell] spoke in similar language. Alluding to the re- fusal of Kentucky to respond to the first call of the President for seventy-five 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 -siic refused to furnish the regiments called for. The Senator seems to be a litUe offended at the neutrality of Kentucky. Sir, Kentucky has assumed a position of neiurality, 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 t'rom the North or the South. Kentucky looks upon this war as unholy, unrighteous, and unjust. Kentucky believes that this war, if carried out, can result in nothing else than a final disruption of this Confederacy. She hopes, she wishes, slie 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 c(uiciliation, if it can be done at all ; and henri'. being devoted truly to the Union, she desires to stay this war, and desires measures of peace to be presented for the ad- justment of our ditiiculties." I desired in this connection to place before the Senate the remarks of both the Senators from Kentucky and the Senator from Missouri, and to answer them at the same time. The Senator from Missouri says the war was brought <>n uince the 4th of March by the Pr.Hidenl of the United .States of hi.s own moiion. The S.-nator from Kentucky [.Mr. PiiwKi.LJ pronounceM it on unjust, an un- righteous, and an unholy war. Sir, I think it is an unjust, an unrighteous, and tin unlioly war. Hut, sir, i conunenced enumerniiiig the facts with the view of siiowing whoccunmeneed tlie wnr. How do they .stand.' I have juHlHtat«d tliut South Carolina seceded — witlidrew from tlii- Confi;dcr- acy; and in the very act of withdrawing, mHc makes practical war upon the Government, anil becomes its enemy. The Star of the West, on the 7th of January, laden simply with provi.iions to supply those starving m>'n in Fort Sumter, attempted to enter the harijor, and was fired upon, and had to tack about, and leave tin; men in the forts to perish or do the best they could. We also find, that on the Hth of April General Heau- regard had an inti^rvic^w with Major Anderson, and made a proposition to him to surrender. Major Anderson stated, in substance, that he could do no such thing; tiutt he could not strike the colors of his country, and refused to surren- der; 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, starvation must take place. It seems that at this time, Mr. Pryor, from Virginia, was in Charleston. The convention of Virginia was silting, and it was j important that ihe cannon's roar should be heard j in the land. Virginia was to be taken out of the I Union , although a majority of the delegates in the I 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 commenced the bombardment, fired upon your fort and upon your men. They knew that in three days they would be compelled to surrender; but they wanted war. It was indis- pensable to produce an excitement in order to hurry Virginia out of the Union, and they com- menced 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 hand- kerchiefs to their faces to save them from sulTo- cation and death. Even in the midst of all this, they refused to cease 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 orought 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, .Ipril 12, 1861. "An immense crowd seren.ided Pre>idint Davis and Secretary Walker, at the E.\chango Hotel to-nigUt." 14 Mr. Davis refused to address tlie audience, but his Secretary of War did. Tiie Secretary of War, Mr. Walker, said: " No man could tPll where the war this day commenced ' would end, but lie would prophesy that the tliig which now j flaunts tlie "breeze liere would float over the'doine of the ' old Capitol, at Washington, before the 1st of May. Let them try southern chivalry and test the extent of soutliern resources, and it miuht float eventirally over Faneuil Hall itself." " I What is the announcement.? We have attacked ' Fort Sumter, and it lias surrendered, and no one | can tell where this war will end. By the 1st ofi May our flag; will waive in triumph from the dome 1 of the old Capitol at Washington, and ere long perhaps from Fanueil 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 thousand men, and in increasing the Army and Navy under the exigency. Do we not know, in connection witli 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 confidently 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 thou- sand picked men, in the Slate of Virginia, to make a descent and attack 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 inva- sion, maintain the rightful possession of the confederate States of America in every portion of territory belonging to each State, and to secure the public tranquillitv and in- dependence against threatened assault, the President be, and he is hereby, authorized to employ the militia, mil- itary, and naval forces ofthe confederate States of .\merica, and asli for and accept the services of any number of vol- unteers, not e.xceeding one liiuidred thousand." When your forts were surrendered, and when the President of the so-called southern confed- eracy was authorized to call out the entire militia, naval, and military force, and then to receive in 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 thisfloor that ere long their Congress would be sitting Irere 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 necessity 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 mil- itary and naval force of those States, Senators- talk about the enormous call of the President for seventy-five thousand men and the increase he has made of the Army and Navy. Mr. Presi- dent, it all goes to show, in my oiiinion, that the sympathies of Senators are with tlie one ggvern- ment and against the other. Admittmg that there was a little stretch of power; admitting that the margin was pretty wide when the power was ex- ercised, the query now comes, when you have got the power, wlien you are sitting here in a legis- lative attitude, are you willing to sustain the Gov- ernment 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 Government. 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 protecta Government from seizure as it is an individual. I reckon the moral 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" aggre- gate is protected and maintained by the same law, moral and legal, as that which applies to an in- dividual. These rebellious States, after commenc- ing tills war, after violating the Constitution^ seized our forts, our arsenals, our dock-yards, our custom-houses, our public buildings, our ships, and last, though not least, plundered the in- dependent treasury at New Orleans of $1,000,000. And yet Senators talk about violations of the law and the Constitution. They say the Constitu- tion is disregarded, and the Government is about to be overthrown. Does not this talk about vio- lations of the Constitution and law come with a beautiful grace from that side of the House? I repeat again, sir, are not violations of the Con- stitution necessary for its protection and vindica- tion more tolerable than violations of that sacred instrument aimed at the overthrow and destruc- tion of the Government? We have seen ins-tances, 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 overthrow 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 proclamation calling out seventy-five thou- sand men after the congress of the so-called south- ern confederacy had passed a law to call out the entire militia, and to receive into their service one htmdrcd thousand men. The President issued his proclamation after they had taken Fort Moul- trie and Castle Pinckney ; after they had fired upon and reduced Fort Sumter. Fort Sumter was taken on the 12th. and on the 15th he issued his proclamation. Talcing 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 15 the Coiistitiition and tlie Iiiws nnd the Govern- ment. Senators talk about violations of the Constitu- tion. Pliivo you liianl any intimation of com- plaint from those Si'mgors about this soutiitrn confederacy — ihi.s band of traitors to their coun- try and their country's institutions? I repeat, substatitially, the lani|jiu>y;e of tiic Senator from Illinois, [Mr. IjUowning:] " Have you heard any complaint or alarm about violations of constitu- tional law on ttiat 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 ilu army and the navy. While they are reducing our forts, and robbing us of our prop- erty, 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 confederate 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 Govcnnnent; who sucked its pap; who re- ceived all his military instruction at the hands of this Government; a man who got all his distinc- tion, civil and military, in the service of this gov- ernment, 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 service of the United States, and on the 17ih this same Jefferson Davis, President of the southern confederacy, issued a proclamation proposing or opening the door to the issuance of letters of marque and reprisal, and that, too, in violation of the pseudo-hermaphrodite government that has been gotten up down there. In retalliation for the proclamation issued by the President of the United States, he, in violation of the con- stitution of this pseudo-confederacy, issued his proclamation proposing to issue letters of marque and reprisal. In other words, he proposed to open an oflice and say, we will give out licences 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 issue letters of marque and reprisal until its independence is first acknowledged as a separate and distinct power. Has that been done? I think, therefore. Senators can find some little violation of constitution and law down there among them.selves. Sir, they hnvc violated the law and the Constitution every step they progruiiHcd in going ilxre, nnd now ilwy violate it in trying to come this way. Thin? wan u g< nernl liciimo otlVred, II premium oUVridjio every fn-eliootcr, to every nwii whowuniud to plundaripie and repriMul to |)ick them up nndapprof)riale ihein. After that, their congri'ss saw that he had gone ahead of their constitution and tin' laws of nation.s, and they passed a law modifying the issuance of let- ters of marque and reprisal, that they .should i)rey upon the property of the citizens of the United States, excepting certain States — excepting Ken- tucky and Tennessee — holding tlvat out as a bait, as an inducement to get them in. I do not think, therefore, when we approach the subject fi\iriy and squarely, that there was any very great wrong in the President of the United States, on the 19th, issuing his proclama- tion blockading their ports, saying you shall not have the opportunity, so far as I can prevent it, of plundering and appropriating other people's property on the high seas. I tliink he did pre- cisely 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, n fright. Some of us would not feel so very com- fortable 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 en- joying what tew 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 remote. 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 committed 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 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 sus- tained; that those citizens who have been borne down and tyrannized over, and who have had laws of treason passed against them in their own States and threatened wuh confiscation of prop- 16 erty, shall be protected. I say it is the paramount duty of this Government to assert its power and maintain its integrity. 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 re- publican form of government; for we have seen one continued system of usurpation carried on, from one end of these southern States to the other, disregarding the popular judgment; disregarding the popular will; setting at defiance the judgment of the people; disregarding their rights; paying no attention to their State constitutions in any sense whatever. We are bound, under the Con- stitution, to protect those States and their citizens. We are bound to guaranty to them a republican form of government; it is our duty to do it. If we have no Government, let the delusion be dis- pelled; let the dream pass away; and let the peo- ple of the United States, and the nations of the earth, know at once that we have no Government. If we have a Government, based on the intelli- gence and virtue of the American people, let that great fact be now established, and once estab- lished, this Government will be on a more endur- ing and permanent basis than it ever was before. 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 intend 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 preten- sions and claims of one of the distinguished sons of Kentucky, 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 doubtlYil questions, to pursue principle; and in the pursuit of a great principle I can never reach a wrong conclusion. I intend, in this case, to pursue principle. I am a Democrat, believing the principles of this Government are Democratic. It is based upon the Democratic theory. I believe Democracy can stand, notwithstanding all the tauntsandjeersthatarc thrown at it throughoutthe southern confederacy. The principles which I call Democracy — I care not by what name they are sustained, whether by Republicans, by Whigs, or not — are the groat principles that lie at the foundation of this Government, and they will be maintained. We have seen that so far the exper- iment has succeeded well; and now we should make an effort, in this last ordeal through which we are passing, to crush out the fatal doctrine of secession and those who are cooperating with it in the shape of rebels and traitors. I advocated the professions of a distinguished son of Kentucky at the late election, for the rea- son that I believed he was a better Union man than any other candidate in the field. Others ad- vocated the claims of Mr. Bell, believing him to be a better Union man; others those of Mr. Doug- las. In the South we know that there was no Republican ticket. 1 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 No- vember last that has produced sufficient cause to break up this Government.' The Senator from California enumerated the facts up to the 25th day of May, 1860, when there was a vote taken in this body declaring that further legislation was not necessary for the protection of slave property in the Territories. Now, from the 6th of Novem- ber up to the 20th of December, tell me what trans- pired of sufficient cause to break up this Govern- ment? Was there any innovation^was there any additional step taken in reference to the rights of the States or the institution of slavery ? If the candidate whose claims I advocated had been elected President — I speak of him as a candidate, of course not meaning to be personal — I do not believe this Government would have been broken up. If Stephen A. Douglas had been elected, I do not believe this Government would have been broken up. Why ? Because those who advo- j cated the pretensions of Mr. Lincoln w-ould have j done as all parties have done heretofore: they I would have yielded to the high behest of the American people. Then, is. the mere defeat of one man, and the election 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 Sen- ators had stood here as faithful sentinels, repre- senting 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 Lin- coln wa^ inaugurated, we had a majority of six upon this floor in opposition to his Administra- tion. Where, then, is there even a pretext for breaking up tlie 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 without the majority of the Senate confirming the nomination? Do we not know that if any min- ister whom he sent abroad should make a treaty inimical to the institutions of the South, that treaty could not have been ratified without a ma- jority of two thirds of the Senate? With all these facts staring them in the face, where is the pretense for breaking up this Gov- ernment? Is it not clear that there has been a fixed purpose, a settled design to break up the Government 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 favorable to excite the prejudices of the South, and thereby enable them to break up this Govern- ment 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 fiivorite of those who are now engaged in breaking 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 con- 17 fidence in the cnpncity of the people for self-gov ernmoiit woukl have been iticrcnsod; Inu it so linp- pened tlmt the people thoii^lit proper to elect somebody else, accordinj^ to law and the Consti- tution. Then, as all parties had done heretofore, it was the duty of the whole people to acr|uiesce; if he made a ;jood President, sustain liim; if he became a bad one, condemn him; if he violated the law and the Constitution, impeach him. We had our remedy under the Constitution and in ilie Union. What is the real cause.' Disappointed ambi- tion; an unhallowed ambition. Certain men could not wait any longer, and they seized this occasion to do wiiat they luid been wanting to do for a long time — 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 con- federacy. Another, who was bold enough on this floor to proclaim himself a rebel, retired as a Sen- ator, and became secretary of state. All perfect- ly disinterested, no ambition about it! Another, Mr. Benjamin, of Louisiana — one who under- stands something about the idea of dividing gar- ments; 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 attor- ney general, to show his patriotism and disin- terestedness — nothing else! Mr. Slidell, disinter- ested altogether, is to go as minister to France. I mighi; enumerate many such instances. This is all patriotism, pure disinterestedness! Do we not see where it all ends? Disappointed, impa- tient, unhallowed ambition. There has been no cause for breaking up this Government; there have been no rightsdenied,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 abstract idea that they had a right to secede, they have gone out; and what is the consequence ? Oppres- sion, 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 I said just now that I had advocated the elec- i tion to the Presidency of the distinguished Sen- ' ator from Kentucky, on the ground that he was I 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 every- where. I hold in my hand a document which was our text book in the campaign. It is headed "Breckinridge and Lane Campaign Document No. 16. Who arc the disunionists.' Breckinridge and Lane the true Union candidates." It con- tains an extract which 1 will read from the Sena- tor'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 , tlmri! an .Ami'ricnn wlio rcBrcm ihe pam ? f « (hen- on<' who will ilnridi; hi inilry's liiwi", pcTVcrl Iht CoMstltiitl'in, or alionalu her people; .' 1 1 tUm- hit hucIi n man, land votes were not cast against secession. The dispatcli added that ' the southern rights men are determined to hold possession of the State, tliough 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 minority. This shows tlie ad vanceof tyranny and usurpation. By way of showing the Senate some of the wrong.s borne and submitted to by that people, who are loyal to the Government — who have been deprived of the arms furnished by the Government for their protection. — withheld by this litlle man Harris, the Governor of the State — I -will read a fewpar- agraphs from the address: " It has passed laws declaring it treason to savor do any- Jhing in favor of the Goveinment of the United States, or against the confederate States; and sucli a law is now be- fore, and we ajiprehend will soon be passed by the Legis- lature of Tennessee. " It has int'olved the southern States in a war whose success is hopeless, ai>d which snust ultimately lead to the ruin of the people. " Its 1)igoted, overbearing, and intolerant spirit, has al- ready subjected the people of East 'I'ennessee to njany petty grievances ; our people have been insulted : our flags have been fired upon and torn down ; our houses have been rudely entered ; our families subjected to in>ult; our peace- able meetings interr'apted ; our women and children shot at by a merciless soldiery ; our towns pillaged ; our citizens robbed, and some of them assassinated and murdered. " No efl'ort has been spared to deter the Union men of East Tennessee t'rom the expressio:; of their free thoughts. The penaltiesof treason have been threatened against them, and murder and assassination have been openly encour- aged by leading secession journals. As secession has been thus overbearing and Intolerant while in the minority in East Tennessee, nothing better can be expected of the pre- tended majority than wild, unconstitutional, and oppressive legislation ; an utter contempt and disregard of Irw ; a de- termination to force every Union man in the State to sweaj to the support of a constitution he abhors ; to yield his money and property to aid a cans • lie detests ; and to be- come the object of scorn and derision, as well as the vic- tim of intolerable and relentless oppression." These are some of the wrongs that we are en- during in that section of Tennessee-; not near all of them, but a few whicii I have presented that the country may know what we are submitting to. Since I left my home, having only one way to leave tlie State through two or three passes comingout through Cumberland Gap, 1 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 insurrection and rebellion. Yes, sii-, there they stand in arms environing a popu- lation of three hundred and twenty-fivethousand loyal, brave, patriotic, and unsubdued 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 suppliant, but I demand 19 it as a constitutional riglu, that you give us pro- j| tection, give us arms niui munitions; ami if tlu-y ' cannot be got there in any other way, to take I them there with an invading army, and dehver | the people from the oppression to v/hieh they are | now subjected. We claim to lie the State. 'Tin' other divisions may have -seceded and gone o(V; , and if this Government will stand hy and permit I those portions of th-j State to go ofl", and not en- 1 force tlie liws and protect the loyal citizens there, ' we cannot help it; but we still claim to be the State, and if two thirds have fallen oil', or have j been sunk by an earthquake, it does not change our relation to this Government. If the Govern- I ment will let them go, and not give us protection the fault is not ours; but if you will give us pro- j tection we intt-nd to stand as a Slate, as a part of this Confederacy, holding to the stars and stripes ' the tlag of our country. We demand it according ! to law; we demand it upon the guarantees of the Constitution. You are bound to guaranty to us a republican forrn of Government, and we ask it as a constitutional right. We do not ask you to in- terfere 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 GovcrniTicnt according to the Constitution, ■Of course we want your sympathy, and your re- gard, and your respect; but we ask your inter- ference on constitutional grounds. The aivieiulments to the Constitution, which ■constitute the bill of rights, declare that " a well regulated militia being necessciry to the security ■of a free St;.te, 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 ■Slates; yet we hear no complaints liere of viola- tions of the Constitution in this respect. We ask 'the Government to interpose to secure us this con- stitutional right. We want the passes in our mountains ojiened, we want deliverance and pro- tection for a downtrodden and oppressed people who are stru^-gling for their independence wiih- tmt arms. If we had had ten thousand stajid of arms and ammunition when the contest com- menced, we should have asked no further assist- ance. We have not got them. We arc a rural people; we have villagesand small towns — no large cities. Our [lupulation is homogenous, industri- ous, frugal, brave, independent; but now harmless •and powerless, and oppressed by usurpers. You may be too late in comingto our relief; or you may not corneal all, though I do not doubt that you will ■come; they may trample us under foot; they may •convert our plainsintograveyards, and the caves of ourmountau)sinlosepulcliers;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; aiid if we are overpowered, and liberty shall be driven ■from the land, we intend before she departs, to take the flag of lur country, with a stalwart arm, a patriotic heart, and an honest tread, and place it upon the summit of the loftiest and most majestic inountnin. We intend to plant it llirre, and l«-nre it, to indicate to the inquirer who may come in after limes, the spot where the Goddekii of Lihcriy lingered and wej.t for the hi«l lime, before iiho took her (light from u people once prospcrouii, free, anil happy. We asic the Government to ronic to our nid. We love the Connitntion iisniade by our fiithers We have confidence in the integijiyand rnpnriiy of the people lo govern thiniHelvi s. We have lived entertaining these oninion.s; we iniend to die entertaining them. The battle lia.scomnienced. The President lias j)laced it u[ion the true ground. It is an issue on tiie one hand for the poojde's Government, and its ovirthrow on the other. We have commenced the battle of Ireedom. It in free- dom's cause. We are resisting usurpation and oppression. We will triumph; we must triumph. Right is with us. A great and fundamental prin- ciple of right, that lies at llie foundation of all things, is with us. We may meet with impedi- ments, and may meet with disasters, and here and there a defeat; but uliimatcly freedom's cause must triumf)h, for — " riee • ■ ■^^^X . V-' r^ ' * 0* 4 .•^"^ c » " » * '^^ %<» * M -■'i cv/^- *-?^m^S^: -v^.