o> 
 
 GEORGIA.. 
 
 LIFE, SPEECHES 
 AND WRITINGS 
 
CHAS EDGEWORTH JONES 
 AUGUSTA 
 
 GA 
 
 I 
 v^ 
 

 
v% 
 
 > > > 1 
 
 J 
 
 * 
 
 v 
 
 * " 
 
 " 
 
 J 
 
 > / 
 
 93 
 t 
 
Y 
 
Senator Benjamin H. Hill 
 
 OF GEORGIA 
 
 His Life, Speeches and Writings 
 
 WRITTEN AND COMPILED BY His SON 
 
 BENJAMIN H. HILL, Jr. 
 
 Also Memorial Addresses of Eminent Citizens of Georgia, Senators and 
 
 Representatives in the Congress of the United States. Tributes 
 
 of the Press, Nortfi.and South, and Exercises attending the 
 
 tin veil ing of the Statue to His Memory Erected in the 
 
 City of Atlanta by His Grateful Countrymen. 
 
 ILLUSTRATED 
 
 T. H. P. BLOODWORTH 
 
 32 and 33 Fitten Building, - - Atlanta, Ga. 
 
 189? 
 
I f 
 
 
 . 
 . 
 
 c* 
 
 ^ 
 J e 
 
 v 
 
 
 : .*; : : 
 
 * e 
 
 
 
 
 f I < 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 < > 
 t , 
 
 4 
 1 
 
 >: c : r " tc : 
 
 , * i * . 
 
 - 
 . 
 
 J \- 
 
 
 
 
 C 
 
 . . 
 
 <> 
 
 
 
 i t . - 
 
 
 
 Copyrighted by 
 
 BENJAMIN H. HILL, JR. 
 1891 
 
TO 
 
 flatter, 
 
 THIS BOOK IS TENDERLY AND LOVINGLY DEDICATED. 
 
 MY FATHER CALLED HER 
 " THE MAINSPRING OF HIS LIFE S SUCCESS, AND HIS COMFORT IX EVERY SORROW. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 IT has been with me a deeply cherished purpose to collect and publish in 
 permanent form the speeches and writings of my father, witli a sketch of 
 his life and career as a private citizen, lawyer, and statesman. This purpose 
 has been inspired and strengthened by the conviction that these speeches 
 and writings contain much that was valuable to his countrymen, and this life 
 
 / 
 
 was filled with suggestions of encouragement to pure and patriotic endeavor. 
 The history of Georgia is rich in names of great orators and many are the 
 traditions of eloquent orations, but few of these orations have been preserved. 
 The fame of William H. Crawford is proudly treasured by our people, and 
 Berrien is said to have possessed wonderful power as debater and speaker, 
 but no speech of either has been preserved. Many now living bear enthusi 
 astic testimony to the marvelous gifts of Howell and T. R. R. Cobb, but 
 their great speeches are lost to this generation. And so with many others 
 who illustrated the State in the fields of oratory and statesmanship. I 
 think it is to be deeply regretted that more attention has not been given to 
 the collection and preservation of the great thoughts of these rarely gifted 
 men, and I sincerely hope that I have done some service in collecting the 
 speeches of one of Georgia s orators and placing them within easy access. 
 I regret exceedingly that the pressing duties of official station have delayed 
 so long the completion of my work, yet I entertain the hope that I am not 
 too late for the accomplishment of the good intended. My father s public 
 life embraced the most momentous periods in the history of the country. 
 
 His career as a public man was an exceedingly stormy one. Before the 
 war he was the dauntless leader of patriotic minorities, and after the war he 
 was the aggressive leader of an oppressed and outraged people. His " Notes 
 on the Situation " and his speeches made during the Reconstruction era con 
 tain severe and bitter invective. Read in the softening light of time, they 
 seem harsh, but when uttered, the arraignment of men who were the 
 leaders of radical oppression, was not considered unwarranted by the pro 
 vocation. Senator Brown, by reason of his course at this period, came 
 in for a full share of this terrible invective. I think it proper to say 
 that he and my father became warmly attached friends before the latter s 
 death, and my father s opinion of the character of his former antagonist was 
 greatly changed by a more intimate association, but this modification of 
 opinion did not extend to an approval of political conduct but was confined 
 to an estimate of personal character and motives. The sketch of Senator 
 Hill is necessarily of the most general description. A biography, giving 
 the interesting details of his public career, would of itself require a large 
 volume, and for the want of space I have limited this memoir to the more 
 prominent incidents of his life. In estimating the value of Senator Hill s 
 work, I have, for obvious reasons, given the opinions of contemporaries, 
 rather than my own deductions. His convictions on all political questions 
 
iv PREFACE. 
 
 were so positive and his courage of expression so pronounced, that cotempo- 
 raneous criticism was prompt and abundant. 
 
 If in the selection I have included only those that were commendatory, it 
 is because these only have stood the test of time and truth ; and if in 
 admiration of some act of wisdom or patriotism I have occasionally spoken 
 words of praise, I hope it will be pardoned the son, and if unsupported 
 by the facts will be attributed to filial affection and not discriminating 
 judgment. In discussing some of the great questions of the past, I have 
 occasionally given my own views, for which I am solely responsible. But 
 after all, neither the opinions of contemporaries, nor the pen of a biog 
 rapher, although guided by filial devotion, can give so true and luminous 
 conception of the man and the statesman as his own utterances. I have 
 had great difficulty in collecting the speeches, and express in this place my 
 obligation to T. H. Whitaker, of Troup County, and John L. Culver, of 
 Hancock County, for valuable assistance in this direction. My father had 
 one remarkable characteristic. He never preserved any of his speeches nor 
 any criticism on his political course. His sole motive power was to serve 
 his people. In his public work he lost sight of self. He was not a scrap- 
 book statesman. The accusation of enemies he did not care to remember. 
 The kind words of friends he treasured in his heart. His fame he left en 
 tirely to the future. Every speech of importance which was published will 
 be found in this book. Few were revised or written by the author, and they 
 appear just as they were reported at the time they were delivered. Accom 
 panying each speech there is given a brief narrative of the occasion of its 
 delivery and the effect produced at the time. The " Notes on the Situation " 
 are given in full. They were written to meet a crisis in the South. The 
 liberties and honor of the people were in peril. Constitutional Government 
 was endangered. , The crisis was met, the danger averted, but I believe the 
 "Notes" will be found of permanent value. They will ever remain as 
 models of invective against proposed wrong and of clear and powerful Con 
 stitutional argument. With the earnest hope that the life of the father has 
 not lost anything of its beauty and value by the presentation of the son, 
 and trusting that the people of the South, in reading the works of the one, 
 will be indulgent to the other, I present this volume to the public. 
 
 BENJ. H. HILL, JK. 
 ATLANTA, GA., January 2, 1891. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 PART FIRST. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Biographical Memoir, Berg. H. Hill, Jr., iii 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Ancestry of Benjamin H. Hill Of Irish- Welsh Stock Characteristics of his ather 
 His Mother Birth in Jasper County, Georgia Brothers and Sisters His 
 Youth At Sixteen Prepared for College How He Appeared on Entering 
 College His Career in College Carried off the Honors of his Class Studied 
 Law under William Dougherty Admitted to the Bar in 1844 Marriage to Miss 
 Caroline E. Holt, of Athens, Ga. Settled in La Grange, Ga. His Early Success 
 at the Bar His Methods of Study His Interest in the Cause of Temperance, - 11 
 
 CHAPTER n. 
 
 Entrance into Politics Elected to the Lower House of the General Assembly in 
 1851 Position on Political Questions A Member of the Whig Party Declines 
 a Re-election to the Legislature Declines the Nomination for Congress in 
 1853 Nominated for Congress by the American Party in 1855 His Opponent, 
 Hiram Warner His Canvass How He Won the Soubriquet of " Our Ben " 
 Reduced the Democratic Majority from 2000 to 24 Nominated as a Presiden 
 tial Elector from the State at Large for Fillmore in 1856 Canvass of the State 
 Discussion with Alexander H. Stephens at Lexington, Ga. Stephens Challenges 
 him to Mortal Combat He Declines the Challenge Correspondence Between 
 the Two The People Sustain him in his Declination Nominated for Governor 
 by the American Party in 1857 Joseph E. Brown his Opponent Ben Hill and 
 Joe Brown Comparison of their Political Careers and Statesmanship Defeated 
 for Governor Elected to the State Senate in 1859 The Choice Case Nomi 
 nated in 1860 for Presidential Elector for the State at Large on the Bell and 
 Everett Ticket Selected as a Delegate to the Secession Convention Letter Ac 
 cepting the Nomination Secession Convention Mr. Hill s Earnest Fight for the 
 Union His Feeling of Sadness over Secession, - 17 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Selected as a Delegate to the Provisional Congress of the Confederate States Elected 
 Confederate States Senator His Record as Confederate States Senator Personal 
 Difficulty in the Senate with William L. Yancey True Account of this Un 
 fortunate Affair Speech in 1862 in Milledgeville Efforts to Rally the People to 
 Continue the War Great Speech in La Grange in 1865 Confederate Leaders 
 Gather at Mr. Hill s House in La Grange Mr. Hill s Arrest and Imprisonment 
 Letter to President Johnson His Release from Prison His Letter on Election 
 of United States Senator in 1866. - 43 
 
vi CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 Mr. Hill Resumes the Practice of Law His Success The Metcalf Case He Pre 
 vents the Illegal Seizure of Cotton of the People Mr. Hill s Fight against the 
 Reconstruction Measures of Congress His Davis Hall Speech, July 16, 1866 
 General Pope Advises his Banishment from the State His Notes o*n the Situa 
 tion Joel Chandler Harris on this Part of his Work Reorganized the Demo 
 cratic Party in Macon in 1867 Bush Arbor Speech in Atlanta, July 4, 1868 
 Toombs, Cobb, and Hill Description of their Speeches and Effect Produced 
 Henry Grady s Graphic Account of the Occasion Robert Toombs s; Tribute 
 Some Reflections on the Character of the Reconstruction Measures, - 50 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 Address to the People, December 8, 1870 The Effect of this Address State Road 
 Lease Delano* Banquet Speech at the Banquet These Three Things Cost Hill 
 his Popularity in the State He was Misunderstood and Greatly Abused Ex 
 plains fully his Reasons for Attending said Banquet to Mr. Grady The Greeley 
 Movement Advocates it Defeated for United States Senate in 1873 by General 
 John B. Gordon Cause of his Defeat Gainesville Convention of 1875 Fails 
 to Make a Nomination for Congress Mr. Hill Goes before the People Makes a 
 Canvass of the District Elected by a Very Large Majority General Rejoicing 
 over his Election Throughout the South Meeting of the Citizens of Atlanta to 
 Celebrate his Election His Speech on the Occasion Analysis of Mr. Hill s 
 Political Character, by F. H. Alfriend, - - 55 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 Takes his Seat as a Member of the.Forty-fourth Congress, December, 1875 Great 
 Debate with James G. Blaine, on the 10th of January, 1876, on the Subject of 
 Amnesty Powerful Vindication of the South The Scene in the House during 
 this great Discussion The Effect of his Speech Received with Great Enthusi 
 asm at the South Editorial of Henry W. Grady on the Speech Mr. Hill is 
 Unanimously Re-elected to the Forty-fifth Congress The Electoral Commis 
 sion Mr. Hill Supports it His Reasons for so Doing Elected United States 
 Senator on Januarys, 1877 Great Enthusiasm of the People over his Triumph 
 His Career in the United States Senate He again Meets in Discussion his old An 
 tagonist, Mr. Blaine The Similarity between the Two Men Mr. Hill s Debate 
 with the Judiciary Committee of the Senate on the Pacific Funding Bill Great 
 Speech on the 10th of May, 1879 Comments of a Northern Journalist The 
 Spofford-Kellogg Senatorial Contest Argument against Kellogg Discussion 
 with Senators Butler and Hampton of South Carolina The Attack on William 
 Mahone His Speecli on this Occasion Scenes in the Senate during its Delivery 
 His Letter in Reply to an Attack Made on him by Dr. William H. Felton, - 68 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 General Statement of Mr. Hill s Political Career His Career as a Lawyer Resolu 
 tions of the Supreme Court of Georgia He made a Great Deal of Money Practic 
 ing Law His Experiment in Planting in Southwest Georgia Great Financial 
 Loss His Princely Manner of Living His Generosit3 T His Character as Hus 
 band and Father His Private Life Pure Domestic Lives of Georgia s Great 
 Men Mr. Hill s Letter to his Wife from Richmond, Va. Mr. Grady s Personal 
 Reminiscence of Mr. Hill s Home Life His Letter to his Son Advice about 
 Political Office, - - 82 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 His Sickness Touching Account by Mr. Grady Surgical Operations Their 
 Effect Apparently Restored to Health Third and Last Operation A Great 
 Mistake His Surgeon Abandons Hope Trip to Eureka Springs Incidents Con 
 nected with his Stay at Eureka Springs Not Benefited Returns Home Re 
 ception in Atlanta Editorial by Mr. Grady Incidents Connected with his 
 Sickness in Atlanta Wonderful Patience and Heroism Touching Evidences of 
 Sympathy from the People Letter from Jefferson Davis Letter from Paul H. 
 Hayne Universal Interest in his Condition Closing Scenes His Last Words 
 His Death, August 16, 1882, - 94 
 
CONTENTS. vii 
 
 P.4.QE 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 Profound and Universal Grief throughout the Country Memorial Meetings Action 
 of the Governor Of the Mayor of the City of Atlanta His Funeral Scenes and 
 Incidents in the City the Day of his Burial Movement to erect a Monument to 
 his Memory Its Success Statue erected on Peachtree Street in the City of At 
 lanta Inscriptions on the Same Conclusion of the Memoir, - - - 108 
 
 PART SECOND. 
 
 MEMORIAL ADDRESSES : 
 
 Funeral Sermon by Rev. C. A. Evans, D.D., - - - . - - 110 
 Memorial by Dr. E. W. Speer, - -120 
 
 MEETING OF THE CITIZENS OF ATLANTA : 
 
 Address of Mayor J. W. English, - - - 125 
 
 Address of Senator Joseph E. Brown, - - 126 
 
 Resolutions, . - - 127 
 
 Address by Benjamin E. Crane, President of the Chamber of Commerce, - 127 
 
 Address by Hon. N. J. Hammond, - - 128 
 
 Address by Governor A. H. Colquitt, - - 130 
 
 Address by Chief Justice James Jackson, - - 131 
 
 MEMORIAL ADDRESSES DELIVERED IN THE SENATE AND HOUSE OF REPRESENTA 
 TIVES IN THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS : 
 
 Extract from Address of Senator Brown, - 134 
 
 Address of Senator Ingalls, 134 
 
 Address of Senator Vest, ... . 136 
 
 Address of Senator Morgan, - 138 
 
 Address of Senator Sherman, - 144 
 
 Address of Senator Voorhees, __..._.. 145 
 
 Address of Senator Edmunds, ...._. 149 
 
 Address of Senator Jones, - 150 
 
 Address of Representative Tucker, ....... 153 
 
 Address of Representative House, ........ 155 
 
 Address of Representative Wellborn, - 159 
 
 Address of Representative Kasson, 164 
 
 Address of Representative Hooker, 165 
 
 Address of Representative Cox, .......... 168 
 
 TRIBUTES OF THE PRESS : 
 
 From the Georgia Press, - ........ 175 
 
 From the Southern Press outside the State, - 190 
 
 From the Northern Press, 195 
 
 POEMS : 
 
 On The Portals, - . John W. Campitt, - - - 200 
 
 Fronting The Shadow, - Paul H. Hayne, 202 
 
 The River, . Mary E. Hill, - 202 
 
 Almost Home," . Charles W. Hubner, 204 
 
 Almost Home," - Montgomery M. Folsom, - 205 
 
 The Fallen Shaft, - Wallace Putnam Reed, - - 206 
 
 Fallen Risen, - - Paul Hamilton Hayne, - 206 
 
 Senator Hill of Georgia, H., - 208 
 
 The Unveiling of the Ben Hill Monument, H. T. W., 208 
 
 Immortal, - - Charles W. Hubner, - 209 
 
 EXERCISES ON UNVEILING THE STATUE OF SENATOR HILL IN ATLANTA, GA., ON 
 MAY 1, 1886: 
 
 Extract from Atlanta Constitution, May 2, 1886, ...... 210 
 
 Address by Henry W. Grady, - 210 
 
 Prayer by General Evans - - 211 
 
 Address by R. D. Spalding, 212 
 
 Address by Governor H. D. McDaniel, - 213 
 
 Address by J. C. C. Black, 215 
 
 Address by Jefferson Davis, 227 
 
viii CONTENTS. 
 
 PART THIRD. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 SPEECHES OF SENATOR B. H. HILL. 
 
 Speech Delivered at Macon, Ga., June 30, 1860 in favor of Bell and Everett, 229 
 Speech Delivered at Milledgeville, Ga., November 15, 1860, in Opposition to 
 
 Secession, - - 237 
 
 Speech Delivered before the Georgia Legislature, December 11, 1862, in Sup 
 port of the Confederate Administration, 251 
 Speech Delivered in La Grange, Ga., March 11, 1865, Urging the Continuance of 
 
 the Struggle for Independence, 273 
 
 Speech Delivered in Atlanta, Ga., July 16, 1867, against the Military Bills of 
 
 Congress, known as the Davis Hall Speech, 
 
 Speech Delivered at Atlanta, Ga. , July 23, 1868, known as the Bush Arbor Speech, 308 
 Speech Delivered in New York City, October 6, 1868, before the Young Men s 
 
 Democratic League, - 
 
 Speech Delivered at Athens, Ga., July 31, 1871, before the Alumni Society, - 
 Speech Delivered in Atlanta, Ga. , in June, 1872, in defense of Greeley Movement, 350 
 Speech Delivered in United States Circuit Court in Atlanta, Ga., March 14, 1873, 
 
 on Motion to Quash Panel of Jurors, - - 367 
 
 Speech Delivered in Atlanta, Ga., before the General Assembly, January 16, 
 
 1873, on the Election of United States Senator, 378 
 
 Address before the Southern Historical Society in Atlanta, Ga. , February 18, 1 874, 399 
 Speech Delivered in Atlanta, Ga., January 20, 1875, on the Situation in 
 
 Louisiana, - ... 415 
 
 Speech on his Election to Congress, Delivered in Atlanta, Ga., May 12, 1875, 432 
 Speech Delivered in the House of Representatives, January 11, 1876, on the 
 
 Amnesty Bill, in reply to Blaine, 442 
 
 Speech on the Reception of a Flag from Citizens of Ohio, Delivered in Atlanta, 
 
 Ga., September, 1876, - 461 
 
 Speech before the Legislature of Georgia, January 20, 1877, on the Election of 
 
 United States Senator, 473 
 
 Speech Delivered in the Senate of the United States on the Pacific Railroad 
 
 Funding Bill, March 27, 1878, - 494 
 
 Speech in the United States Senate on the Coinage of Silver Dollars, Febru 
 ary 8, 1878, 530 
 Speech in the Senate of the United States on the Subject of War Claims, Janu 
 ary 27, 1879, - - 551 
 " The Union under the Constitution knows no Section, but does Know all the 
 
 States." Speech Delivered in the Senate, June 11, 1879, 561 
 
 " The Untruthful Charge of a Revolutionary Purpose " on the Democratic 
 
 Party. Speech in United States Senate, March 24, 1879, - - 585 
 
 " The Union and its Enemies," Speech Delivered in the Senate, May 10, 1879, 594 
 Speech Delivered in the United States Senate, May 11 and 12, 1880, against 
 
 William Pitt Kellogg, 635 
 
 Speech in Reply to Butler and Hampton, in the Senate of the United States, 
 
 June 11, 1880, - 684 
 
 Speech in the United States Senate, March 14, 1881, known as the " Mahone 
 
 Speech," 712 
 
 WRITINGS. 
 
 Letters to Alexander H. Stephens in Reference to the Lexington Discussion, 1856, 20 
 
 Letter Declining Mr. Stephens s Challenge to Fight, 1856, 25 
 Letter Accepting his Election as a Delegate to the Secession Convention, 1860, 38 
 
 Letter to his Wife, February 7, 1864, 87 
 
 Letter to his Wife, February 14, 1864, 90 
 
 Letter to President Johrtson written from Fort Lafayette, 1865, - 47 
 
 Letter in Reference to the Election of United States Senator, 1866, - 48 
 
 Notes on the Situation, 1867-1868, - 730 
 
 Address to the People of Georgia, December 8, 1870, 55 
 
 Explanation of his Alumni Address, 332 
 Letter to his Son, written in 1881, 
 
 Letter to his Daughter-in-law, 1881, 104 
 
 Letter to R. C. Humber reviewing the Hayes Administration, 1877, - - 812 
 
 Article in Reply to Dr. Win. H. Felton, 1882, - - 817 
 
ILLUSTRATIONS. 
 
 FACING PAGE 
 
 Portrait of Senator Hill, {Frontispiece} 
 
 Birthplace of Senator Hill, 12 
 
 Academy where Senator Hill first went to school, 34 
 
 Senator Hill s Residence in La Grange, Ga., 46 
 
 Portrait of Senator Hill s Wife, 90 
 
 Residence of Senator Hill in Atlanta, where he died, 108 
 
 Senator Hill s Statue, - .... -. 210 
 
PART FIRST.;. 
 
 * > > > 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 3 I 
 
 > C- 
 
 Ancestry of Benjamin H. Hill Of Irish- Welsh Stock Characteristics of his Father 
 His Mother Birth in Jasper County, Georgia Brothers and Sisters His Youth 
 At Sixteen Prepared for College How He Appeared on Entering College His 
 Career in College Carried off the Honors of his Class Studied Law under William 
 Dougherty Admitted to the Bar in 1844 Marriage to Miss Caroline E. Holt, of 
 Athens, Ga. Settled in La Grange, Ga. Early Success at the Bar His Methods 
 of Study His Interest in the Cause of Temperance. 
 
 IT is a family tradition that the paternal ancestors of Benjamin Harvey 
 Hill came from Ireland, and his maternal ancestors from Wales the 
 Welsh name being Ingraham. The Hill branch settled in North Caro 
 lina. The Ingraham stock was composed of three brothers who built their 
 own boat in Wales and in it crossed the Atlantic, settling in Virginia. In 
 Colonial days there was a great orator in North Carolina named Benjamin 
 Hill ; whether he was an ancestor of the subject of this sketch is not known. 
 Indeed, my father s family kept no genealogical tree nor family record, and 
 the tradition given above rests upon no satisfactory basis. The writer is 
 not one of those Americans who boasts of having no ancestors. While every 
 man is the architect of his own name and fortune, yet a spotless record from 
 generation to generation, is a priceless heritage. There is both beauty and 
 inspiration in heirlooms and ancestral portraits. A tree is known by its 
 fruit, and a crystal stream must flow from a crystal source ; and if great 
 qualities of head and heart indicate pure and noble lineage, the forefathers 
 and foremothers of Benjamin Harvey Hill were stainless men and gentle 
 women. In the line of authentic history, his life begins in the pure and 
 simple home of an honest farmer. In the beginning of the century his 
 iather, whose name was John Hill, came from North Carolina and settled in 
 Jasper County, Georgia. He was a farmer of very moderate means and of 
 limited education, but he was a man of strong individuality, extensive read 
 ing, and deep reflection. He believed in education, religion, and temperance, 
 and he gathered around his home, a school-house, a church, and a temperance 
 society. In the language of his son : " He was the trustee of the school, 
 steward and class leader in the church, and the president of the temperance 
 society." He was an enterprising citizen and the leader of every movement 
 having for its purpose public progress and improvement. He was beloved 
 by his neighbors, and the little town, that owed in great part its existence to 
 his energy, was named for him, and to this day is called Hillsboro. These 
 characteristics of the father gave color and substance to his entire family, and 
 through all the subsequent years of political strife, and the cares and tempta 
 tions of official station, Benjamin H. Hill remained true to the lessons of his 
 boyhood home. 
 
 These domestic flowers, planted in his child s heart, bloomed all through 
 the years of a stormy career, and blossomed into fragrance and comfort 
 
 11 
 
12 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 when great trouble and suffering came. When quite a young man, John 
 Hill married Miss Sarah Parham. She was a woman with a noble, tender 
 and loving heart, deeply religious and charitable, and a most excellent wife 
 and mother. To her loving and careful training can be truthfully attributed 
 all that was best in the, moral and religious character of her^son. In this 
 home, . vviiere, witji ; tiie Simplicity of perfect faith, God was honored and 
 love rei*gned;the biography of Benjamin Harvey Hill begins. He was born 
 in .Tasppi" iCounty, Georgia* September 14, 1823. He was the fifth of six 
 sons- and the* "seven h -of- nine children. From an early age he worked with 
 his brothers and a few slaves on his father s farm. In this respect no differ 
 ence was made between the children and the slaves ; they were all made to 
 work early and late. The wife and daughters of the family did the entire 
 household work, spun, wove, cut, and made all the clothing for husband, 
 children, and slaves. When his son Ben was ten years old his father moved 
 to Troup County and settled in a little place called Long Cane. The boys 
 walked the entire distance, assisting in driving the cattle, and the father, 
 mother, and sisters rode in wagons containing the household furniture and 
 the personal property of the family. The farm in Troup was in the woods, 
 and the boys at once set to work to clear the land, and afterward assisted in 
 cultivating the soil. When the crops were made, or rather " laid by," the 
 children all went to school and studied hard through the winter. So, with 
 alternate work and study, life ran smoothly along, and at sixteen years of 
 age Ben was strong and robust physically, and mentally eager and ambi 
 tious. So earnest was his desire for an education, and so rapidly did he 
 master his lessons, that his father was induced to select him from among 
 his children for higher educational advantages than he was able to give all. 
 So at sixteen he was taken from the farm and placed at school for the pur 
 pose of preparing to enter college. It is proper to say in this place that one 
 other son, William Pinckney, also received from his father the advantages 
 of a collegiate education. But he did not graduate, leaving college before 
 his course was completed and going to Texas to fight Indians and Mexicans. , 
 While at college, this brother was considered a young man of great genius. 
 It is related that he and the late Bishop George F. Pearce, who were class 
 mates, began preaching together, and that the sermons delivered by young 
 Pinckney Hill were considered superior to those of George F. Pearce. When 
 we consider that Bishop Pearce was the most eloquent preacher ever produced 
 in the South, we can but regret that young Hill decided to change his voca 
 tion in life. After the first enthusiasm of youth had been expended in many 
 contests with the Indians and Mexicans, William Pinckney Hill settled 
 in Texas, selecting the law as his profession. He rose to great eminence as 
 a lawyer and was easily the leader of the Texas bar. I have heard my 
 father state that if the Southern Confederacy had established a supreme 
 court, that Mr. Davis would have selected his brother as the first chief 
 justice. Many political honors were offered to him but he declined them 
 all, preferring to devote himself to his profession. My father thought him 
 the most gifted member of the family, and was very proud of him. In 
 1869, the year the writer graduated from the University of Georgia, this 
 uncle came to Athens on a visit to his brother. He impressed me as a man 
 of vast information, great culture, and was a most brilliant and fascinating 
 conversationalist. He was not, however, the equal of his younger brother in 
 originality, depth and strength of thought. The late Jeremiah Black, one 
 of the greatest of American lawyers, said that William Pinckney Hill was 
 
i 
 *.*. 
 
 . 
 
 r 1 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 13 
 
 the most interesting speaker he had ever heard in the Supreme Court of the 
 United States. The other brothers were all farmers and men of character 
 and local influence. Only one survives, Allen, now living in Arkansas, who 
 is the youngest of the brothers. His three sisters married Georgia farmers 
 and all diecT before their brother. Indeed, the family was not a long-lived 
 family, only two reached the age of sixty. 
 
 When sixteen years old Ben was taken -by Dr. John F. Moreland, an 
 intimate friend of the family, to Meri wether County, and lived in his 
 home, where he had the privilege of being taught by Rev. Mr. Corbin, a 
 graduate of Yale College. His progress under this tutor. was very rapid. 
 His preceptor declared that his pupil could easily master six lessons to an 
 ordinary boy s one, and he confidently predicted that " Harvey," as he was 
 then called, would some day be president of the United States. But for the 
 unhappy movement of secession and the consequent destruction of Southern 
 institutions and the disqualification of all Southern men for generations for 
 this high office, there are many who believe this prediction would have been 
 verified. He did reach the highest position possible for a Southern man 
 in his day and generation. And he reached this high eminence purely by 
 his own genius, for he possessed none of the tricks and arts of a demagogue 
 to win the favor of the fickle populace. At seventeen he was ready for 
 college. But in the mean time his father had become somewhat discouraged 
 with the result of higher education, as illustrated in the case of his son 
 William Pinckney, and he felt lyiwilling to risk another experiment in this 
 direction. At this most important juncture his mother, and an old great- 
 aunt, who lived near the homestead, came to the rescue. To use the lan 
 guage of my father, in giving an account of this period of his life to a friend, 
 " A family consultation was held. My mother insisted on my going. She 
 had always had what was called her patch, which was near the house, and 
 was cultivated bv her house servants when not needed at house work. This 
 
 ff 
 
 patch had always been my mother s pin money, amounting from $50 to 
 $100. My mother said she would contribute this to my college expenses 
 and would make my clothes at home besides. An old aunt of my mother s, 
 who lived in a small house in my father s yard and had some means small 
 and no children, agreed to contribute as much more. My father agreed 
 to add the balance, and I promised that all my college expenses of every 
 kind should not exceed $300 per annum. I promised my mother I would 
 take the first honor in my class. I redeemed this promise." And thus 
 these two noble women opened the door of opportunity to genius. They 
 were repaid with love, honor, and fame. The tutor endeavored to persuade 
 his promising student to go to Yale, but with that love for his own State 
 and her institutions, which was even then a controlling influence, he pre 
 ferred to go to the University of Georgia, at Athens. The writer cannot 
 understand nor appreciate that policy which induces parents to send chil 
 dren to colleges and universities outside the limits of their own State, 
 only patriotism, but a regard for the future interest of the child should 
 always decide the balance in favor of home institutions. Associations 
 formed in college are the strongest and most lasting in this life, 
 begins a comradeship that is not only a source of happiness, but of great 
 usefulness throughout life. And in the fierce struggle with the world the 
 companions of college days are the loyal friends upon whom one can lean 
 with confidence. This truth was illustrated during the stormy career of 
 Benjamin H. Hill, as it has been illustrated in the lives of many others. 
 
14 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 In 1841, Benjamin H. Hill entered the university, joining the sophomore 
 class. Dudism or even style in those days were unknown accomplishments 
 of the students at Athens. The boys drove into the classic city in wagons 
 containing their furniture, dressed in homespun and home-made jeans. The 
 art of the tailor was little known among the mothers and sisters, who cut 
 and made with loving hands suits for sons and brothers. And it mattered 
 little how it fit, so that the material*was substantial and the suit comforta 
 ble. Those who saw Ben Hill when he first came to Athens declare that he 
 was the greenest looking student of that year. His dress consisted of home 
 made gray jeans, an unusually long coat, and scanty trousers barely touch 
 ing the tops of his home-made shoes. In personal appearance he was un 
 usually tall and slender, with a very pale and thoughtful face, and rather 
 shy and awkward. In the words of one of the brightest of his classma tes: 
 "He was a towheaded boy that had grown up without filling into pro 
 portion. He had none of the light and blithesome habit usual to boys, but 
 was thoughtful and quiet. Even then he carried his head bent to one side, 
 and when walking appeared to be completely absorbed in thought." 
 
 His college career was brilliant and successful. Popular with his fel 
 low-students, he was also the favorite of the faculty and especially loved 
 by the Chancellor, Dr. Church. He devoted his hours to redeeming the 
 promise made to his mother, and was remarkable for his earnest, studious 
 habits. He carried witli him to college the pure lessons of his country 
 home, and was ever faithful to the family altar, where his father had prayed 
 for him and his mother had blessed him with her kiss. Dr. G. A. Orr, a 
 distinguished man and an earnest Christian, one of his classmates, in speak 
 ing of this part of his life, said : " He was a pure and exalted boy through 
 my college acquaintance with him. There was not the slightest shadow of 
 immorality in his character. He was loyal, quiet, studious. I knew that 
 he would be a great man. Through all his life and through all criticism, I 
 have thought of him as the pure, earnest boy I knew at Athens, and I have 
 loved him and believed in him always." At the very beginning he took the 
 head of his class and the lead in his debating society, and easily maintained 
 both positions until he graduated with the highest honors of class and 
 society. In those days the debates in the society were not simply superficial 
 declamations, but most laborious and exhaustive discussions. The subjects 
 for debate were thoroughly studied, and on Saturday the entire day was 
 spent in argument. Close attention to the debates, as then conducted, 
 taught logical thought and accuracy of speech. It was in the contests of 
 the Demosthenian Society that Mr. Hill laid broad and deep the foundations 
 of his matchless eloquence and resistless logic. He made three speeches 
 during his college career which were much talked of at the time of their de 
 livery. His speech at commencement, when a member of the junior class, on 
 " Life, Love, and Madness of Torquato Tasso," was in perfect harmony with 
 the poetical subject, yet luminous with eloquence. His speech as anniver 
 sary orator of the society was said to have been a masterly address, full of 
 wisdom and practical suggestions. The crowning effort of his college career 
 was his valedictory. Col. P. W. Alexander, a classmate and a scholar of 
 splendid attainments, said of this speech: "It was a superb piece of 
 eloquence from beginning to end, and held the audience entranced: his per 
 oration was a tribute to Dr. Church, the thrilling tones of which ring in my 
 ears yet. It was magnificent! That speech stamped the young orator as 
 a man of wonderful power, and had newspapers then given the same atten- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 15 
 
 
 tion to details as they now do it would at once have made him famous 
 
 throughout the State." This opinion was attested as correct by the enthu 
 siastic applause of the two most eminent Southern orators of that day, who 
 sat on the stage Berrien, of Georgia, and Preston, of South Carolina. 
 When the young orator had finished, both distinguished senators rose from 
 their seats, and, warmly grasping his hand, spoke to him words of highest 
 encomium. 
 
 In the course of years the young orator eclipsed the fame of the great 
 Berrien in the Senate of the United States, and became involved in a bitter 
 controversy with the successors of Preston, in an effort to expel from the 
 Senate an infamous carpet-bag intruder from the State of Louisiana. Im 
 mediately on graduating, Mr. Hill entered the office of William Dougherty, 
 one of the ablest lawyers that ever adorned the bar of any country. The 
 great lawyer took a special interest in his student, and after one year s study 
 he was admitted to the bar in Heard County, Georgia. After his admission 
 to the bar he returned to Athens, where he married Miss Caroline E. Holt, 
 whom he had wooed and won while at college. This marriage connected 
 him with one of the oldest and best known families in the State, and added 
 some little to his financial condition. 
 
 After his marriage, Mr. Hill settled in La Grange, Ga., and commenced 
 the practice of law. From the first he had unbounded confidence in himself. 
 Without a dollar arid with a young wife who had been surrounded with 
 every luxury, he purchased, exclusively on credit, ahandsome and expensive 
 home. And it is proof of the faith of the people of Troup County in him 
 that he was enabled to do so. As soon as he opened his office, clients came 
 to him. The eager, yearning, watchful, and sometimes hopeless waiting for 
 clients, the lot of most young lawyers, was not his. His success was im 
 mediate and phenomenal. In two years he had paid for the home he had 
 bought on credit, and was rapidly forging ahead to independence and fame. 
 He was in his early professional life* a hard student. He mastered the prin 
 ciples of the law. Blackstone s Commentaries, Chitty on Pleading, Story s 
 Equity Jurisprudence, Starkie s Evidence, and elementary books of similar 
 character were completely mastered. He not only understood the funda 
 mental principles laid down* by these great writers, but he understood the 
 reason of the principles. He could have written a book equal to Blackstone 
 or Chitty, because he understood as well as they did the subjects they 
 treated. He did not search the reports to find precedents. He knew what 
 had been decided, or would be decided, because he fully understood what 
 was the law. His comprehension and apprehension of legal principles even 
 at this early day marked him as an authority. In addition to his legal 
 studies, he was at this time a student of the classics and of English history. 
 He was also very fond .of Milton and Shakespeare. But what was known 
 as light literature he never read. He seemed to construe the aphorism of 
 Bacon, " That reading maketh a full man," as applicable to quality and not 
 quantity. There is much truth in the warning, " Beware of the man with 
 one book " ; if it be a great book and the man who has thoroughly read 
 the Greek and Latin classics, English history, Shakespeare, and Milton, need 
 go no further in search of knowledge, unless in the field of science. In his 
 entire life Mr. Hill only read three novels. The first novel he ever read 
 was the " Lamp Lighter." He told the writer that he was induced to read 
 it by the following incident : While attending a country court, he went one 
 night at a late hour into the room of the presiding judge, and found him 
 
16 
 
 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 poring over a book with tears streaming down his face. Curious to know 
 what could so move the stern man of justice, he asked him what he was 
 reading, he replied the " Lamp Lighter," and that he was crying over the 
 tribulations of " poor little Gerty." He borrowed the book from the judge 
 and read it. He also read " Ten Thousand a Year," that wonderful novel 
 by Samuel Warren. Later in life, he was persuaded by his youngest son, 
 who is an ardent lover of Dickens, to read " Pickwick Papers," and I have 
 seen him laugh until the tears rolled down his cheeks over the inimitable 
 humor found in this incomparable book. But as a general rule, he regarded 
 it as a waste of time to read either novels or light literature. His nature 
 was too earnest and profound. His mind was far too great to be satisfied 
 with any lesser food than the mighty problems of life and government, and 
 the great thoughts of the profound and original. 
 
 In 1845 to 1851, he gave all of his time to the practice of his profession, 
 and in a few years he was on one side of every case in his circuit. As a 
 private citizen he was from the first very much beloved by the people of 
 La Grange and Troup counties. He carried into his own household the 
 teachings of his country home. He was a devoted father and husband, and 
 in every respect a most exemplary citizen. He was an earnest member of 
 the Methodist Church, a most efficient superintendent of the Sunday 
 School, and active in every movement looking to the elevation of his town 
 and people. At this time the temperance movement took an absorbing 
 hold on the people. An organization known as the " Sons of Temperance r 
 was pushing the cause in Troup County and throughout the State. Mr. 
 Hill was the leader of this movement in his section. In 1884, in speaking 
 of his work in this direction and its effect, Judge B. H. Bingham, who was 
 one of his associates, declared that " his speeches on temperance had a won 
 derful influence, which has been felt in the county ever since and which will 
 be felt for time to come. These orations were the finest I ever heard deliv 
 ered on any subject, and stamped him as the coming statesman." We can 
 well understand how the earnest nature of Mr. Hill was enlisted in such a 
 noble cause, and it is to be deeply regretted that the eloquent appeals he 
 made for the preservation of home, and the salvation of man, from this the 
 deadliest of all curses, have not been preserved! 
 
CHAPTER II. 
 
 Entrance into Politics Elected to the Lower House of the General Assembly in 1851 
 Position on Political Questions A Member of the Whig Party Declines a Re-elec 
 tion to the Legislature Declines the Nomination for Congress in 1853 Nominated 
 for Congress by the American Party in 1855 His Opponent, Hiram Warner His 
 Canvass How He Won the Sobriquet of "Our Ben" Reduced the Democratic 
 Majority from 2000 to 24 Nominated as the Presidential Elector from the State at 
 Large for Fillmore in 1856 Canvass of the State Discussion with Alexander H. 
 Stephens at Lexington, Ga. Stephens Challenges him to Mortal Combat He De 
 clines the Challenge Correspondence Between the Two The People Sustain him in 
 his Declination Nominated for Governor by the American Party in 1857 Joseph 
 E. Brown his Opponent Ben Hill and Joe Brown Comparison of their Political 
 Careers and Statesmenship Defeated for Governor Elected to the State Senate in 
 1859 The Choice Case Nominated in 1860 for Presidential Elector for the State at 
 Large on the Bell and Everett Ticket Selected as a Delegate to the Secession Con 
 vention Letter Accepting the Nomination Secession Convention Mr. Hill s Earn 
 est Fight for the Union His Feeling of Sadness over Secession. 
 
 WITH a love for the country which dominated him throughout life, in 
 1849 Mr. Hill purchased a farm three miles from the town of La 
 Grange, to which he moved his wife and two children. In this quiet and 
 delightful re-treat he devoted himself to study and farm work, was ideally 
 happy with his young wife and children, and untroubled by any ambitious 
 longings. But it could not be expected that a man so brilliant as a speaker, 
 so wise in counsel, would be permitted to pursue his private work. The 
 people of his county were watching him, and in 1851, without seeking or 
 desiring the office, he was elected to the lower house of the General Assem 
 bly. During the year 1850 the entire country was greatly aroused on 
 the subject of the compromise measures in reference to the extension of 
 slavery. The agitation on this subject, which eventually disrupted the 
 Union, was at its height. Mr. Hill entered the struggle in behalf of the 
 Union, and was elected to the General Assembly as a Union man, and 
 against continued slavery agitation. He saw with deep concern the bitter 
 and aggressive agitation of the slavery question and its rapid and dangerous 
 growth as a paramount and overshadowing issue in national politics. He 
 realized that the question was dividing the North and South, embittering 
 both sections and laying the foundation for war. He therefore entered 
 public life as a member of the grand old Whig party, which at all times 
 was for the Union, and he was an unrelenting enemy of the Democratic 
 party in its course on national questions. He hoped that the splendid 
 Union victory in 1851 had settled the question of slavery, and, notwithstand 
 ing a most brilliant record in the Legislature, he declined a re-election, 
 and foivthe same reason he declined the nomination for Congress in 1853. 
 In 1 85 4T; Congress repealed the Missouri compromise. This legislation Mr. 
 Hill regarded as an act of bad faith, a reopening of the slavery question, a 
 menace to the peace of the country and the institutions and liberties of the 
 South. "Take care^my fellow-citizens," was his prophetic warning, "that 
 in endeavoring to carry slavery where nature s laws prohibit its entrance, 
 
 17 
 O^. --<>.( 
 
18 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 and where your solemn faith is pledged it shall not go, you do not lose the 
 right to hold slaves at all." 
 
 Declining a nomination by the Know-Nothings, whose ritual, especially 
 the religious test, he condemned, he announced himself, in 1855, a candidate 
 for Congress upon the simple yet comprehensive platform of opposition to 
 the agitation of the slavery question and the maintenance of the Union. 
 He was splendidly equipped for the contest, he had earnestly studied from a 
 patriotic national standpoint the great questions of the hour, and was an ardent 
 lover of the Union and the Constitution. The maintenance of slavery he 
 regarded as secondarv to the maintenance of the Union, and he felt assured 
 
 ti 
 
 that the extremists, North and South, would, if successful, destroy both. 
 He was also in fine physical condition; his active and regular life in the 
 country had fully restored his health, which had been somewhat impaired 
 by hard study, and Ixis experience in the court house and in the Legislature 
 had fully overcome the awkwardness of youth, and at this time he was the 
 personification of grace in motion and manner, and was a noble type of 
 robust manhood. To oppose this ardent advocate of the Union, the Demo 
 crats nominated Hiram Warner. Judge Warner was a man of middle age, 
 a fine lawyer, and a logical and forcible speaker. He was, however, no match 
 on the stump for his brilliant and aggressive young antagonist, and after 
 two joint discussions the managers of the democratic party thought it pru 
 dent to withdraw their champion. In this contest Mr. Hill received the 
 sobriquet of " Our Ben," by which he was ever afterward affectionately 
 called by his political supporters. Hon. A. O. Bacon, a leading lawyer and 
 politician, gives the circumstance of the christening as follows : 
 
 A big American rally was held at* Newnan, Ga. There was a great 
 crowd assembled to hear Mr. Hill speak. One of the spectators drew a car 
 toon, which was mounted on white linen and hung from a pole. It was en 
 thusiastically received. It represented a big shanghai rooster, all tattered 
 and torn and overthrown, while a trimmed Georgia game cock fluttered 
 over him in triumph. The shanghai represented Judge Warner, while the 
 native game cock represented Mr. Hill. Underneath the picture were these 
 lines: 
 
 When shanghais meet our native bird, they are sure to get a licking, 
 Old Hiram Shanghai tried " Our Ben," and there he lies a-kicking. 
 
 The district had always given a Democratic majority of not less than 
 2000, and it was predicted that this majority would be greatly increased 
 during the election. But Mr. Hill s power as a speaker, his impassioned 
 eloquence, his inspiring presence, and his earnest and patriotic appeals, burn 
 ing with unselfish love for his country, made many converts, and he was 
 defeated by only twenty-four votes. It was conceded that the virtue and 
 intelligence of the district were largely in his favor, and that his defeat was 
 accomplished by smuggling Democratic miners across the Alabama line from 
 Okichobee gold mines. This campaign gave Mr. Hill a State reputation, 
 and in 1856 he was elected as a Fillmore elector for the State at large. He 
 made an active canvass of the State, meeting in joint discussion the most dis 
 tinguished Democratic orators. He won National fame by the power and 
 scope with which he discussed great national questions. He took as his patri 
 otic text, " The Northern extremist who would save the Union at the expense 
 of the Constitution, and the Southern extremist who would save the Constitu 
 tion by destroying the Union, are to be equally condemned. Let us have 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 19 
 
 both, my countrymen: the Constitution inviolate, and the Union as its surest 
 defense." No nobler sentiment ever inspired patriot. But the extremists 
 were too strong for patriots, and for a while both Constitution and Union 
 were torn and rent by contending armies. Mr. Hill s ardent love for the 
 Union and Constitution naturally placed him as a supporter of a man who, 
 as a candidate for President, declared, "If there be those either North or 
 South, who desire an administration for the North as against the South or 
 the South against the North, they are not the men who should give their 
 suffrages to me ; for my own part I know only my country, my whole 
 country, and nothing but my country. I can never consent to be one thing 
 to the North and another to the South." How strangely this sentiment 
 sounds in this day of political degeneracy, when the entire political stock in 
 trade of one party is hatred and misrepresentation of the South, and when 
 the highest office in the gift of the American people is filled by a man whose 
 administration is characterized by narrow and unrelenting sectionalism. 
 Indeed, but for the Cleveland epoch, such patriotic sentiments would have 
 been forgotten by our people and laughed at by our politicians. Groveh 
 Cleveland, by precept and practice, revived the better and purer days of the 
 republic, and to him our country is a grateful debtor for a four years re 
 naissance of national patriotism, free from the poison of sectional bitterness. 
 It is a striking proof of the blind passion even then possessing our people 
 that the patriotic speaker of these noble sentiments was defeated by a politi 
 cal coward and trickster. A man who as President saw the gathering and 
 oncoming of fratricidal strife, and who had the power, but not the courage, 
 to save the country. In this eventful fight, which really involved the preser 
 vation of the Union, Mr. Hill met the most bitter and formidable opposition. 
 Alexander H. Stephens and Robert Toombs had both been Whigs, but had 
 left the party and gone over to the Democrats, and, like all converts, 
 were extremely zealous. These two men had ruled the State in politics for 
 a decade, and they looked upon the advent of this new claimant to public 
 favor as an intrusion. It is true that Bob Toombs, who was in some respects 
 a generous man toward his political rivals, had declared in speaking of Hill, 
 "You may bury him under a mountain that will overtop Pelion, and make 
 Ossa a wart, and he would rise again more formidable than ever and more 
 ready for the conflict. He is bound to succeed. He was born to excel." 
 But even Toombs, while lavishing his praise, was limited in his assistance. 
 Alexander H. Stephens never shared this feeling of admiration for his young 
 rival and opponent, or if he did he was never generous enough to express 
 it. He and Mr. Hill began a joint canvass of the State, but in their first 
 meeting in Lexington, Ga., Mr. Hill was unfortunate enough to utterly route 
 his adversary, and Stephens never forgave him or met him again. 
 
 From this Lexington discussion dates a political animosity that lasted 
 throughout life, frequently going beyond the limits of political controversy 
 into acrimonious personalities. Mr. Stephens became exasperated over Mr. 
 Hill s triumph, and concluded to slay his adversary with the sword, having 
 failed to do so with the tongue. Some time after the discussion had taken 
 place, smarting under the recollection of his defeat and over reports of the 
 discussion, he sent Mr. Hill a peremptory challenge to mortal combat. This 
 presented a terrible crisis to a brave, ambitious man. At that time in the 
 South the Code Duello was universally recognized and appealed to in the 
 settlement of difficulties. If one refused to accept a challenge, he was pro 
 nounced a poltroon, and his political death and social ostracism was sure 
 
20 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 and permanent. In this condition of public sentiment, it required a brave 
 man to refuse a challenge and a most extraordinary man to survive a re 
 fusal. Mr. Hill promptly declined, and the remarkable spectacle was pre 
 sented of a dueling believing people applauding his refusal. The correspond 
 ence between the two men is exceedingly bitter, and on the part of Mr. 
 Hill shows remarkable power of satire and sarcasm. The entire correspond 
 ence is interesting and is here inserted. 
 
 CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN HON. A. H. STEPHENS 
 
 AND HON. B. H. HILL. 
 
 CRAWFORD VILLE, November 17, 1856. 
 
 Sir : I have been informed that in your speech at Thomson, and also in 
 Augusta, in alluding to a discussion you had with Mr. Toombs at Washing 
 ton, and myself at Lexington, you said in substance that you had charged 
 upon them (Mr. Toombs and myself) that they had betrayed the Whig 
 party, and had acted toward it worse than Judas Iscariot, for though he be 
 trayed his Master, yet he did not abuse Him afterward ; that you had 
 thundered this in their (Toombs s and Stephens s) ears, and they cowered 
 under it. 
 
 Please let me know if it be true that you, on the occasions alluded to, 
 used such language, or intended yourself to be understood as using such 
 language, or any of like import, at least so far as I am concerned. Your 
 early attention to this will oblige 
 
 Yours most respectfully, 
 
 ALEXANDER H. STEPHENS. 
 To B. H. Hill, Esq., La Grange, Ga. 
 
 LA GRANGE, GA., November 18, 1856. 
 
 Dear Sir : I received your letter of the 17th to-day, and proceed to give 
 a prompt reply. 
 
 I did not say at Thomson or Augusta, or elsewhere, that you and Mr. 
 Toombs " had betrayed the Whig party, and had acted toward it worse than 
 Judas Iscariot," etc. This, perhaps, is the application which your informant 
 himself made of what I did say. 
 
 It is not possible for me now to recall the precise words used by me at 
 the time alluded to, nor at any other time ; but the substance of what I said 
 about the discussion at Lexington and Washington I well remember, though 
 I cannot designate precisely how much I said at one place, as I sometimes 
 said more than at other times ; but I have no disposition to conceal any 
 thing I did say at any time ; because my motives were right and my " dec 
 larations from the house-tops." 
 
 At Thomson, Augusta, and other places, I did allude to the discussion 
 at Lexington and Washington, especially the first, but I can say with entire 
 certainty that I said no more on the subject of your inquiry than I did say 
 in your presence at the time of the discussion at Lexington. 
 
 During the discussion at Lexington you spoke of the "Know-nothings 
 (as you have been pleased to term the members of the American party) very 
 severely, or contemptuously, as I understood it. Among other things, you 
 read a portion of what you called the " oath," and declared it illegal, and 
 you spoke of Lane, "one of the forty-four," as a Judas, and said he was 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 21 
 
 "our ally," etc. At Washington, Mr. Toombs spoke of the Americans, if 
 possible, still more bitterly, and described t!iem "as sneaking at midnight 
 around back lots," and even ministers as " telling lies, and getting out of 
 them by equivocations," etc., etc. 
 
 To both of you I made reply, and a portion of the reply was the same 
 to both, and in the reply alluded to the manner in which you had on former 
 occasions treated these men, when they were alluded to as " midnight con 
 spirators," "treason plotters," arid as comparable to "French Jacobins," etc. 
 I then spoke of the characters of many of these men who were brought 
 under these terrible denunciations ; referred to the fact that they were up 
 right members of the various branches of the Christian church ; never vio 
 lated any law ; were men into whose keeping we would be willing to trust 
 our families, our reputation, and our property ; that among them were to 
 be found the greatest number of your early and best friends men who had 
 made you had taken you by the hand and given you their business and 
 made you rich ; had placed you in the national councils, and kept you there, 
 and thus made you great ; and even if you differed from them now, that 
 difference on such questions of propriety could not justify you in using the 
 position they had given you thus to denounce them. I then spoke of your 
 habitual and particular reference to Judas, and I added, " that Judas did be 
 tray his Lord, but even Judas never abused his Lord after he betrayed 
 him." 
 
 These are the facts on the "Judas " branch of the argument the only 
 one to which you have addressed your inquiry. 
 
 Now, as the manner in which "I intended it to be understood," I 
 intended it to be understood as simply in reply to the charges made ; 
 neither more nor less. It was in reply at Lexington and Washington, and 
 on every other occasion afterward, when referred to, it was by way of nar 
 rative as in reply, and in no other manner. The same charges seem to have 
 been made wherever I went in eastern Georgia, and the same manner of 
 treating the so-called " Know-nothings " oath had been adopted by you dur 
 ing the canvass of last year. So the people said. I never abused either you 
 or Mr. Toombs saw no one who so construed my remarks. I spoke of the 
 reply as a reply, and made in your presence. May have said " thundered 
 it r not certain as to those words. Do not remember that I said in any 
 speech, " you cowered under it." May have said in conversation that some 
 of your friends were reported as saying so, and that the people, as far as I 
 know, deemed the reply not out of place, but well timed and merited; 
 know my main object was to report the facts as the best form in which I 
 could present the argument. I never abuse anybody, never myself make 
 personal issues in public speeches, but generally reply to anything which I 
 consider merits a reply; I frequently, if not always (I now believe always), 
 alluded to yourself and Mr. Toombs with a distinct disclaimer of unkind 
 feelings, because I never had such feelings for either of you. But I deemed 
 it my duty to meet your argument to the best of my humble ability", wher 
 ever I met it, or heard it, and that, too, whether the argument assumed the 
 shape of logic, sarcasm, or ridicule, and I never attempt the latter species of 
 argument unless in reply to something of the kind first used by the adver 
 sary. I never make shots, except to those who build batteries. What I said 
 at Thomson, Augusta, or elsewhere, on the Judas allusion, you heard at Lex 
 ington. How I said it you saw, and to what it was said in reply, and, there 
 fore, why it was said you know; and whoever represents otherwise misleads 
 
22 SENATOH 3. B. &ILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 you, either by misrepresenting me, or by substituting his own applications 
 for my statements. I had almost said I was willing to submit to your own 
 judgment, whether the whole was not in strict accordance with the rules of 
 parliamentary retort. 
 
 The public mind has strangely had yourself, and brother Linton and my 
 self, on several occasions fighting and quarreling about something growing 
 out of this Lexington discussion, but hoping these things will be in the fu 
 ture, what they have been in the past, entirely imaginary and without foun 
 dation in either fact or feeling, 
 
 I am very truly yours, 
 
 B. H. HILL. 
 Hon. A. H. Stephens. 
 
 CKAWFORDVILLE, GA., November 22, 1856. 
 
 Sir : Your letter bearing date the 18th instant (mailed or postmarked the 
 20th) was received by me to-day. In reply to the inquiry made in mine to 
 you of the 17th inst., you say that you did not, at Thomson or Augusta, or 
 elsewhere, say that I and Mr. Toombs " had betrayed the Whig party, 
 and had acted toward it worse than Judas Iscariot," etc. 
 
 This is satisfactory on that point. You, however, go on to say that at 
 Thomson, Augusta, and other places you did allude to the discussion at Lex 
 ington; but that you said on those occasions no more on the subject of my 
 inquiry (contained in my letter of the 17th inst.) than you did say in my 
 presence at Lexington. And you give what you intend, I suppose, as the 
 substance of what you there said, etc. 
 
 Now waiving all comments on this report of your remarks at Lexington, 
 as given in your letter, allow me to ask you further, whether, at Lexington, 
 in the only allusion you made to Judas Iscariot, you did not expressly state 
 that you did not apply that to me ? 
 
 I wish also to be informed whether, in your " narrative " at Thomson or 
 elsewhere, you intended to be understood as having imputed treachery in 
 me to the Whig party, or any other body of men ? An early and distinct 
 reply to these additional inquiries rendered necessary by the character of 
 your letter, is desired. 
 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 ALEXANDER H. STEPHENS. 
 To B. H. Hill, Esq., La Grange, Ga. 
 
 LA GRANGE, GA., November 24, 1856. 
 
 Sir: By the mail of yesterday (Sunday) I received your letter of the 
 22d inst., in which you made two inquiries, and ask distinct replies. 
 
 1st. Whether in the allusion to Judas Iscariot at Lexington I did not 
 expressly state that I did not apply that to you. My recollection is this: 
 In your first speech you made your charges against the Americans, alluded 
 to in my>letter of the 18th, and introduced the character of Judas and " his 
 allies." In my first rejoinder, I made the reply alluded to, and without quali 
 fication, expecting you, if you were dissatisfied or desired explanation, to 
 speak of it in your conclusion. I again mentioned it, and added voluntarily 
 " of course, rny friends, I do not mean to say that Mr. Stephens is a 
 Judas." This I added because I did not wish the audience to consider me 
 personal, but as using a figure of my own in reply, and (as I must now tell 
 the feeling that actuated me) because I did feel some compunctions for 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 23 
 
 making that last speech at all, as it seemed cruel to add anything after your 
 last speech. I always disclaimed personal unkindness, because I certainly 
 
 felt none. 
 
 2d. You ask " whether in my narrative at Thomson or elsewhere, I in 
 tended to be understood as imputing, or having imputed, treachery in you 
 to the Whig party, or any other body of men." 
 
 In my letter of the 18th, I distinctly stated in reference to my meaning 
 that " I intended to be understood as simply in reply to the charges made, 
 neither more or less." By the light of your own meaning, then, you can 
 learn my answer. 
 
 Your remarks were, certainly, as offensive as anything said by me, and 
 were the first made; and I might also have been writing letters and calling 
 on you for explanation; but as I entered the contest to use the sword of 
 the tongue and the shield of fact, I intend to be satisfied with the result, 
 and so I am. And as what I said there was said to the public, I had no ob 
 jections to its use in reply to similar points, made at any time to any 
 people. 
 
 I never, in discussion, first enter the field of ridicule or personal re 
 proach, but if my adversary takes that path, I generally follow, and if I get 
 too close on his heels for his comfort, he must blame only himself. 
 
 Instead of discussing the principles advocated by the American party, 
 have you not for the last eighteen months been abusing the members of that 
 party as " midnight conspirators," " treason plotters," " French Jacobins," 
 etc.? Have you not compared them to everything monstrous among men, 
 beasts or insects ? Have you not searched the whole field of ridicule from 
 "Doodle-holes," " Bear Fights," with which to engender prejudice against 
 this party ? Did you not at Lexington call them the ajlies of the Abolitionist 
 Lane, who has never acted with them, nor been of them, but who was one 
 of the immaculate " forty-four " ? And did you not pretend to read what 
 you called the " Know-nothing " oath (which you said Mr. Fillmore had 
 taken) and did you not read only a portion, leaving out the qualification 
 which your argument was designed to prove it did not contain ? Did you 
 not, in that very connection, talk a good deal about Judas ? Were these 
 charges just? Were they true ? Was it not abuse ? And who were the 
 men thus denounced ? Can you find better anywhere ? Will you ever find 
 men who can or will do more for you than these men have done ? Do you 
 really believe that they are dangerous to their country ? Why, sir, I but 
 repeat what you know when I say that when the battle for our country, our 
 section, or our rights, must be fought, these men will be the first in the field, 
 and the last to leave it. When they fall, Rome has fallen, and the Goths 
 and Vandals may take it. Now then, to the point: If in discussion you 
 do so treat these men, must I say nothing in reply ? If I do reply, can your 
 own illustrations returned be out of place ? If the arrow does pierce, it was 
 taken from your own quiver, and if I make you feel this one shot, how do 
 you suppose your old friends have felt when you have made thousands ? If 
 you had not" made the charge, I should not have made the reply. If you 
 had only a political meaning, then the reply goes no further. If you meant 
 nothing, so did the reply. Your treatment of the Whiixs is a matter be 
 tween you and them; nor is it material to me to how many parties you may 
 have belonged, or how you left them, or they left you; but when you speak 
 of my political associates, whether Whigs or Democrats, in the manner men 
 tioned, then the hour of defense and retort has come, and will not be 
 
24 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 suffered to pass idly away. By your own words, construe mine; by your 
 own meaning judge me, and harshly or kindly as you may. The charge 
 was made, the reply followed, and there they are; take both or take neither. 
 If you were in a glass house, you ought not to throw stones: if you did not 
 live in a glass house, no stone thrown by me has harmed you. Your right 
 to refuse to join the American party, and to join the Democratic party, is 
 unquestionable; and the motive and the fact are both unquestioned by me. 
 The right of your old friends to refuse to follow you is also unquestionable, 
 and neither you nor they should be compared to Judas, nor charged with 
 treachery in thus obeying the dictates of honest conviction. Nor have 
 I done so, or intended to be so understood by anybody. But if you compare 
 these men to Judas, or apply the other opprobrious terms mentioned to 
 them, their organizations, their principles, or their conduct, I shall call it by 
 its right name abuse; and in retorting to such abuse, leaving his treachery 
 out of the question, I say you do what the record does not show against 
 Judas abuse the men who for twelve years fed you with " five loaves and 
 two fishes," indefinitely multiplied. 
 
 I hope you now understand me. I never have made, and do not now 
 make any charge of treachery against you. No man regrets more than I do 
 your opposition, and especially the character of your opposition to the 
 American party. It has been unjust to the party, grossly unjust, and untrue 
 to the motives of the men and the principles they advocate. It has been 
 unjust to yourself, and the student of your early history will have no right 
 to anticipate such a sequel. But in the discharge of what I deemed my duty, 
 I replied to your charge, and while the charges remain the reply must keep 
 it company. 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 B. H. HILL. 
 Hon. A. H. Stephens. 
 
 WASHINGTON, D. C., November 29, 1856. 
 
 Sir: Your letter bearing date of the 24th inst. (mailed or postmarked 
 the 25th), did not reach Crawfordville, where it was directed, until after I 
 had left for this place, which I regret. It has just come to hand here, 
 where it has been forwarded, and is far from being such as I had reason to 
 expect. So far from this, it has in it much, both in tone and matter, per 
 sonally offensive in itself. Your answer, therefore, to my last two inquiries, 
 taken in connection with the whole of your response to my first letter of 
 the 17th inst., by no means constitute such an explanation of the offensive 
 character of the report, which had been communicated to me of your 
 remarks at Thomson and Augusta, as I can receive with a due regard to my 
 honor as a gentleman and my integrity as a man. I do not deem it proper 
 on this occasion to join issues with you in any statement of facts in your 
 account of what either you or I said at Lexington. You hold yourself 
 responsible, I suppose, for your own version of both, and for the version, as 
 given by yourself, as well as its tone and manner. I ask of you that satis 
 faction which is usual between gentlemen on such occasions. My friend, 
 Hon. Thomas W. Thomas, who will hand you this, is authorized to make 
 all necessary arrangements, allowing only such terms as my present distance 
 may require. Respectfully, 
 
 ALEXANDER H. STEPHENS. 
 To 12. If. Hill, Esq., La Grange, Ga. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 25 
 
 LA GRANGE, GA., December 6, 1856. 
 
 Dear Sir: Your letter of November 29 was handed to me a few moments 
 since by Hon. Thomas W. Thomas. You say that my letter of the 24th 
 ult. has in it much, both in tone and manner, personally offensive in itself, 
 and, without specifying anything which you designate as offensive, you pro 
 ceed to ask of me " that satisfaction which is usual between gentlemen in such 
 cases." It might be some satisfaction for you to shoot me, though I should 
 entertain no great fear of being hit; but candor requires me to say, with my 
 present feelings, I could not deliberately shoot at you, and for many reasons, 
 a few only of which I now give: 
 
 1st. I might possibly kill you, and though you may not consider your life 
 valuable, yet to take it would be a great annoyance to me ever afterward. 
 The ceaseless accusations of my conscience that I was a murderer would be 
 the bane of my future happiness. 
 
 2d. I am not conscious of having given you any just ground of offense. 
 In my letter of the 24th I authorized you to construe my remarks by the 
 meaning of your own charge, to which the remarks were intended as reply. 
 If the reply then was offensive, it only proves that you so intended your 
 charge, and in that view you are entitled to no satisfaction, and I am satis 
 fied with the reply. Further than this I distinctly disclaimed any personal 
 allusion or unkindness, and, notwithstanding your " belligerent message," 
 feel none now. 
 
 3d. If the invitation to mortal combat is extended as a mere formal oc 
 casion to exchange a few harmless shots, and then have an adjustment, I 
 can only say I never engage in farces nor make feigned issues. If I could 
 be made conscious that I had done you injustice, I should deem it a duty to 
 repair it, and should not wait first to be shot at. If you did me injustice, I 
 met the occasion with the remedy, and it does seem made a shot which pro 
 duced a wider, if not deeper sore than any within the power of powder or 
 ball to produce. 
 
 Now, sir (as I always speak plainly), I will only add that I know of 
 nothing which has occurred between you and me which could authorize or 
 justify a duel; and while I have never at any time had an insult offered to 
 me, nor an aggression attempted, I shall yet know how to meet and repel 
 any that may be offered by any gentleman who may presume upon this 
 refusal or otherwise. 
 
 Yours respectfully, 
 
 B. H. HILL. 
 Hon. A. H. Stephens. 
 
 Mr. Stephens, after receiving Mr. Hill s letter, refusing to meet him in 
 mortal combat, publishes the following in the Chronicle and Sentinel: 
 
 The letter of B. H. Hill, Esq., published in the Constitutionalist of the 
 26th ult. (copied from the Savannah Republican), abounding as it does with 
 the grossest perversion of truth upon matters relating to myself, though not 
 of great weight of themselves, should have been noticed at an earlier date, 
 but for the pendency of a correspondence between him and me upon another 
 subject of a much higher grade of importance, which required prior adjust 
 ment that was the report which had reached me of his speeches at Thomson 
 and Augusta, near the close of the late canvass, in which, as communicated 
 to me, he had said in substance, at both of these places, in alluding to the 
 discussion at Lexington with me and the discussion at Washington with Mr. 
 
SENATOR B. ff. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Toombs, that he had charged them (Messrs. Toombs and Stephens) with 
 having betrayed the Whig party, and having acted toward it worse than 
 Judas Iscariot. " For though he betrayed his Master, yet he did not abuse 
 him afterward that he thundered this in their ears and they cowered under 
 it." An explanation of this language took precedence over all minor issues, 
 and I am now compelled, by a sense of duty to myself and the public, to 
 make known that in the correspondence referred to, and just terminated, in 
 relation to it, Mr. Hill has proved himself to be, not only an impudent brag 
 gart and an unscrupulous liar, but a despicable poltroon besides. All these 
 I proclaim him to be, holding myself, notwithstanding what has passed and 
 this denunciation, still responsible even to him for what I say, if he be not 
 utterly insensible to shame or degradation, however he may be as to fear. 
 The public will, therefore, excuse me for not saying anything further upon 
 his version of facts relating to the very immaterial question, so far as I was 
 concerned, as to whether he did or did not "back out from a discussion in 
 Elbert." I will also, I trust, be excused, even by the most fastidious, for 
 the language now used toward him, which my own self-respect, on ordinary 
 occasions, would forbid. But when a mendacious gasconader sets up wan 
 tonly to asperse my private character and malign individual reputation, and 
 then refuses that redress which a gentleman knows how to ask as well as to 
 grant, no course is left for the most courteous and decorous, and the most 
 upright and honorable, but to put the brand of infamy upon him, there to 
 remain until a radical change in his character, and especially in his conduct, 
 either in giving personal insults or making proper amends for them when 
 given shall remove it. 
 
 ALEXANDER H. STEPHENS. 
 WASHINGTON CITY, D. C., December 12, 1856. 
 
 Letter from Mr. Hill : 
 
 LA GRANGE, GA., December 18, 1856. 
 
 Mr. Editor : I have this morning read the " card " of Hon. A. H. Ste 
 phens, dated at Washington City, December 12, and published in the Con 
 stitutionalist of yesterday. It shall be answered as its merits demand. The 
 correspondence between Mr. Stephens and myself, as far as any purpose of 
 mine was concerned, was not intended for publication, but as Mr. Stephens 
 has alluded to it in his card, and, as an inspection will show, has given it a 
 false version, it is proper that the public should see the whole of it, and 
 " then enter judgment." I send it to you with this. Mr. Stephens first 
 made an issue of veracity in his letter of October 31 about going to Elbert. 
 I stated the facts on this subject in my letter of November 5, and gave it as 
 my opinion that Mr. Stephens would not deny the facts there stated. He 
 does not do it. He dare not do it but goes on to say that the letter 
 abounds " with the grossest perversion of truth upon matters relating to 
 himself," and then without a single specification dismisses this branch of the 
 controversy, by saying they are of " no very great weight in themselves," 
 etc., and was a very " immaterial question," etc. 
 
 It is well for him that he abandoned this issue. He made it, but soon 
 found it was a ridiculous retreat from a mortifying defeat, and every posi 
 tion assumed by him in relation to it false, either in letter or the im 
 pression which he sought to make, and known to him to be false, because he 
 is compelled to know my statement is correct and can now be proven by 
 disinterested gentlemen, if he dared to deny it, and specify what he denied. 
 
LIF&, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 2? 
 
 Since writing this portion of this article I have received another letter from 
 a highly respectable gentleman (whose name with many others can be given 
 if desired), in which he says : " I read your published letter to Mr. Ste 
 phens, of November 5, stating the facts in the case relative to your going to 
 Elbert, or to Washington ; every item of which I think you could substan 
 tiate, if necessary, by at least twenty witnesses myself among the number." 
 In his letter of the 12th inst. he alludes to what he calls a " subject of a 
 much higher grade," and that was the following language, which he says 
 was communicated to him as used by me at Thomson and Augusta, that I 
 had charged them [Messrs. Toombs and Stephens] with " having betrayed 
 the Whig party, and having acted toward it worse than Judas Iscariot,*for 
 though he betrayed his Master, yet he did not abuse him afterward ; that 
 he had thundered this in their ears, and they had cowered under it." By 
 his own showing this is the language he desired explained, and it is the 
 correspondence in relation to it [this language] by which he justifies his 
 challenge, and, when it was declined, proceeds to utter his denunciations 
 against me with his characteristic impotence and imperiousness. Now I will 
 prove that this is not only a discreditable evasion, but an unmitigated false 
 hood. My witness, I admit, is discredited, and has been often proved to be 
 guilty of false statements ; but as he testifies in this instance against himself, 
 probably some slight credence ma} - be given to his statements. Look at his 
 letter dated November 22, and you will find that he quotes this very lan 
 guage and says my explanation " on that point is satisfactory," and then 
 proceeds to ask other questions, " rendered necessary," as he says, by the 
 character of my letter of the 18th of November, the very letter which on 
 that point complained of is admitted to be satisfactory. The man is so 
 given to falsehoods that he disputes himself. The truth is, the language 
 which I did use, and which hurts him so badly, he knows was justifiable, 
 because provoked by him, and hence his complaint could not be based on 
 that foundation. But his sore would not let him rest ; he must have an 
 issue; the only effect of which he knew would be to prevent the probability 
 of another " Lexington blister," and if he could not get up this issue in any 
 other way, he would follow his natural proclivities, and lie into it. This he 
 could do easily without effort. The gentleman has thus made two issues 
 growing out of this Lexington discussion. The first he abandons as " im 
 material," and the second he proves, himself, to be a falsehood, yet he says 
 my correspondence proves to him that I am a "braggart, a liar, and a pol 
 troon," etc. 
 
 The public can judge from the correspondence itself whether this is not 
 like all else he has said on the subject. His statement is no evidence. 
 But let us see by facts how he stands on each of these points. 
 
 I am informed that some time since, in a speech he made at Lexington, 
 he compared himself to Moses ; and I know in the discussion with me he 
 bragged disgustingly, I and Toombs and a few others (underlining he at the 
 top always) passed and formed the Compromise Measure of 1850, told Web 
 ster how to fix up the Whig platform of 1852, and did almost everything 
 else of importance for many years in Congress. The records do not show 
 it very badly kept they ought to be corrected. At Mount Moriah, in 
 Jefferson County, when asked publicly by some of his friends where they 
 should go in the then disruption of parties, he drew himself up, assuming 
 the air of a Jupiter Tonans, and stretching forth his " red right arm " cried 
 " Come to me, come to me, Alexander Hamilton Stephens," etc. Wonderful 
 
28 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 savior. lie also compared himself to an eagle and other folks to an owl, 
 and talked about how he soared, and he did soar beyond all location. I 
 could fill columns with evidence on this subject, but I should say the fore 
 going is enough for the present to prove him a " braggart." 
 
 Now let us see how this imperious arbiter of character stands the test of 
 the second characteristic which he attributes to me. During the discussion 
 at Lexington I referred to and quoted a passage in Mr. Brooks s speech at 
 Ninety-six, and asked Mr. Stephens if he indorsed it. In his reply, he said 
 that he did not know that Mr. Brooks had used such language it had not 
 been read. I immediately handed it to him, pointing to the portion quoted, 
 and asked him (Stephens) to read it. He commenced reading, and when he 
 reached the portion I had quoted he skipped, and commenced reading 
 below. I quietly stopped him and asked him to go back, and as I was 
 rather under and behind him I gently took hold of his arm to point him to 
 the omitted part, and he absolutely pulled against me. The thing was so 
 palpable that a little boy five years old detected it, and exclaimed " he 
 skips." After he was thus compelled to go back, he read it, and found it 
 precisely as I had quoted it. He then told the people I had misrepresented 
 Mr. Brooks, that he [Mr. Brooks] had not advised us to "tear up the already 
 tattered Constitution that these were not Mr. Brooks s words, as I had 
 said, but that Mr. Brooks said these are the abolitionists words, that they 
 would tear up the Constitution, etc. This he said with the balance of the 
 sentence before his eyes, and which I then read : " Tear up the already 
 tattered Constitution, scatter its fragments to the winds, and build a South 
 ern Confederacy." Did the Abolitionists say they would build a Southern 
 Confederacy ? Here are two falsehoods in reading one paragraph. 
 
 He afterward read, or pretended to read, what he called the " Know- 
 nothing Oath," and commenced with the words "You will, when appointed 
 to office," etc., and then made an argument to prove this oath was illegal, 
 and went through a theatrical ceremony of holding up the Constitution, and 
 closed by depositing it into the keeping of some little boys. (I understood, 
 in Elbert, he deposited it in the keeping of some good old woman.) I 
 asked him for the very paper from which he read, and I took it, and showed 
 the people that this very sentence, which he pretended to read, and which he 
 sought to prove was illegal, commenced, " If it can be done legally, you 
 will, when appointed to office," etc., he [Stephens] leaving out the words " if 
 it can be done legally," etc. Now, reader, how do you suppose this truth 
 ful impeacher of other men s veracity justified this deceptive garbling ? 
 With an effrontery and imperturbable gravity which surpassed even Simon 
 Suggs, when, after swindling his neighbor out of a horse by a legerdemain 
 known only to jockeys, he said, " Integrity is the post I allers tie to." Mr. 
 Stephens told the people " he read as much of the document as suited his 
 purpose." His purpose; amid all his prevarication this one truth slipped 
 out by accident; he read enough to suit his purpose. He next spoke of the 
 passage of the Compromise Measures of 1850, and the part Mr. Fillmore 
 acted, which he illustrated by one of those classical anecdotes, which so 
 distinguish this gentleman s oratory, about Nancy fighting the bear, and 
 her husband remaining in the loft until Nancy killed the bear, and then 
 coming down and saying, " Nancy, aren t we brave! So said Mr. Stephens 
 when " I andToombs and a few others " were fighting the bear [passing the 
 Compromise] Fillmore said, " Nancy, aren t we brave! In reply to all this 
 stuff, I proceeded to read Mr. Stephens s published declarations in 1852, ap- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 29 
 
 plauding Mr. Fillmore for his advocacy of these measures and his " firm ad 
 herence " to the policy which sustained them. To get out of this dilemma 
 he told the people he was not speaking of Mr. Fillmore he told the bear 
 anecdote to ridicule me, which, of course, made me President in 1850, and 
 the candidate for that office in 1856. He denied that he had abused Stephen 
 A. Douglas, especially on the slavery question, in 1852. I appealed to the 
 audience before me to prove otherwise, and stated what I myself had heard 
 Mr. Stephens say in La Grange, and voices responded from every part of the 
 audience, " He did it here we heard him." I could go on and state more 
 falsehoods equally ridiculous his Lane charges, the introduction of Judas, 
 a favorite illustration with him [Mr. Stephens] and many other things, 
 but it seems to me unnecessary, and it is no pleasant task thus to expose 
 him, if I were able to count his falsehoods as fast as he told them. I have 
 mentioned five, given as instance at one time in one discussion, and before a 
 large audience of intelligent people, and by whom every word can be pro 
 ven, if he denies them. It seems to me this makes the gentleman a perfect 
 " Colt s Repeater " in the matter of telling falsehoods. Keep cool, Nancy, 
 this is worse than the bear fight. 
 
 To the third point: The gentleman cannot specify a single sentence, 
 word, or syllable in my letters to him, my speech in his presence, or my 
 remarks about him, that is not strictly true, and confined to him as a public 
 man. The only grievance which he specified in his card, he admits in his 
 letter, is satisfactorily explained. Everything else in the correspondence 
 relates to what was said in the discussion. He did not take it as offensive 
 at the time, invited me to discussion afterward, saw me two days before his 
 first letter was written, was with me, had a long business transaction and 
 social conversation, and not a word of dissatisfaction was whispered. He 
 forged his grievance, manufactured his excuse, acted only a pretender in his 
 challenge and is, therefore, a poltroon. 
 
 Mr. Stephens speaks of my aspersing "private character " and " malign 
 ing individual reputation." This is false unconditionally, absolutely 
 false; in fact, in conception, and in purpose. I never said anything against 
 his private character, nor do I deal, in public discussions or at dinner tables, 
 with private characters. But even on this point, I cannot release him 
 without a stripe. At the dinner table, in Lexington, on the very day 
 before the discussion, at the house of a distinguished gentleman, and when 
 most of the listeners were personally strangers to me, this very man, A. H. 
 Stephens, did asperse my " private character " and " malign my individual 
 reputation." This he did falsely and maliciously. 
 
 My private character is the jewel I prize above all others. I was born, 
 raised, and educated in Georgia, and if man, woman, or child can be found 
 whom I ever willfully deceived in private or public life, in politics, law, or 
 social intercourse, I hereby unseal his lips, and authorize him to speak. It is 
 a real consolation to know that on this subject, at least, I can defy the 
 slanderer, mock the traducer, and despise the venom of even Alexander H. 
 Stephens. I hope that no one will suppose that even now I entertain any 
 thing like a feeling of hatred for Mr. Stephens; far from it I would not 
 harm a hair of his head. Up to the Lexington discussion, I entertained some 
 thing of respect for him, though the character of many of his statements 
 prior to that time shook my faith in him considerably. Since I saw him, 
 felt him, and weighed him, and knew him, as at Lexington, all the depths 
 of unutterable contempt are exhausted in the idea I have of his utter want 
 
30 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 of fairness and candor and truthfulness as a debater. In our discussion at 
 Lexington, I deemed it a duty, because of his slanders of honest men, to 
 draw a picture of his own course and show it to him. The very sight of 
 his own picture ran him mad. It was true to life, and therefore the more 
 hideous. Hence his sore. He had been allowed to misrepresent until he 
 concluded he had a right to do so, by lapse of time and immemorial usage. 
 His adverse possession of falsehood, he deemed, furnished an absolute bar 
 to the entry of truth by the statute of limitations. 
 
 No man saw any grounds for a challenge in any of my speeches; no man 
 can find it in our correspondence, and I believe every candid man will admit 
 that my letter of November 18 ought to have proven satisfactory to any 
 gentleman. The truth is, Mr. Stephens has discovered that I have found 
 him out, and if you want a man to hate you, let him be aware that you are 
 honest and that you know he is mean. I say to Mr. Stephens, that 
 while I do know his faults, I am willing to regard them with much allowance 
 and not talk about them as much as he supposes; because I honestly believe 
 the man has perverted, distorted, and misrepresented until he cannot help it. 
 It is necessary for his comfort. He is a monomaniac on the subject of 
 falsehoods. 
 
 This letter is long, but my reliance is the facts, and it requires space to 
 state them. The language is severe, but not so wanton as that which called 
 it out. I did not commence this controversy. Mr. Stephens was scarcely 
 out of the stand at Lexington, before, keeping time with the new discovery 
 in electricity, he formed his throat into a wire for passage of counter-cur 
 rent dinner going down and slanders coming up originating the version 
 about going to Elbert. To generalities I have replied facts, which, if the 
 gentleman controvert, he will but confirm his title to the character given 
 him. There are many facts known to me, not stated; but I have no dispo 
 sition to prosecute this controversy, even against a man who originates 
 falsehood to injure me and appeals to malice to soothe his self-provoked 
 wounds. 
 
 I regard dueling as no evidence of courage, no vindication of truth, and 
 no test of the character of " a true gentleman." I shall be " braggart," 
 " liar," and " poltroon " enough, now and forever, to declare that what the 
 laws of God and my native State unite in denouncing as murder could give 
 me no satisfaction to do, to attempt, or to desire. This determination is but 
 strengthened when the contrary course involves the violation of my con 
 science and the hazard of my family, as against a man who has neither con 
 science nor family. But I have had, and shall continue to have, courage 
 enough to do my duty firmly and truthfully, and to defend myself any 
 where and everywhere, even in the Eighth District, and if any gentleman 
 doubts it, there is a short and easy way to test it. 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 B. H. HILL. 
 
 A distinguished Georgian, in writing about this episode of Mr. Hill s 
 public career, says : " When the correspondence was published, Hill became 
 more popular than before. There was not another man in all the South 
 who could have penned that letter of declination and escaped political anni 
 hilation and social ostracism. But Hill was a man whose courage required 
 no certificate. His mien, his language, and his character were like all the 
 blood of all the Howards, The courage of Henry of Navarre was acquired, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 31 
 
 that of Ben Hill was innate in the man." The writer has always regarded 
 it as unfortunate that these two Georgians became thus early personal 
 enemies. They viewed a great many public questions alike, were both 
 ardent lovers of the Union, and, in his opinion, impartial history will pro 
 nounce them the two wisest statesmen the South has ever produced. The 
 work done by Mr. Hill in the Fillmore campaign made him the leader 
 of the Whig or American party in the State. The press of that 
 day was filled with eulogiums of his powers as an orator and 
 debater. Colonel J. R. Sneed, then editor of the Savannah Republican, and 
 for a long time the leader of. Georgia journalism, published in his paper, 
 October, 1856, the following strong article describing a speech which Mr. 
 Hill made at Waynesboro , in Burke County. This article is one of many of 
 similar import published of him at this time, and it is here quoted for the 
 purpose of giving the reader some conception of him as a speaker at this 
 period of his career. 
 
 From the Savannah Republican : 
 
 HON. H. B. HILL. 
 
 I heard the Hon. B. H. Hill at Waynesboro , on Friday last, address the 
 people for three hours, arid the impression he made upon my mind is that, 
 now the great Berrien is no more, he stands, irrespective of age, without a 
 rival in mental power in Georgia. I know all our great men ; I have read 
 their thoughts and listened to their eloquence. He has no superior as an 
 orator, and no equal as a logician. He unites moral with intellectual 
 strength. He shuns, with the dignity of a statesman, and the integrity of a 
 patriot, all the subtle arts and artifices of a demagogue. He goes not about 
 the country imposing upon the weak and credulous with miserable balder 
 dash and clap trap. He deals only in the indisputable truths of history, and 
 in his analysis of these truths he makes arguments that eloquence can never 
 fritter away, festoons of rhetoric never conceal, nor the thunders of declama 
 tion silence. His language is plain, his perception clear, his wit bright, and 
 under it the sophistry of an adversary withers. With a manner manly, an 
 agreeable and a deep-toned voice, his unanswerable logic becomes irresisti 
 bly fascinating, and for four consecutive hours intelligent audiences have 
 listened to his great efforts at the hustings without having a thought to 
 give to impatience or anything else but the vast importance of the vital 
 theme, whose interest his pre-eminent powers as a public debater are so 
 happily adapted to intensify. There are some public men who, with great 
 boldness, will confront an intelligent audience, and, like the eagle dashing 
 against the sun, will plume their wings for lofty flights into the far-off 
 regions of speculation. The ignorant and vulgar stare and wonder ; but 
 Avhen the man of sense goes home, and sits down in his own quiet closet to 
 ruminate on what he has heard, he finds it an easy matter to pick to pieces 
 with a bodkin all the fine fret work that blazed so brilliantly before him for 
 an hour. It is not so with the views promulgated from the stump by this 
 gifted young statesman. When you take his facts and thoughts home with 
 you, you find his facts are not inventions, and his thoughts are not specula 
 tions ; but you do find one is history and the other is truth, and ought to be 
 come history. With a spotless private character, a big heart full of the glow 
 ing fire of pure patriotism, an intellect such as God sends to the human family 
 only once in a century, a soul that dreads neither the devil nor his imps, 
 
32 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 neither the enemies of Heaven nor his country, he is at this time capable of 
 more usefulness than every other public man in Georgia, and you may set the 
 balance to work in a gang, and turn him out on his high and holy mission alone. 
 
 One who was present at this meeting says: " There were several Demo 
 crats on hand, and when they saw that a speech was being made that no 
 mortal man could answer, they determined to drown their sorrow in the pro 
 verbial answer of Democracy to sound logic, to wit whisky; and every 
 now and then they could be heard shouting for Buchanan. One of them I 
 heard shout: Hurrah for Buchanan and he.ll, whereupon Mr. Hill pleas 
 antly remarked, * That man is in the right fix to shout for Buchanan, be 
 cause his reason is gone. One of Mr. Hill s chief characteristics as a 
 speaker, even at this early day, was his coolness, his calm self-possession. 
 He was absolute master of himself at all times, and nothing could disturb 
 his wonderful mental equipoise. On October 1, 1868, a great Fillmore mass 
 meeting was held in Atlanta. All the eloquent Whig orators were present, 
 including such men as R". P. Tripp/ H. V. M. Miller, A. R. Wright, and 
 Henry W. Hilliard, the latter gentleman at this time the leading orator in 
 Alabama. He had frequently successfully met that greatest of Alabamians, 
 William L. Yancey. The account of the speaking given in the newspapers 
 of the day shows that Mr. Hill, though much the youngest of the brilliant 
 coterie, was a popular favorite. After the conclusion of Mr. Hilliard s 
 speech, our native bird, Benjamin H. Hill, arose amid deafening shouts of 
 applause, and after some length of time he was permitted to proceed with 
 his speech. It was the speed) of the day, and will long be remembered 
 by those who were enchained by his brilliant eloquence and burning sar 
 
 casm. 
 
 In July, 1857, the American party held its convention at Milledgeville 
 for the purpose of nominating a candidate for Governor. At this date the 
 party was composed of some of the best men in Georgia. Among its lead 
 ers was Charles J. Jenkins, a name revered by Georgians; E. A. Nisbet, 
 one of the first and ablest justices of the Supreme Court ; H. V. M. Miller, 
 then, as now, a marvel of eloquence and learning; the impulsive and chival 
 rous Francis Bartow, the witty and humorous Cincinnatus Peeples, the 
 scholarly A. R. Wright, and men of like spotless and lofty character, but 
 who were all of them totally unfit for the rough contention of politics. 
 Mr. Hill was the youngest of the leaders, but so great was the reputation 
 made by him in the race against Warner, and in his canvass as a Fillmore 
 elector, that he was unanimously and by acclamation, amid great applause, 
 nominated as an American candidate for Governor. In writing of Mr. Hill, 
 in connection with this high position, an eminent journalist of that day said : 
 "Uniting a cool head and cultivated mind with a warm and honest heart, 
 he is eminently qualified for the high and honorable station of chief magis 
 trate. We are told he is the very idol of the community in which he lives, 
 that he has been pronounced by the judges of the courts in which he pleads 
 to be the best lawyer there is in this State. The recent political campaign 
 has placed him in the front ranks with the orators and politicians of the day, 
 many of his political opponents even admitting that he has proven himself 
 victor of every contest. For a man of his age to have risen so rapidly in 
 the estimation of the people, with so much to contend with, not to say envy, 
 malice, and political asperity, is proof positive that he is a great man. And 
 for him to have had the moral courage to brook public opinion in an affair 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 33 
 
 of honor and lean to virtue s side, because the laws of his country and of his 
 God demanded it, is the best evidence that he is a good man, one who fears 
 God and eschews evil. Such a man is eminently qualified to be governor of 
 a Christian people." This nomination, following so soon after Mr. Hill s 
 declination of the challenge of Mr. Stephens, furnishes conclusive proof that 
 he had lost neither popularity nor prestige by the act. He was then thirty- 
 four years old, and had met all the old leaders of Democracy on the stump, 
 and, by the concurrent opinion of friend and foe, met them most success 
 fully. In his letter accepting the nomination he went beyond the limits of 
 State politics, discussing with breadth and ability the issues then agitating 
 the whole country. The committee notifying him of his nomination assured 
 him it was " with unanimity and amid great enthusiasm," and that the "office 
 had sought the candidate." 
 
 The "Democrats nominated Joseph E. Brown for Governor. " Ben Hill 
 and "Joe Brown," as they were familiarly called by their admirers, thus 
 began a political antagonism which continued until a few years before the 
 former s death. When they met as colleagues in the United States Senate, 
 this personal and political bitterness of years was entirely forgotten, and 
 they became very close friends. In Georgia s political history the most 
 striking and original figures are Ben Hill and Joe Brown. The State has 
 been the prolific mother of genius. In statesmanship and literature, in 
 science and art, she has given to the world many names that posterity will 
 not willingly let die. But no two men have more indelibly stamped their 
 individuality upon her history than Hill and Brown. 
 
 These two men, in character, in temperament, in thought, and in method, 
 were opposites. Their careers are divergent and in contrast. They both 
 sprung from the people, and were leaders of the people, but they led them 
 hi different paths and by different methods. It has been so frequently 
 asserted as almost to have attained the dignity of a popular belief, that the 
 political career of Governor Brown was characterized by unerring sagacity. 
 That in statecraft his judgment was almost infallible. Indeed, he has 
 appropriated the meaning of the word by peculiarity of pronunciation. 
 His admirers point him out in the political firmament as the planet shining 
 with clear and steady light. 
 
 These same critics have asserted that Senator Hill s political course 
 was inconsistent and frequently unwise. That he was unreliable and 
 unstable as a leader. In the political firmament he was the meteor, brilliant, 
 but erratic ; dazzling, but doubtful. This opinion is partly attributable to 
 the different political methods of the two men. Brown 1V r as a skillful party 
 tactician, Hill an earnest student of political principles. Brown was 
 influenced by policy Hill by conviction. Personalism and party expedi 
 ency dominated Brown. Patriotism, intense and ardent, inspired Hill. 
 Brown was a partisan, Hill a statesman. 
 
 Governor Brown himself is largely responsible for this estimate of 
 Senator Hill. Indeed, he is the author of the fallacy that " Ben Hill pos 
 sessed great eloquence, but lacked judgment." But Governor Brown can 
 not be condemned for this opinion of his antagonist. It was necessary to 
 accredit his own wisdom. I purpose to depart from the chronological order 
 of my narrative, and by a comparison of the course of the two men demon 
 strate, in the light of the logic of events, the absolute incorrectness of this 
 opinion. In doing so, it is unnecessary for me to disclaim any personal 
 feeling against Senator Brown. I am actuated solely by a motive of justice 
 
34 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 to the public career of Senator Hill. I know that there never was a greater 
 error, and one for which there was less foundation, than the statement that 
 Senator Hill as a leader and statesman was lacking in consistency and 
 wisdom. And if I show this truth by contrast with the career of his eminent 
 antagonist, it is because the facts furnish the contrast. 
 
 These two statesmen began their great careers in the midst of a revolu 
 tion. This revolution, caused by slavery agitation, finally culminated in 
 these momentous stages of Secession, Coercion, and Reconstruction. In 
 the light of to-day let us consider these stages and the part these two 
 leaders took in each. 
 
 Viewed from the standpoint of practical statesmanship, the monumental 
 folly of the century was secession. It stands without a rival in all history, 
 the most striking example of a people s madness. I am not discussing seces 
 sion as a right, but as a remedy for political wrongs. Senator Hill believed 
 that secession was a revolutionary right, but not a remedy for Southern 
 wrongs. He asserted that this remedy was to be found inside the Con 
 stitution, and if) the Union. He first entered public service to warn his 
 people against that fanaticism of the North which would trample upon Con 
 stitutional rights, and that folly of the South, which in its efforts to 
 carry slavery where God intended it should not go, the Union would be de 
 stroyed and the right to hold slaves would be lost. With prophetic vision 
 he saw that fanaticism, slavery fanaticism, was the element of destruction in 
 the Union of the States. At all times and everywhere he denounced slavery 
 agitation. The right to hold slaves he held as nothing in comparison with 
 the priceless value of the Union. At all times, and to the last, he resisted 
 the current rushing madly and blindly on to the rock of secession. With 
 pathetic voice he exclaimed : "I pray God that those who would destroy 
 this Union in a frolic, may have wisdom to furnish our children with a 
 better." To save the Union was the grandest opportunity ever offered to 
 American statesmanship. Mr. Hill fully comprehended it, and with patriot 
 ism and wisdom labored to accomplish it. 
 
 Governor Brown had no conception of the value of the Union, and the 
 awful consequences resulting from its disruption. He was an extreme Seces 
 sionist. He advocated secession as a constitutional right, and a perfect 
 remedy. His judgment was obscured by passion. His nature, usually calm, 
 his actions, ordinarily deliberate, became impetuous and precipitate. He 
 rushed ahead of the fierv Toombs toward revolution and ruin. He seized 
 
 \> 
 
 the forts and arsenals of the general government before the ordinance of 
 secession was adojfted and in advance endeavored to commit his State to 
 the fatal step of disrupting the Union. 
 
 During this great crisis of our country s history, who was the wise and 
 sagacious statesman, Benjamin H. Hill or Joseph E. Brown ? 
 
 War, predicted and dreaded by Hill, laughed at and precipitated by 
 Brown, resulted. After the conflict began, the only possible hope of success 
 was in the absolute unity of the Southern people. Division was certain 
 defeat. Harmony was possible victory. Factious opposition to the Con 
 federate Government was an unpardonable crime. Mr. Hill, realizing this 
 truth, consecrated himself without reservation to the cause of the South. 
 He never wavered in his support of the Confederate administration, and 
 soon became to civil affairs what Lee was to the military the right arm of 
 the Confederacy. While leaders who plunged the country into strife were 
 using their power and influence to impede the success of the cause by fac- 
 
c 
 
 > 
 
 G 
 
 3 
 
 ffl 
 
 CC 
 
 H 
 O 
 
 02 
 H 
 
 H 
 O 
 
 02 
 O 
 hi 
 
 I-H 
 
 O 
 
 O 
 
 f 
 
t t r. 
 
 f 
 < r 
 
 C V * 
 
 4j 
 t r T * 
 
 r TI: f 
 
 /. 
 
 > * 
 
 f r 
 
 O , I 
 
 tilt 
 
 t 
 f > 
 
 * O t 
 
 < : r , 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 35 
 
 tious attacks on the policy of Congress and the President, Mr. Hill exerted 
 his eloquence in their defense. He never criticised. No soldier in the 
 front ever heard from him any but words of cheer. His absorbing purpose 
 was success, and to accomplish this he was ready to make any sacrifice of 
 opinion or property. In short, he was one of the " most heroic figures in 
 the revolution fought against his judgment." 
 
 The men who were responsible for the Confederacy were under para 
 mount obligation to promote its success. Of all men, the Secessionist should 
 have buried self and exalted country. It is not my purpose to go into the 
 merits of the controversy between President Davis and Governor Brown. 
 But I believe Jefferson Davis was true to the cause of the South in every 
 fiber of his nature ; and I assert that Governor Brown s course during these 
 trying days is open to serious criticism from the standpoint of patriotic 
 statesmanship. I do not doubt the sincerity of his motives, nor question 
 his loyalty in arraying himself against the Confederate Government. But 
 it is certainly true that his attitude caused much discontent among the people 
 and the soldiers, and his threat to resist the enforcement of the conscript 
 laws gave encouragement to the enemy. 
 
 Who was the wise leader those four years of darkness and death Hill, 
 the faithful friend of Davis, or Brown, the opponent of Davis? Let the 
 soldiers who followed Lee, Jackson, and Hood, answer. 
 
 The third and last stage in the revolution was the infamous period of 
 Reconstruction. That the Reconstruction measures were infamous in pur 
 pose and character has passed, as a truth, into impartial history. No people in 
 the history of the world ever occupied a more critical position than the 
 white people of the South immediately after the war. Civil law was dead. 
 Military tyrants held absolute and irresponsible sway. A fanatical Con 
 gress proposed to disfranchise intelligence and enfranchise ignorance ; to 
 place " black heels on white necks," and the white men of the South were 
 asked to consent to the monstrous outrage. 
 
 ^j 
 
 It was indeed a fearful crisis. Courage, patriotism, and statesmanship 
 were demanded. It was absolutely necessary to put hope into the crushed 
 hearts of the people, to preserve the self-respect of the soldier, otherwise the 
 fate of the country was not only certain but ruinous. In this extreme hour 
 of the country s peril was it wise statesmanship to accept the terms proposed? 
 It is conceded that they were degrading to Southern honor, that they were 
 monstrous usurpations ; but it was claimed by Governor Brown that they 
 were the terms of the conqueror, and therefore it was expedient in the con 
 quered to accept them. He thought the " South was doomed to a complete 
 surrender," and without a struggle she should accept her doom. It is true 
 that such acceptance carried with it the admission by the South that the 
 war between the States was a rebellion, and not a revolution, that our dead 
 soldiers were traitors, not patriots. Governor Brown insisted that unless 
 these terms were accepted, others, more objectionable, would be forced upon 
 the South. He did not show how it was possible for wicked ingenuity to 
 devise other terms, worse in character and effect, for death to a proud people 
 is preferable to dishonor. Mr. Hill, on the contrary, resisted the adoption of 
 the Reconstruction measures, as a menace to the honor and civilization of his 
 people. He fought them with matchless power, terrible invective, and burn 
 ing eloquence. In the language of one of his ablest biographers, " He was 
 the incarnation of eloquent zeal in opposition to the wrongs he believed 
 to be meditated against his people, and against Anglo-Saxon civilization, 
 
36 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Under the influence of his magnificent appeals, his burning invective, and 
 dauntless courage, the white people of Georgia became suddenly massed in 
 a Macedonian phalanx, seemingly ready again to defy the monster that had 
 but recently subdued them." The practical result of Mr. Hill s leadership 
 was the salvation of his people from dishonor and the redemption of his 
 State from the rule of ignorance and corruption and placing her ten years 
 in advance of the other Southern States, an advance that she still maintains. 
 
 To sum up the whole matter : On these great questions of Secession, 
 Coercion, and Reconstruction, Mr. Hill displayed marvelous statesmanship 
 and prophetic wisdom. The irresistible logic of results has demonstrated 
 the absolute correctness of his positions. And these facts being true, the 
 converse is equally true as to Governor Brown. 
 
 When I consider the lives of these two statesmen, the momentous scenes 
 in which they were leading actors, when I find that events have always 
 justified Senator Hill, and have never justified Governor Brown, it seems to 
 me a political paradox that the former should ever have been regarded 
 unsafe and unwise as a leader, while the latter was regarded safe and wise. 
 I have been led into this digression by the conviction that truth and justice 
 demanded the prompt explosion of this popular error. 
 
 I return to the order of my sketch. 
 
 The campaign between Mr. Hill and Mr. Brown for Governor, in 1857, 
 was a memorable one in Georgia. Both candidates were young, and popular 
 with their parties. Mr. Hill had the advantage in prestige and reputation, 
 and in the joint discussions that took place demonstrated his superiority as 
 an orator and debater. Governor Brown, however, exhibited great skill 
 and adroitness, but after several meetings the manager of the Democratic 
 campaign deemed it prudent to withdraw their champion from the joint 
 discussion. The Democratic party was overwhelmingly strong in Georgia, 
 and after a canvass of unsurpassed brilliancy, in the language of another, 
 " Mr. Hill found himself the idol of his party, the wonder of all Georgians, 
 defeated by ten thousand votes, but the foremost man of his years in the 
 country." 
 
 In 1859 Mr. Hill was elected a member of the State Senate by the 
 American party. He accepted the position for the express purpose of avert 
 ing, if possible, secession and saving the Union he loved so ardently and 
 had always championed so eloquently. In the Senate, he was the admitted 
 leader of his party, and recognized as the ablest debater in an unusually 
 strong body. While serving his term in the Senate Mr. Hill won a mar 
 velous legal victory, and established himself as the foremost advocate in 
 Georgia. In the winter of 1858, William A. Choice shot and killed one 
 Calvin Webb, in the city of Atlanta. The killing was a premeditated assas 
 sination. Webb was a constable, who the day before had attempted to col 
 lect a small debt from Choice. There was at this time an angry discussion 
 between the two, but violence was prevented by others. The next day 
 Choice met Webb near the Trout House, and, without warning, drew his 
 pistol and shot him twice, killing him instantly. The murder was so brutal 
 and inexcusable that excitement ran high, and the prisoner s life was in 
 danger from mob violence. Mr. Hill was employed to defend the murderer ; 
 his defense was insanity, caused by a blow on the head in early youth. 
 Notwithstanding a powerful effort to acquit, the jury found Choice guilty. 
 Mr. Hill appealed the case to the Supreme Court. This tribunal affirmed 
 the judgment. In the report of this case, in 31 Georgia, the doctrine of 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 37 
 
 mental responsibility for crime and the legal view of insanity are exhaust 
 ively discussed. It is said that Mr. Hill s argument before the Supreme 
 Court in the case exceeded the great speech of Erskine in behalf of Hadfield. 
 The defense in the two cases was similar. Undismayed by the adverse 
 decision, Mr. Hill appealed to the General Assembly for pardon, and by a 
 majority of one the pardon was granted. Governor Brown, however, in a 
 very strong message, vetoed the bill, and in the effort to pass tlie bill over 
 this veto, Mr. Hill made a speech, that to this day is recalled by those who 
 heard it, as a marvel of argument, eloquence, and pathos. Unfortunately, it 
 was never reported stenographically, and we have only tradition as to its 
 power and eloquence. Under the influence of the argument the bill was 
 passed over the Governor s veto, and Choice was liberated while under the 
 shadow of the gallows. Mr. Hill was greatly enlisted in the case, because 
 of his thorough conviction that his unfortunate client was not mentally re 
 sponsible for his act. The sequel proved the correctness of his belief. 
 Choice lived only a few years, a mental wreck, and when he died he was per 
 fectly insane. 
 
 Mr. Hill s course in the Senate was conspicuous for his earnest efforts 
 to stop sectional agitation and save, if possible, the imperiled Union. And 
 to his work is in large part attributed the strong love for the Union that 
 existed in the State even when the ordinance of secession was passed. But 
 no human power could stay the revolution, and events were shaped and con 
 trolled by destiny. 
 
 The most momentous Presidential campaign this country ever passed 
 through was that of 1860. Four tickets were before the people. The ex 
 tremists of the North nominated Lincoln ; the extremists of the South nom 
 inated Breckenridge ; the Whigs who loved the Union more than slavery, 
 nominated Bell ; the conservative Democrats nominated Douglass. 
 
 Mr. Hill s consistent course in favor of the perpetuity of the Union 
 naturally placed him with the Bell party. He was an elector from the 
 State at large. His canvass of the State was marked by great power and 
 earnestness. The platform upon which Bell and Everett stood was broad 
 enough to include all patriots. It was " the Constitution of the country, the 
 Union of the States, and the enforcement of the laws." The candidates were 
 personally eminent for purity of character, and in public life had been con 
 sistently non-sectional and national. Mr. Hill s speeches in this campaign 
 were characterized by clear statement, close argument, and conservatism. 
 He endeavored to convince the reason of the people and to prove the abso 
 lute necessity for the election of the candidates of the Constitutional Union 
 party in order to stop further slavery agitation, and thus save the Union. 
 None of these speeches were preserved by him, and I have been able to find 
 only one that was reported in such a way as to give any idea of his style. 
 This speech was delivered at Macon, June 30, 1860. It is a very calm, 
 lucid exposition and argument. Mr. Hill foresaw that unless the three anti- 
 Republican tickets were united, the election of Mr. Lincoln and the conse 
 quent disruption of the Union would be inevitable. Just before the election 
 he wrote a strong appeal urging a fusion of these three tickets. This propo 
 sition was favored by some of the ablest leaders of the three parties, but 
 was finally declined. The proposition shows that Mr. Hill stood far above 
 all mere party consideration and was working in behalf of the whole country. 
 The election of Mr. Lincoln plunged the country into a momentous struggle. 
 Mr. Hill felt that the Union must be saved at all hazards, and into this last 
 
38 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 great effort he threw all the devotion of his heart and all the eloquence of 
 his tongue and all the fearlessness of his nature. He found fighting by 
 his side his old adversary, A. H. Stephens, and his brother, Linton Stephens. 
 In reviewing this period of our history at this day, when the mind is free 
 from the passions of the hour, we are astonished at two things ; we are 
 amazed that any human power could have withstood the storm of passion in 
 which the secession of Georgia was consummated and so nearly defeated it 
 in the end. Robert Toombs, then a Senator from Georgia, with all the im 
 passioned eloquence of his nature, had declared to his people upon his faith 
 as a true man, that there was no longer any hope for the security of South 
 ern rights in the Union. Howell Cobb had asserted that the South could 
 
 ^j 
 
 only find independence out of the Union. South Carolina had seceded, 
 Fort Sumter had been captured, other States had followed Carolina, and 
 their ambassadors thronged our halls pleading with Georgians to make 
 common cause with them against a common enemy. Governor Brown had 
 anticipated secession, and seized the Federal forts and arsenals at Augusta 
 and Savannah. The fanatics North and South made the atmosphere lurid 
 with passionate crimination and recrimination. The people were in a state 
 of frenzy, and it required a brave and dauntless heart to withstand the on 
 coming storm. Says an eloquent writer, in describing this period : " In the 
 midst of all this fury and madness, unawed and undismayed, Mr. Hill stood 
 the incarnation of seventy years of national peace and glory under the Union 
 and Constitution the spirit of Bunker Hill, of Yorktovvn, pleading for the 
 perpetuity of the republic, born of that revolution to which his people had 
 furnished the voice in Patrick Henry, the pen in Jefferson, and the sword in 
 Washington. In the Senate, on the hustings, in the convention, every 
 where and under all circumstances, he was for the Union and the Consti 
 tution, speaking like one inspired." One of the many speeches made by Mr. 
 Hill in this great struggle for the preservation of the Union, only one is 
 given. This speech he delivered in Milledgeville on November 15, 1860, 
 and, at the request of many who heard it, he afterward wrote out the argu 
 ment*; and although the speech lacked the fire and fervor which must have 
 characterized its delivery, it is an unanswerable piece of logic, and is espe 
 cially valuable in fully setting forth his views of the course to be pursued in 
 the great crisis then before the people. Mr. Hill was selected as a delegate 
 to the secession convention, and wrote the following letter accepting the 
 nomination: 
 
 ACCEPTANCE OF MR. HILL. 
 
 LA GRANGE, GA., December 26, 1860. 
 
 Gentlemen: Your letter, informing me that I have been unanimously 
 nominated as a delegate to the approaching convention, has been received. 
 I accept the nomination, because I do not think such a position ought now 
 to be sought or declined. 
 
 You ask for my particular views on pending issues. These I have hith 
 erto fully given. I see no reason to change or modify the views expressed 
 to the people of Troup County on the 29th day of November last. 
 
 A more important crisis was never upon any people. We of the South 
 can bring this crisis to an end, just such as we wish; and we can reach that 
 end in blood or peace, as our passions or our prudence may direct. Come 
 what may, we should never be content with any patch- work. Slavery must 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 39 
 
 never again be the hobby of the political demagogue. I greatly deplore so 
 much feeling and impatience with so many of our people. We need all the 
 wisdom and cool firmness of all our people. We are in danger now from 
 nothing but ourselves. No man is a fit counselor now who assumes that 
 
 ^j 
 
 slavery can be abolished by any party or any power. This is a concession 
 to the efforts and dreams of fanaticism without any foundation in fact. Of 
 all people in this nation, the slave is this day far the happiest; and of all 
 property, slavery is by far the safest. The Union, the Constitution, good 
 government, and the peace of the country, are in danger from the passions, 
 the fanaticisms, and ambition of the white race only. But, whatever be the 
 cause, a crisis is upon us, and we must meet it. 
 
 It is an hour when every man should be all prudence and firmness, with 
 out petulance or rashness in word or action. Every Southern man should 
 remember that every other Southern man is as much interested as himself; 
 and every Southern State should remember that every other Southern State 
 must be, more or less, involved by her action. Each is, therefore, bound by 
 every consideration of ordinary respect and good feeling, to offer a consulta 
 tion and an interchange of views before final action. 
 
 Has South Carolina done this? Does her hasty action become the dig 
 nity of the occasion and the importance of the issues ? Rather, has she not 
 acted with abrupt discourtesy to the claims, wishes, and movements of her 
 sister slaveholding States? I trust she will yet be more deliberate and com 
 municative than her proceedings would, at first view, indicate. South Caro 
 lina is not acting toward her sister States in 1860 as she did act toward her 
 sister colonies in 1776. Perhaps her people are more chivalrous and patri 
 otic! In the name of Calhoun, South Carolina is doing whatCalhoun, to the 
 day of his death, never intended, desired, or counseled. It may be her present 
 statesmen are wiser, and understood Calhoun better than Calhoun understood 
 himself! She, doubtless, expects the sympathy and assistance of her sister 
 Southern States; and these States, equally, expected from her consultation, 
 and, at least, advisory co-operation. They have been disappointed; she may 
 not be. At any rate, I hope Georgia, in her own sensible way of doing 
 things, will return good for evil, and act in no spirit of retaliatory petulance. 
 At the same time, Georgia will not be dragooned by either friends or foes. 
 Georgia will prefer discretion to haste, and wisdom to impetuosity. I believe 
 she will be courteous to all her sister States of the South, and seek to com 
 bine the wisdom of at least as many as will act with her. She will not 
 be coerced to stay in the Union, nor to be hurried out before the proper 
 time. 
 
 There are numberless rumors and telegraphic reports flooding the coun 
 try. We know not how much to believe. Our people must be self-pos 
 sessed and deliberate, or they will be misled. One truth is established: 
 there are too many demagogues and too few statesmen at Washington. By 
 the papers of this morning I am confirmed in what I have before suspected: 
 that certain great men, so called, are playing tricks, in this awful crisis, to 
 excite the people! Oh, my country! 
 
 The dissolution of this Union may be a necessity. If so, after being 
 fully satisfied of that fact, let us decree that dissolution. But I must be 
 allowed to say that I cannot regard such an event as an occasion for rejoic 
 ing. The sum of Nero s ingratitude is recorded in the fact that he "fiddled 
 while Rome was burning." I do not liken our people to Nero. Far from 
 it. But is it not strange that we should fire cannons, illumine cities, raise 
 
40 SENATOR B. R. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 bonfires, and make noisy the still hours of night with shouts over the de 
 struction of a government infinitely greater than Rome ever was ! 
 
 Unless our grievances are fully redressed, and we can have satisfactory 
 guarantees that they will not be repeated, I will aid in the necessity of dis 
 union. But I shall dissolve this Union as I would bury a benefactor in 
 sorrow of heart. For, after all, the Union is not the author of our griev 
 ances. Bad, extreme men, in both sections, insult each other, and then both 
 fight the Union, which never harmed or insulted either! Perhaps it has 
 blessed all above their merits. For myself, I shall never ask for more true 
 liberty and real happiness under any government than I have enjoyed as a 
 citizen of this great American Union. May they who would destroy this 
 Union in a frolic have wisdom to furnish to our children a better. 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 B. H. HILL. 
 
 There is deep pathos in the closing sentence of this letter, and through 
 out it breathes a consecration of service to that Union which had blessed all 
 beyond their merits. In this spirit he went to the convention, determined to 
 do all in his power to redress Southern grievances inside the Union. But if 
 the rash impetuosity of the hour overrode considerations of wisdom, and 
 Georgia was whirled from the beautiful system in which she had moved so 
 harmoniously, then with a sad but loyal heart he would follow her in all her 
 wanderings to the end. The secession convention was the ablest body that 
 ever assembled in Georgia. Every county had sent its truest and wisest 
 men. The question to be settled was the greatest that had ever confronted 
 the people. Upon its wise solution depended the destiny of the common 
 wealth. Mr. Hill fully comprehended the magnitude of the issue. He was 
 the leader in the great and prolonged debate, and his appeals for the Union 
 surpassed expectation. And he, and those who stood with him, would have 
 held the State safely anchored to that Union, even amid the wild waves of 
 passion and impulse, but for the argument of the disunionist that better 
 terms could be made outside through a parliament of sovereign States and 
 the Union restored in more perfect form. But for the conviction that the 
 separation would be o nly temporary, and the sovereign sisters would come 
 together again, with all differences healed, into a more lasting and loving 
 Union, the ordinance of secession would not have been adopted. Even with 
 this argument the test vote was close 166 to 130. Not in the way then 
 predicted, but through great sorrow and sacrifice in God s own appointed 
 time, Georgia did return to the Union, and though many of her gallant sons 
 have been left by the wayside, she has come, we believe, to a more perfect 
 one. Her tears have crystallized into diamonds. They are the most price 
 less of her treasures. But regretting nothing but the sacrifice, she has 
 turned her face resolutely to the future, and in love and in wisdom will 
 make the restored Union a better one for her children. In studying this 
 period of our history, the second fact that strikes the mind with amazement 
 is, that our fathers should have sought a remedy for their wrong in the de 
 struction of the Union. Waving discussion of the right of secession, it is 
 astounding that it should have been regarded as a remedy. The great 
 wrongs perpetrated against the Constitutional rights of the South were many 
 and outrageous. But the Constitution was strong enough to protect her, 
 and no President great enough to be the ruler of the nation had ever been 
 traitor to its mandates or deaf to its voice. A Southern President, in 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 41 
 
 obedience to the appeal of the North, had declared, "By the Eternal God," 
 that a Southern State should not nullify the national la\v, and his declaration 
 had been successfully enforced. So I believe Abraham Lincoln would have 
 been patriot enough to have listened to the voice of the South, and through 
 Constitutional methods protected her rights from Northern fanaticism. 
 Viewing the question, therefore, free from the passion of the hour, mel 
 lowed by the lapse of } r ears, the argument of Mr. Hill that the remedy for 
 Southern wrongs was not to be found in secession, but in the enforcement of 
 the Constitution, was the very essence of practical statesmanship. It is not 
 my purpose to discuss fully this great question. It is forever buried, and 
 as a remedy for sectional wrong will have no resurrection in the South. It 
 is simply referred to here to illustrate the wisdom of the subject of this 
 sketch in this the greatest crisis of the country s history. The writer has 
 frequently heard Mr. Hill declare that this was the saddest period of his 
 political life. While the people were rejoicing over the adoption of seces 
 sion, cannon firing, the air illuminated with bonfires and laden with eloquent 
 speeches, he shut himself in his room in Milledgeville, and in darkness 
 grieved for the Union he had loved and labored so earnestly to maintain. 
 Indeed, so earnest and outspoken was the expression of this sorrow, and so 
 resolute was his refusal to participate in the rejoicings of the hour, that 
 some of the people became offended, and to show their displeasure burned 
 him in effigy. How little they understood his loyal heart the next five years 
 made demonstration. 
 
CHAPTER HI. 
 
 Selected as a Delegate to the Provisional Congress of the Confederate States Elected 
 Confederate States Senator His Record as Confederate States Senator Personal 
 Difficulty in the Senate with William L. Yancey True Account of this Unfortu 
 nate Affair Speech in 1862 in Milledgeville Efforts to Rally the People to Continue 
 the War Great Speech in La Grange in 1865 Confederate Leaders Gather at Mr. 
 Hill s House in La Grange Mr. Hill s Arrest and Imprisonment Letter to Presi 
 dent Johnson His Release from Prison His Letter on Election of United States 
 Senator in 1866. 
 
 far I have given a general sketch of Mr. Hill s political career 
 J_ previous to the war between the States. The conspicuous features of 
 this career are a broad nationalism, and an intense love for the Union and a 
 wise opposition to slavery agitation, as inevitably leading to a sectional war, 
 in which the South would lose the battle, and Republican institutions, as em 
 bodied in the great American system of government, be menaced, if not 
 destroyed. His speeches and writings from 1851 to 1861 are replete with 
 prophetic warnings to his countrymen, and, as we read them in the light of 
 subsequent events, we fully realize that in the decade leading to revolution, 
 Georgia or the South had no more sagacious or wiser statesman. When his 
 heroic struggle in behalf of the Union resulted in failure, and his beloved 
 State was fully committed to revolution, he cast his lot with his own people, 
 and in order to secure unity of action he voted for the passage of the ordi 
 nance of secession. There was no inconsistency in this course. He had not 
 changed his convictions, but he felt it to be his duty to yield his convic 
 tions, and he knew that his loyalty was due first to his State. So great was 
 the confidence in him, notwithstanding his Union sentiments, that he was 
 selected in 1861 as a delegate to the Provisional Congress of the Con 
 federate States. In this Congress he was one of the most earnest and active 
 leaders in the formation of the new government, and it was largely through 
 his influence that the Constitution of the Confederate States was in all 
 essentials like the Constitution of the United States. In speaking of this long 
 afterward, while defending his own Southland from the charge of disloyalty 
 to the Constitution, he declared: "That so far from having lost our fidelity 
 to the Constitution which our fathers made, when we sought to go, we 
 hugged that Constitution to our bosom and carried it with us." 
 
 When the Provisional Congress adjourned, and the new government of 
 the South, fraught with so many hopes, was fully organized, Mr. Hill re 
 turned to his home in La Grange. He had predicted that there would be a 
 long and bloody conflict, and although he had no part in bringing it on, but 
 had exerted all the powers of his mind to avert it, yet he felt that every 
 Southern man should be ready to go to the front, and he prepared to be 
 among the first. The Legislature of his State was in session at Milledge- 
 ville. He did not imagine that he would be called on to serve his country 
 in any civil capacity, but that the leaders in the secession movement would 
 naturally be selected for this work. Great, therefore, was his surprise when 
 a telegram informed him that he had been elected on the first ballot Con- 
 
 42 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 43 
 
 federate States Senator over Toombs, Jackson, and Iverson, who had led the 
 secession movement. There never was a more signal honor paid to man than 
 this action of the General Assembly. Toombs had missed by only one vote 
 the highest prize in the gift of the people in the new government, and to be 
 selected almost unanimously over such a man was not only wholly unex 
 pected, but a remarkable evidence of confidence. Mr. Hill could not resist 
 the call of his State coming to him in such a spontaneous way, and lie 
 accepted the high and responsible position. His record as Confederate States 
 Senator is known and honored all through the South. He was the young 
 est member of the Senate. This body was composed of the ablest lawyers 
 in the South. The judiciary system of the government had to be organized 
 and all national laws enacted in pursuance of provisions of the Constitution. 
 Such work required great ability, learning, and experience. So eminent 
 was Mr. Hill s reputation as a lawyer, that he was selected as the legal 
 pioneer of the new government and made chairman of the Judiciary Com 
 mittee of the Senate. His services in this capacity involved immense labor 
 and great anxiety, and he gave his whole ardent nature to it. I do not pur 
 pose to go into detail showing his great work in the Confederate States 
 Senate. His unfaltering devotion to the cause of the South, his tireless de 
 fense of her civil administration, his eloquent support of her military lead 
 ers, are known and honored by every true Southern man. In the language 
 of another : " A proud passage in his life and in the history of Georgia is Hill s 
 record as a Confederate Senator. Georgia knows the story of the patri 
 otic ardor with which, forgetting party associations and political antecedents, 
 he became the right arm of the Confederate civic leader, and the devotion 
 which so often won for him the measured eulogy of its first and incompara 
 ble military defender. Mr. Davis, in speaking of this part of Mr. Hill s 
 career, declared that he was one who stood by me when all others forsook 
 our cause. It was in those trying times that he proved himself the truest of 
 the true. His pen and voice were on my side when I most needed them, 
 and they were equal to ten thousand bayonets, and I will not forget his 
 services. The fervid encomiums of Davis and the tranquil confidence of 
 Lee, are the sum of all praise that a devoted Confederate should desire, and 
 these Hill had in abundance." 
 
 While in the Confederate Senate, Mr. Hill had a personal difficulty with 
 William L. Yancey, Senator from Alabama. I allude to this matter for the 
 purpose of correcting many of the exaggerated, false, and sensational 
 reports that have been published about it. It has been even stated that an 
 injury, which Mr. Yancey received in this difficulty, subsequently caused his 
 death. This statement is absolutely without truth. The facts connected 
 with the unfortunate occurrence, as gathered from Mr. Hill, are as follows: 
 An exciting debate had been in progress for several days, in which Mr. 
 Yancey was making severe attacks on the administration, and Mr. Hill was 
 defending it. Mr. Yancey, in the course of one of his speeches, asserted 
 that a statement made by Mr. Hill was false, and known to be false when 
 spoken. As soon as the words were uttered, Mr. Hill threw an inkstand at 
 the speaker, striking him on the cheek bone. The wound produced was not 
 at all serious, and after a few minutes Mr. Yancey resumed his speech, mak 
 ing no further allusion to Mr. Hill. The matter was adjusted by friends of 
 both Senators, and no other reference was ever made to the occurrence by 
 either Senator. The following version of the affair is taken from the 
 Montgomery Bulletin, Mr. Yancey s home paper : " The facts in a nut-shell 
 
44 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 are these, as we learned them subsequently to the removal of secrecy from 
 Senators who witnessed the whole affair. In the midst of a warm debate 
 in open session, Mr. Hill animadverted upon the record of Mr. Yancey. At 
 the conclusion of Mr. Hill s speech, Mr. Yancey rose to reply, and during his 
 speech said that what the Senator from Georgia had said in regard to his 
 record, was false, and that the Senator knew it was false when he made the 
 statement. Whereupon Mr. Hill threw a glass ink-stand from aslant the 
 position of Mr. Yancey, striking him on the point of the cheek bone, which 
 made a sharp cut, producing considerable flow of blood, but causing no 
 serious injury. The Senate went into secret session, took the matter in hand, 
 and settled it. Long afterward Mr. Yancey died at his residence, near this 
 city, from an affection of the kidneys from which he had suffered for years." 
 The brother of William L. Yancey, Hon. B. C. Yancey, of Athens, and his 
 son, the gallant and generous G. H. Yancey, were Mr. Hill s warm personal 
 friends and most earnest supporters up to the date of his death. During his 
 last illness, the latter gentleman, in a meeting of the Ninth District Demo 
 cratic Committee, presented the following resolution: 
 
 "Col. G. H. Yancey, of Clarke, offered the following resolutions : Re 
 solved, that we tender to our distinguished and peerless Senator, the Hon. 
 Benjamin H. Hill, our profound sympathy in his affliction. His great ser 
 vices to the country command our warmest admiration, his fidelity to duty 
 our highest respect, his matchless eloquence our unbounded praise, and his 
 Christian fortitude in bearing without a murmur the great suffering which 
 has been sent upon him, touches our very hearts. If it be consistent with 
 the will of the Divine Ruler of us all, we pray that God will still spare his 
 life to a devoted people ; but if he must die, may God in his mercy close his 
 eyes to earth in peace, and open them to a blissful immortality in Heaven." 
 
 It is hardly probable that the son would have presented such tender and 
 sympathetic resolutions about the man who had caused the death of his 
 father. There is, therefore, no foundation for the sensational accounts that 
 have been published concerning this matter. Both Mr. Yancey and Mr. 
 Hill were men of undoubted courage, high-spirited and impetuous, and 
 deeply regretted the unfortunate affair. Mr. Hill left his post in Richmond, 
 Va., only twice during the entire session of Congress, and each time for the 
 purpose of counteracting influences in Georgia that were weakening the 
 cause. As the cause of the South grew more hopeless, his devotion grew 
 more intense. He gave himself wholly to the effort of the South to win in 
 dependence. During the year 1862, the Confederate Congress enacted the 
 conscription laws. There was no disaffection on the part of the soldiers to 
 these laws. They were recognized as necessary to meet the crisis, and sub 
 mission was prompt and patriotic. Governor Brown, however, earnestly 
 opposed them, and counseled disobedience. It was feared that his persist 
 ent opposition might produce serious trouble, and Mr. Hill was sent to 
 Georgia to meet the threatened emergency. On the llth of December, 
 1862, he made a speech before the Legislature at Milledgeville. It was a 
 comprehensive presentation of the causes that led to the conscription laws, 
 a demonstration of their constitutionality, and a most earnest denunciation 
 of internal strife, and an eloquent appeal for harmony. This speech, in con 
 nection with others made in different parts of the State, fully satisfied our 
 people of the correct policy of the laws, and although the opposition of 
 Governor Brown continued, no serious trouble resulted. But the fate of 
 the South was certain. While we fought for a higher and deeper principle 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 45 
 
 than the right to hold slaves, yet the world regarded slavery as the " corner 
 stone " of the Confederacy, and we fought alone, without support and with 
 out sympathy. Our soldiers were our own citizens, and after each battle, 
 whether victorious or defeated, our ranks were reduced without hope of re 
 cruits. The enemy, on the contrary, having the world upon which to draw, 
 grew stronger with each succeeding year. So Appomattox was inevitable. 
 Mr. Hill s courage rose higher under disaster, his efforts more earnest with 
 successive defeat. In the darkest hour of the struggle, he came to Georgia 
 to encourage the people and inspire them with a determination to continue 
 
 (the fight. In La Grange, on the llth of March, 1865, he delivered a speech 
 which is regarded by many as the best he ever made. The writer, though a 
 mere boy, will never forget the effect it produced on the audience. The hall 
 was crowded with old men, boys, women, and disabled Confederate soldiers. 
 As the orator spoke of our gallant soldiers, and in prophetic language pic 
 tured the South under defeat, his listeners were overcome with emotion, 
 and there was no one present but who would have regarded it as a happy 
 privilege to die for Southern success. This was the last speech made in the 
 South for the continuance of the war. It is a striking illustration of the 
 earnestness of Mr. Hill s nature and the love he bore his State ; that as he 
 was the last man in Georgia to speak against secession and revolution, so he 
 was the last to urge the people to continue the struggle. The predictions 
 made in this speech, many of them were verified in the policy of the Repub 
 lican party toward the South. It was a most remarkable forecasting of 
 Federal legislation with reference to the rights of the negro and the recon 
 struction of the Southern States. It is true, some of the predictions have 
 not been verified, but time may yet bring the exact fulfillment of its 
 darkest prophecies. For though the war has been over for a quarter of a 
 century, and though the South has gone to the point of humiliation in pro 
 testing her loyalty to the Union and her complete acquiescence in the results 
 of the war, vet in this vear, 1890, sectional bitterness at the North is as 
 
 V f 
 
 intense as it ever was against the South, and a radical majority in Congress 
 is threatening to enact sectional legislation against one portion of our com 
 mon country. These things continue, too, after an administration of four 
 years of the national government largely dominated by Southern influence, 
 the purest and most patriotic since Washington. After the war was over, 
 Mr. Hill retired to his home in La Grange, and calmly awaited results. 
 Several of the chiefs of the Confederacy with their families gathered under 
 his hospitable roof. There came the courteous and courtly Clay, for whose 
 head the Federal government offered $100,000. His brilliant wife was his 
 devoted companion, and, when the publication of the reward for her hus 
 band s head came to her knowledge, with high and courageous spirit she 
 accompanied him to Atlanta and claimed the privilege of surrendering him 
 to the authorities. There came also Stephen R. Mallorv, the all-accom 
 plished statesman, who out of nothing had organized a Confederate navy, 
 and driven the commerce of the United States from the seas. The brilliant 
 and fiery Wigfall, who had fought President Davis in the Senate with great 
 bitterness, and had frequently met in high discussion the Confederate chief 
 tain s ready champion, forgot the hours of contest and came to the faithful 
 Hill in the hour of common sorrow. The elegant Sparrow, of Louisiana, 
 with his colleague, the great lawyer, T. J. Semrnes, both of whom were Mr. 
 Hill s able lieutenants in support of the administration, were also welcomed 
 guests. These men all came with their families, and it was an interesting 
 
46 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 group that gathered each day for the purpose of discussing the probable 
 fate of their unhappy country. But they could not remain together long ; 
 already the enemy was on their track. So after a few days, all but Mallory 
 left the country in disguise. It is a sad reflection, that of that brilliant 
 coterie then gathered together, only one is left, all but one have passed into 
 the rest of the beautiful Beyond. 
 
 Mr. Hill s slaves all remained with him, and notwithstanding emancipa 
 tion continued to serve him with affection and fidelity. And it is a strik 
 ing proof of their loyalty to him, that during the time when the leaders of 
 the Confederacy were gathered at his house, and the Federal soldiers were 
 in possession of the town, there was found no traitor among them all. Mr. 
 Hill s immunity from molestation was also due to the fact that the officer in 
 command of the Federal troops had given the most stringent orders to his 
 soldiers to keep out of Mr. Hill s premises. Long afterward he found that 
 this consideration was shown to him and his household because the officer, 
 while a prisoner and desperately wounded, had been taken to the home of a 
 niece of Mr. Hill s and kindly nursed back into health and life. It was 
 thought by Mr. Hill that he would probably be arrested at once. His 
 prominent and ardent support of Mr. Davis, and his efforts in behalf of the 
 continuance of hostility made him a conspicuous figure for exemplary pun 
 ishment; and when several weeks passed by, and no soldier appeared on the 
 scene, the hope was entertained that our conquerors were going to be gener 
 ous, and permit our prominent Southern men to remain at home and aid in 
 the work of rehabilitation. But in this hope we were disappointed. I shall 
 never forget the night my father w r as arrested. We had all retired, and 
 about midnight were aroused by a loud knocking at the front door. I at 
 once, and without dressing, rushed down to my father s bedroom. I found 
 him already awake. A search was made for a match but there was none in 
 the house, and I went outside to the servant s house for the purpose of get 
 ting a light. What was my consternation on opening the rear door to find 
 the house surrounded by soldiers, who stood with muskets and on guard. 
 Securing the light I returned at once, but in the mean time the officer at the 
 front door had secured an entrance and with a dozen men was in the bed 
 room. The officer in command gave him just ten minutes to get ready. 
 He did not leave him for a second, and there was no opportunity for any 
 private leavetaking from wife and children. Neither my mother nor any of 
 the children evinced the slightest fear, but said good-by with courage and 
 cheerfulness. My father was placed in front of the soldiers and the order 
 given to march. Anxious to find out where they intended to take him, I 
 marched in front by his side. We walked rapidly down the long drive 
 leading from the house to the street, and at the gate found another detail 
 with Mr. Mallory in charge. The two rebels were placed in front, and the 
 company rapidly marched through the silent streets of the little village to 
 the depot, where a special train was waiting. The officers declined to give 
 us any information as to their destination, and were a reticent and sullen 
 set of fellows. I bade my father good-by and hurried back alone to my 
 home, where I found the entire family and all the servants in a tumult of 
 indignation. We afterward learned that the reason for the time and hurry 
 of the arrest was a fear of resistance or rescue bv the citizens. Mr. Hill 
 
 y 
 
 and Mr. Mallory were taken to Fort Lafayette, in New York Bay, and in 
 carcerated in separate cells. They were not allowed any communication, 
 a.nd were treated with great indignity and unkindness by the officials, My 
 
C C < C 
 *t I C 
 
 jfc 
 
 TCt 
 , 
 
 tfct 
 I. t . 1 
 
 < t 
 
 o 
 
 I \ t 
 
 < r 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 47 
 
 father had no money that would pass current in the North, and but for the 
 kindness of two friends in Atlanta, who insisted on lending him $100 in 
 gold, he would have suffered a great deal. He was arrested in May and 
 remained in prison until the following July. After being in prison for a 
 month and having no specific charge made against him, and hearing of no 
 reason for his arrest and imprisonment, he directed a letter to President 
 Johnson. No copy of this letter was preserved, but it simply contained a 
 request for the reasons of his arrest and continued imprisonment. The 
 President replied to the letter, promising to have the matter investigated at 
 once. After waiting two weeks and hearing nothing at all, Mr. Hill 
 addressed the following letter to the President: 
 
 FORT LAFAYETTE, NEW YORK, July 4, 1865. 
 His EXCELLENCY ANDREW JOHNSON, 
 
 President of the United States. 
 
 Sir : Accept my thanks for your kind letter of the" 23d ultimo. Nearly 
 two weeks since that date having passed without an order in my case, I 
 infer that I have not been sufficiently explicit in presenting my application 
 for parole. Allow me then to say that I accept in good faith continued 
 Union and the abolition of slavery as irreversible results of the late strug 
 gle. Entering politics originally, avowedly, to oppose those extreme meas 
 ures which then endangered the Union, yielding to secession only from 
 necessity, doing nothing cruel or criminal or inconsistent during the war, 
 having at no time a feeling or sentiment in common with extreme men, 
 either South or North, I deem it is clearly not in accordance with your re 
 peated avowals on this subject that I should be selected for exemplary 
 severity. But if I err in this, yet having no concealments, making no at 
 tempt to escape, and wishing to avoid responsibility for no act of my life, 
 I know it cannot be your wish to hold me in prison in a time of peace, with 
 out charge, without process, without indictment, and without trial. Approv 
 ing as I do your plan of reorganizing the Southern States, commending it as 
 a great benefaction to the Southern people, when compared to other plans 
 proposed, seeking no public position, but willing, as a private citizen, by ex 
 ample and counsel to aid in restoring harmony and prosperity on the new 
 basis of labor, I feel it is not egotism to say my presence in Georgia would 
 be of positive service, while it would also enable me to look after the rem 
 nants of an estate devastated by the war, to adjust my family to the new 
 order of things, and to make some arrangements with and for those who 
 have hitherto been my slaves. If for any cause existing or contingent, an 
 amnesty at present is not deemed advisable, and my presence may be desired 
 on any occasion, that presence can be as effectually secured by a parole as 
 my detention in this fort. And if it be deemed better that I do not now 
 return to Georgia, I will remain in any designated place on parole until fur 
 ther orders. I have, therefore, the honor respectfully to request an order 
 for my release, with or without terms, as a candid review of my case may 
 dictate. I have the honor to be, 
 
 Very truly and respectfully, 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 B. H. HILL. 
 
 In a short time after this letter was sent, Mr. Hill was paroled by the 
 President and permitted to return to his family. He had very little prop- 
 
48 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 erty left, and at that time the judiciary of the estate was in a chaotic condi 
 tion. For several years Mr. Hill devoted himself exclusively to his private 
 affairs, taking no part whatever in any public questions. But he fully ap 
 proved the policy of President Andrew Johnson in reference to the restora 
 tion of the South to all the rights and privileges of sovereign States in the 
 Union. He corresponded with the President on the subject, and Johnson 
 was desirous of having his influence in this work. In January, 1866, the 
 Georgia Legislature assembled at Milledgeville and proceeded to elect two 
 United States Senators. The important question was to select men who 
 would not be objectionable either to the President or Congress. Messrs. 
 Ridley and Frost, members of the Legislature from Troup County, wrote 
 Mr. Hill a letter requesting that he permit the use of his name in this con 
 nection. In reply thereto, he wrote as follows : 
 
 LA GRANGE, GA., January 12, 1866. 
 
 Gentlemen: In deference to your query, I have concluded on the sub 
 ject of United States Senator to say: In view of some facts, entire seclusion 
 would be much more agreeable to me at this time. But in view of other 
 facts, which I cannot ignore, I could not honorably decline the position if 
 tendered. Knowledge acquired by honors heretofore conferred might en 
 able me to be of service to those whose misfortunes but increase my regards, 
 and to a people when rescued by plain facts from the most malign obloquy 
 now sought to be heaped upon them, must be admitted by civilized man 
 kind to have shown themselves the bravest and most heroic people of whom 
 history can furnish any account. In this, at least, the labor of duty would 
 become a labor of love. The extreme radicals of the North are now, and 
 ever have been, the most bitter of all the enemies of the Union. By re 
 peated treacheries to the Constitution they forced the impulsive but gener 
 ous South, under the counsels of a few impassioned leaders, into an unwise 
 secession. They then made that secession the excuse for waging the most 
 cruel and devastating war upon their victims. And now, when these victims 
 lay down their arms and offer, in good faith, to restore the Union, they 
 reject the offer. Not satisfied with having broken the peace of the nation, 
 with having shed our blood and laid waste our country, they now seek 
 to hold the government in their exclusive possession until, the slanders lit 
 tered in uncontradicted form, they can fix upon us the most infamous char 
 acter in the annals of human atrocities, and can fix upon the whole country, 
 by repeated amendments, a new Constitution suited to their fanatical vaga 
 ries. The great original error of the South was in mistaking her enemy, 
 and in making war upon the Union instead of upon these common enemies 
 of the South and the Union. The best vindication of the South, the strongest 
 support of the President, and the surest means of perpetuating the Union is 
 to lay bare the real history and purposes of these extreme men. If this be 
 not done, honor for us and liberty for all are no more. But I am not a 
 candidate seeking office. To be honorable, I have always thought it should 
 be conferred as merited, and not secured by personal importunities. And 
 now the crisis is so solemn, our situation so delicate, the duties of the posi 
 tion are so responsible, and the sacrifices to a capable man so great, that the 
 idea of seeking it is shocking. Content with my station, ready to perform 
 to the best of my ability any service, I leave the whole matter where the 
 
7/75 LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 
 
 49 
 
 Constitution and people have placed it, in the hands of an unsolicited and 
 freely-acting Legislature. With high regard, I am 
 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 BENJ. H. HILL. 
 To Messrs. Ridley and Frost, 
 
 Representatives from Troup. 
 
 It was, however, deemed prudent not to present Mr. Hill s name, as 
 had been too earnest and prominent in the counsels of the Confederacy. 
 Mr. Stephens, who had been less active in his support of the "Lost Cause/ 
 was regarded as more acceptable to the North, and he, with Herschel V. 
 Johnson, were elected. But they were not allowed to take their seats. Of 
 course, Mr. Hill s election would have been obnoxious to the North, and he 
 would not have been allowed to take his seat. But, in reading his letter- 
 we cannot repress a deep regret that he could not have been present in the 
 Senate during the great debates of 1866 and 1867, to have met the slander? 
 of the South, and in the very beginning vindicated her honor and humanity, 
 We would have probably lost the " Notes on the Situation," but the iniqui 
 tous purposes of the Republican party would have been exposed to the scorir 
 of the civilized world, and the South would not have waited in deep hu 
 miliation until 1876 for her vindication from the charge of inhumanity 
 barbarism. 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 
 Mr. Hill Resumes the Practice of Law His Success The Metcalf Case He Prevents 
 the Illegal Seizure of Cotton of the People. Mr. Hill s Fight against the Reconstruc 
 tion Measures of Congress His Davis Hall Speech, July 16, 1865^-General Pope 
 Advises his Banishment from the State His Notes on the Situation Joel Chandler 
 Harris on this Part of his Work Reorganized the Democratic Party in Macon in 
 1857 Bush Harbor Speech in Atlanta, July 4, 1868 Toombs, Cobb, and Hill- 
 Description of their Speeches and Effect Produced Henry Grady s Graphic Account 
 of the Occasion Robert Toombs s Tribute. Some Reflection on the Character of 
 the Reconstruction Measures. 
 
 TT^ROM the close of the war until the reconstruction period Mr. Hill took 
 I* no part in public affairs. He gave his time to the practice of law and 
 the adjustment of his private business. During the years 1865, 1866, 1867, 
 and 1868, Georgia was in a fearful condition. Her leading men were all 
 disfranchised, her labor system destroyed, and her people greatly impov 
 erished. Life, liberty, and property were at the will or caprice of military 
 governors. A few of our citizens had saved cotton, and on the proceeds of 
 this they hoped to subsist until law and order could be restored. Northern 
 adventurers, in collusion with Federal commanders, were seizing this cotton 
 under the pretense that it belonged to the Confederate government, and 
 was confiscated to the United States. But the cotton was appropriated in 
 every instance by these robbers. Thomas A. Metcalf, a wealthy citizen of 
 Augusta, had accumulated a large quantity of cotton. This was seized by 
 the Federal commander at Augusta, and Mr. Metcalf himself was arreste d 
 and thrown into prison. There was no lawyer in the city who was brave 
 enough to undertake to release the citizen or recover the cotton. The local 
 bar was completely awed by the threats of the general in command. Mr. 
 Hill happened to be in Augusta at the time, and became deeply interested 
 in the case. In behalf of Metcalf he prepared a bill in equity asking for an 
 injunction to prevent the Federal officers from selling this cotton. General 
 Steadman, who was in command, threatened to put Mr. Hill in jail if he at 
 tempted to invoke the aid of the civil authority. The threat had no effect 
 on Mr. Hill. No judge near Augusta would sanction the bill, and he was 
 compelled to go to Milledgeville and present it to Judge Iverson L. Harris. 
 This brave judge at once sanctioned the bill and granted the injunction. 
 Returning to Augusta, the order was served and treated with respect. The 
 effort to hold the cotton was abandoned and it was restored to its lawful 
 owner. This action of Mr. Hill put a stop to similar robberies throughout 
 the State. It was regarded at the time as a signal instance of professional 
 courage and legal triumph. 
 
 In 1867 the Reconstruction measures were passed by Congress and sub 
 mitted to tht Southern States for ratification. It is not the present purpose 
 of the writer to enter into a discussion of these measures. It is enough to 
 say that they were enacted by a fanatical Congress in bitter hatred of the 
 South and for the purpose of degrading her people. A few citizens of At 
 lanta met together for the purpose of taking such action as might be deemed 
 
 50 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 51 
 
 necessary to meet the exigency of the hour. These men looked around for 
 their leaders. Brown was advocating the prompt acceptance by the South 
 of the terms proposed. Stephens was in silent despair at Liberty Hall. 
 Toombs was abroad. Howell Cobb declined to give advice. Herschel V. 
 Johnson promised to write a letter reviewing the situation. Mr. Hill came 
 to Atlanta to confer with his fellow-citizens. After doing so, he secured 
 a copy of the Military Bills and promised to give his advice in a few days, 
 and at the expiration of that time notified the gentlemen that he was ready 
 to make a speecli in Atlanta at such time as they might wish. July 10, 
 1867, is an ever memorable day in the history of the South. On the night 
 of that day a voice was raised in behalf of Southern honor and manhood 
 for the first time since the surrender. The speech aroused the people to a 
 sense of their danger, it put courage in the place of despair, and that night 
 the glorious fight for political redemption was inaugurated. In the lan 
 guage of Joel Chandler Harris, "His voice rang like a trumpet through the 
 State, yet murky with the smoke of battle. As he called on Georgians to 
 rally once more and defend with the ballot the liberties they had lost by the 
 sword, he stirred the hearts of the people and aroused them to a sense of 
 their duty. And then he went on the hustings and made a campaign 
 through the State. It is a campaign which must remain without a parallel 
 in the history of the State. The circumstances under which it was made 
 can never be repeated. And if they could, there is no longer a Ben Hill to 
 take advantage of them. His soul and intellect were both aflame. He 
 went through the State with the ardor of a prophet. He met the people 
 face to face and lifted them upon their feet. He could not go into every 
 hamlet, but his influence went. He was a Greatheart, to whom the new pil 
 grim turned. What fire, what fluency, what tenderness was his! How 
 terse, how simple his language, how glowing his periods, how terrible his 
 denunciations! He had set himself to the task of revolutionizing a revolu 
 tion, arid he was equal to every demand made upon him. He was sur 
 rounded by bayonets. He walked amid the ruins of a peculiar civilization; 
 upon every hand doubt, fear, and despair had possession of the people. He 
 had attracted the attention of the government. John Pope, a satrap, 
 whose career was pronounced ignominious by Northern writers, was in 
 command of the State. And he wrote to President Grant proposing that 
 Mr. Hill be banished from the State. In the midst of all the confusion and 
 uncertainty and doubt of that trying period, the great orator went among 
 the people and bade them lift their lips from the dust. Few of his speeches 
 during that campaign have been preserved, but it is impossible to remember 
 them without a thrill. The remedies he proposed were the remedies of 
 peace, but with what marvelous eloquence he denounced the oppressors ! 
 
 During this period Mr. Hill wrote his celebrated " Notes on the Situa 
 tion," which did more to arouse the people and weld them together in their 
 assaults upon the Republican party than the efforts of all the combined in 
 fluences in the State. In bitter denunciation, scathing invective, and terri 
 ble force, their merits entitled them to a first rank in the world s political 
 literature. In writing of them, Henry W. Grady said: "In my opinion 
 they stand alone as the profoundest and most eloquent political essays ever 
 penned by an American. They were accepted as the voice of the South, 
 uttering her protest and her plea, and as such were discussed on the streets 
 of London and the Boulevards of Paris, no less than in the cities of the 
 North. Even now they stir the blood and kindle the pulses of the most 
 
52 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 phlegmatic reader, but this is but a hint of the sensation they produced when 
 they were printed. Had Mr. Hill never spoken one speech, his * Notes on 
 the Situation would have stamped him as one of the greatest men Georgia 
 ever produced." This eloquent opinion is but the expression of the public 
 voice. Under the influence of Mr. Hill s appeals, the people became a solid 
 and invincible phalanx against radical wrong and oppression, but for 
 a while he stood alone of Georgia s public men in his denunciation of the 
 Reconstruction measures. It is true that Johnson had written his promised 
 letter, but it was a negative and not a positive force in the fight. Mr. Hill 
 did not confine himself to speech making and letter writing. For the first 
 time in his life he gave attention to the details of politics, and in Macon, in 
 1867, he reorganized the Democratic party. Mr. Hill, therefore, was not 
 only the voice and the pen of the South in the dark days of Reconstruction, 
 but he was also the practical leader in the organization of the party which 
 redeemed his State from the horrors and infamies of radicalism. 
 
 On July 4, 1868, a convention of Democrats met in Atlanta for the pur 
 pose of nominating Presidential electors. An immense bush-arbor was 
 erected where the passenger depot now stands. Robert Toombs, Howell 
 Cobb, and Benjamin H. Hill were the speakers. It was the largest mass 
 meeting ever held in Georgia. Mr. Hill had been for several weeks pre 
 vious to this time suffering from an attack of bilious or malarial fever, 
 which he had contracted while experimenting in planting in southwest 
 Georgia. He had gone to Indian Spring for relief, and the writer had ac 
 companied him. I had no intimation that he intended to make a speech, 
 and was greatly surprised wdien he told me on the day before the meeting 
 that he was going to Atlanta for this purpose. I had been with him con 
 stantly, and did not see any preparation for the speech, and as he was quite 
 feeble physically I felt some concern for the result ; and when we reached 
 the city and found over 20,000 Georgia Democrats gathered to hear the 
 speaking, and that Toombs and Cobb were also to speak, this concern in 
 creased. I shall never forget that day. The impatience of the crowd 
 would not wait for the order of speaking, but broke forth in loud calls for 
 " Ben Hill " before the meeting was organized. It was evident that he was 
 greatly the favorite. This, of course, was due to the fact that he was 
 looked upon as the leader in the great fight against Reconstruction. 
 Toombs, Howell Cobb, and Ben Hill never before in the history of the 
 State had three such orators appeared on the same rostrum, and to discuss 
 questions appealing most strongly to the sympathies and passions of the 
 audience. They were questions upon the correct solution of which depended 
 not only Southern restoration, but white supremacy in the land. I had 
 never heard Toombs, and my expectation was at the highest point, but I 
 was greatly disappointed in his speech. I expected an eloquent and im 
 passioned display of oratory, but I heard a desultory and disconnected argu 
 ment that did not even quicken the pulses of the vast crowd. Howell Cobb 
 followed him and made a great speech of surpassing eloquence, logic, and 
 invective. The crowd was wild with enthusiasm when Mr. Hill rose to 
 speak, the cheering that greeted him was indescribable; men and women 
 rose in their seats and waved handkerchiefs and shouted for about five 
 minutes. Mr. Hill was very pallid, not only from that pallor characteristic 
 of the orator on rising to speak, but this was increased by his physical con 
 dition. 
 
 An able writer, in giving a personal recollection of the scene, gives this 
 
II IS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 53 
 
 vivid description : " Another personal memory of Mr. Hill comes to me 
 with distinctness. It was the day that he spoke at the bush-arbor meeting. 
 I don t think I was ever so impressed by any human being as by Mr. Hill 
 that day. He lacked the superb presence of Mr. Toombs, who preceded, for 
 in personal majesty I never saw the man that equaled the unpardoned 
 Georgian. He lacked the prestige of Mr. Cobb, for that statesman made a 
 larger national figure than any Georgian since Crawford, but in fervid elo 
 quence, in the stirring invective and appeal demanded just then to arouse the 
 people to a true understanding of the situation, Mr. Hill walked like a god 
 for hours at heights to which the others did not soar. Such a speech, of such 
 compass, pitched upon such a key, was never made in this State before or 
 
 since. 
 
 However its violence may stand the test of after inquiry, there is no 
 doubt that it was wisdom when delivered. At its close General Toombs 
 jumped from his seat, and in the presence of the crowd threw his arms 
 around the speaker, tossed his hat in the air, and shouted three cheers for 
 Ben Hill. A careful student of politics said to me a year ago : " One hour 
 after that speech of Ben Hill, I knew that the redemption of Georgia was 
 accomplished. All the bayonets in the United States could not have awed, 
 nor all the wealth of the government debauched a people who had listened to 
 that speech." It is an interesting incident to recall that a dark-eyed youth, 
 his face radiant with excitement and enthusiasm, picked up General Toomb s 
 hat, handing it to its owner. This young man was Henry W. Grady, who 
 years afterward was counted not unworthy to rank with the great orators of 
 that day. The invective of the speakers was directed principally against 
 Governor Brown, and those who remember the indignation and hatred which 
 flashed from every eye as they denounced him as the arch-traitor to his peo 
 ple, can but marvel at his complete forgiveness twenty years afterward. 
 And it is a strange illustration of the remarkable power of the man, that, 
 without change or repentance, he won to his support in 1880 the same men 
 who had cursed him in 1868. This remarkable condonation of what were 
 then deemed political crimes furnishes proof of the ephemeral character 
 of political differences. 
 
 The questions submitted to our people, contained in the Reconstruction 
 measures, were questions of principle and not political expediency; their 
 acceptance involved our honor and civilization. The South could not con 
 sent to accept the terms proposed by Congress without sacrificing her self- 
 respect and dishonoring her dead soldiers. The two fundamental principles 
 of the Reconstruction measures were that the Southern States, in seceding 
 from the Union, committed an act of treason and rebellion, and that in the 
 plan of Reconstruction, intelligence and property should be placed under the 
 heels of ignorance and pauperism. To consent to the first was to volun 
 tarily write the words rebel and traitor on the tombstones of our honored 
 dead. To consent to the second was a crime against our own race. In my 
 opinion, therefore, the men, who when such terms were offered to the South 
 ern people, advocated their acceptance committed an unpardonable crime. 
 Some distinction should be made between the men who were faithful in 
 those dark hours and those who were unfaithful, else there is no incentive to 
 patriotism and no reward for fidelity. The terrible upheaval of the war 
 threw to the surface many hybrid characters, but standing out in hideous 
 prominence as a product of that period is the secessionist-scalawag. A 
 paradox in politics to which history gives no parallel. The bitterness that 
 
54 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 characterized the invective of a true Southern man against this class, was 
 the natural and laudable emotion of an indignant and outraged patriot, and 
 their political ostracism should have been implacable and perpetual. 
 
 The fight made by Mr. Hill could not result in the defeat of these Con 
 gressional measures of Reconstruction, but it did result in solidifying the 
 Southern whites, a solidity which rescued our State from the control of alien 
 enemies and placed her affairs in the hands of her own people. To Mr. Hill 
 is due more than to any other man the honor of saving the character of 
 Georgians and the integrity of Georgia. In the language of one of his elo 
 quent eulogists, " Among all the true sons of Georgia and the South in that 
 day, his form stands conspicuous." The Reconstruction measures were 
 declared ratified by the people of the Southern States, and this, too, in the 
 face of the admitted fact that the whites were opposed to them, and they 
 thus became parts of the fundamental law of the land. This presented an 
 entirely new issue for our people. 
 
CHAPTER V. 
 
 Address to the People, December 8, 1870 The Effect of this Address State Road 
 Lease Delano Banquet Speech at the Banquet These Three Things Cost Hill his 
 Popularity in the State He was Misunderstood and Greatly Abused Explains fully 
 his Reason for Attending said Banquet to Mr. Grady The Greeley Movement 
 Advocates it Defeated for United States Senate in 1873 by General John B. 
 Gordon Cause of his Defeat Gainesville Convention of 1875 Fails to Make a 
 Nomination for Congress Mr. Hill Goes before the People Makes a Canvass of the 
 District Elected by a Very Large Majority General Rejoicing over his Election 
 Throughout the South Meeting of the Citizens of Atlanta to Celebrate his Election 
 His Speech on the Occasion Analysis of Mr. Hill s Political Character, by F. H. 
 Alfriend. 
 
 When the Reconstruction measures were presented to the South in 1867, our people 
 could not have consented to their ratification without dishonoring their history. We 
 could not have allowed them to become laws by our consent. But after they had been 
 declared ratified by the States, they became parts of the law, and although by force and 
 usurpation, yet it was the duty of all good citizens to obey them. The obligation of 
 obedience to a law of consent is a duty embracing the moral sense ; the obligation of obe 
 dience to a law of usurpation is a duty measured by necessity, but practically a duty fully 
 as binding upon all good citizens. To meet this new phase of the great questions, Mr. 
 Hill wrote his letter of December 8, 1870, and as it fully elucidates the changed condition 
 of things and explains the motive actuating Mr. Hill in this part of his career, the letter 
 is inserted at this place : 
 
 ADDRESS TO THE PEOPLE OF GEORGIA. 
 
 r I ^IIE relation I have borne to you during the last fifteen years will justify, 
 JL if not demand, this address. 
 
 I began life with the distinct resolution never to enter public or political 
 station, but to limit the gratification of ambition to professional success. 
 This resolution was based upon the assumption that the integrity of the gov 
 ernment would not be disturbed, and was departed from only when that 
 integrity was brought into question. Entering politics with none but the 
 most unselfish and patriotic desire to aid in preserving our constitutional 
 union. I was caught in the current, which quickened into revolutionary 
 madness, on the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, and have since been 
 borne along, every hour vainly but earnestly endeavoring to arrest its wild 
 rush to our ruin. 
 
 Through all its three stages of Secession, Coercion, and Reconstruction, I 
 have been the zealous and consistent antagonist of the revolution, and regard 
 ing as I did the first stage as an error, the second as a crime, and the third 
 as a monstrous usurpation, I would not if I could, disguise from you the 
 fact that the conscious memory that I opposed all, and am in no degree 
 responsible for the consequences of any, has been to me a well-spring of joy 
 through all the horrors of the past, and will be a source of strength in all the 
 struggles of the future. Whatever else be lost, this consciousness of self- 
 sacrifice and devotion to what I believed was right is a treasure of exhaust- 
 less wealth, which no power can destroy and no misfortune can take away. 
 
 The revolution, at least in its work of violence, let us hope, is at an end. 
 
 55 
 
56 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Leaving now out of view the material and moral devastations sustained, it 
 is our duty to ascertain and fix, with all possible distinctness and without 
 passion, the changes wrought by the revolution in our political framework; 
 changes, though wrought as results, are now to become causes, and in their 
 time must work results, for good or evil, over all our country for, perhaps, 
 generations to come. 
 
 The tangible, permanent results thus wrought by the war in the charac 
 ter of our political institutions are embodied in what are known as the 
 thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth amendments to the Constitution of the 
 United States. It is historical accuracy to say that the thirteenth amend 
 ment received the assent of the original constituency of the Southern States; 
 and the two other amendments did not receive that assent. Nevertheless, 
 all these amendments have been proclaimed by the power having jurisdiction 
 of the question, to have received constitutional ratification, and to constitute 
 parts of the national fundamental law. 
 
 Taking this, then, as our starting point, the first question is : What are 
 the specific changes wrought by these amendments ? 
 
 The first changes I notice are perhaps the only ones which the popular 
 mind seems to be aware of as accomplished at all. The amendments, in the 
 order named, establish, with a qualification, the freedom, civil equality, and 
 political equality of the races all races and colors. 
 
 The only badge of bondage remaining in America is the qualification 
 alluded to being the disabilities imposed by the fourteenth amendment 
 upon a portion of the white race in the Southern States. 
 
 But, in truth, these changes in the relative status of the different races 
 are the most insignificant effects of these amendments. Not only has the 
 civil and political status of the negro race been changed, but, what is inex 
 pressibly far more, the jurisdiction over the civil and the political status of 
 all the races in all the States will be held to have been transferred by these 
 amendments from the States, severally to the general government. This 
 effects a great change in the character of the general government greatly 
 increasing the national and as greatly lessening its Federal features. In 
 deed, language cannot express ideas more intensely national than are the 
 ideas covered by the words " jurisdiction over the civil and political status 
 of the citizen." These powers being conferred, it will be difficult to say 
 what power has not been conferred. While State governments may remain 
 as convenient regulators of limited local interests, it will be held that under 
 these amendments to the now National Constitution the general government 
 has acquired revisory powers over the entire State government, and over all 
 the legislative, executive, and judicial departments of the State governments. 
 
 In view of the thorough changes thus wrought by these amendments in 
 the whole character of the general and State governments, the next question 
 becomes of exceeding great importance. Have these amendments become, 
 in fact, fixed parts of the National Constitution, and will they be so held? 
 
 After giving this subject not only a careful, but a most anxious con 
 sideration, I have been driven to the conclusion that these three amendments 
 are in fact, and will be held in law, fixed parts of the Constitution, as bind 
 ing upon the States and people as the original provisions of that instru 
 ment. 
 
 The legal ratification of the thirteenth amendment is conceded by all. 
 It must be also conceded is conceded that the ratifications of the four 
 teenth and fifteenth amendments have been proclaimed. By whom? I 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 57 
 
 answer, by the political departments of the general government having the 
 jurisdiction so to proclaim. 
 
 But it is said the ratifications were not free or real, but forced and usur- 
 patory, and that, therefore, the Supreme Court will declare the proclama 
 tions of such ratifications to be null and void. I reply, the Supreme Court 
 has only judicial power, and the power in question is political and not 
 judicial. Again, this judicial power of the Supreme Court is itself limited 
 to cases arising under the Constitution that is, to questions arising in the 
 construction of the Constitution after it is made, and not to the making it 
 self. The political power makes the Constitution, and the judicial power 
 construes it. The political power having proclaimed these amendments to be 
 parts of the Constitution, the judicial power can have no jurisdiction to re 
 view or reverse that proclamation, but can only decide what the amend 
 ments so proclaimed mean. The facts necessary to ratification, as recited 
 by the political power, must be accepted as true by the judiciary, and 
 cannot be ever judicially questioned ; for the judicial is no part of the 
 amending power. There is a vast difference, in this respect, between 
 the making of the Constitution and the passage of laws under it after 
 made. 
 
 But, I am asked, can usurpation become law, binding a people and 
 courts ? I reply, yes, easily, very easily, and often. As efforts the most 
 patriotic, failing, became rebellion, so usurpation the most glaring, succeed 
 ing, become laws. A majority of human governments have no origin save 
 in usurpations. Indeed, successful usurpation is the strongest expression of 
 power ; and law itself, in its last analysis, is only power. 
 
 In plain truth, human experience has discovered but one remedy for 
 usurpation. That remedy is preventive not curative ; military not civil. 
 It is the sword. To apply this remedy in this case, the South was unable, 
 and the North unwilling. Conceding then that these amendments were 
 usurpations, they were successful, and have become law fundamental law 
 binding upon States and people, courts and rulers. It may have been 
 criminal was criminal to aid in committing a usurpation ; it is crime it 
 self to break the law. And thus are we bound. 
 
 But, again, we are told, the Northern people will discover their error, 
 and a reaction will take place which will obliterate these amendments. But 
 it will take three fourths of the States to obliterate. Besides, I now believe 
 the following propositions may be correctly assumed concerning the North 
 ern people. 
 
 1. Feeling that their protection was in their power rather than in the law, 
 they have not been induced to understand and learn the nature of their gov 
 ernment as their fathers did. What men do not know they cannot love. 
 Their government the Northern people know. They know its power, in one 
 sense, and for that they love it. They do not understand its federative 
 character and do not love it. 
 
 2. The Northern people believe that what they understand to be the 
 State s rights theory was the real source, and, therefore, the cause of seces 
 sion, the war, and all its consequences. Therefore they hate that theory of 
 our government. 
 
 3. The increase in population, the great accumulation of wealth, the won 
 derful growth of commerce and trade, the close intermixture of many States 
 and people through the agencies of railroads and other improvements, re 
 quire, in the opinion of the Northern people, a strong national government j 
 
58 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 and if these amendments increase the national powers of the government, 
 they are not likely, on that account, to change them. 
 
 4. Add to these views the well known fact that the great body of the 
 Northern people regard the freedom and the civil and political equality of 
 the negro as great national, philanthropic, and religious results ; and you 
 must agree with me that the hope of a change at the North, which would 
 obliterate these amendments, must be abandoned. 
 
 If we could not hold the Northern people to the franchise system, when 
 we had it with all the sanctity of common revolutionary struggles hallowing 
 it, how shall we induce them to return voluntarily to that system after, as 
 they believe, they have paid so much in treasure and blood to get rid of it. 
 In a word, the masses of the Northern people have been taught to regard, 
 and do regard slavery, secession, and State rights as words of close affinity, 
 if not of identical meaning, and, whether they are right or wrong in their 
 conviction, there is no probability of its early change. 
 
 The conclusion, then, is. that we have a new National Constitution, 
 with new and enlarged powers of government, establishing new and differ 
 ent relations between the general and State governments; and also a new 
 system of industry with a new, if not anomalous, condition of society. 
 
 How this new system will operate; whether, under it, government will 
 be more stable ; the enjoyment of life, liberty and property more secure; 
 whether statesmanship shall be more elevated, laws more respected and 
 justly enforced, and natural prosperity and moral excellence advanced and 
 increased; whether "the magnetism of conciliated interests and kindly 
 sympathies " which so distinguished the old system, can be imparted to the 
 new, are all problems which experience alone can solve, and upon which I do 
 not now propose to speculate. 
 
 But there are a few immediate and pressing duties resulting from the 
 above premises, to which I will call your attention. 
 
 First. It is the duty of every good citizen to abide and obey the Con 
 stitution and laws as they exist, precisely as if he had co-operated in estab 
 lishing and enacting them. Because we disapproved a proposed law can 
 furnish no excuse for disobeying an enacted law. Every good and trust 
 worthy citizen will oppose if he can, and disapprove anyhow, a proposed 
 wrong; and every such citizen will likeA\dse obey an existing law and abide 
 an accomplished fact. If the citizen s opinion of the law, rather than the 
 law itself, furnished the measure of his obligation to obey, it would be im 
 possible to have uniform rule, settled law, or stable government. 
 
 Second. It was your opinion that the colored man was not prepared at 
 once and indiscriminately to understand and appreciate, and, therefore, to 
 receive the great trust of suffrage. But right or wrong, wisely or unwisely, 
 the new fundamental law has conferred upon him the right to exercise that 
 trust. It has, therefore, become our duty, as it is also our interest, not only 
 to permit and assent to its exercise, but also to render ready protection and 
 cheerful assistance to the colored man in its free, full, and unrestricted en 
 joyment. I know, fellow-citizens, that you concur in these views and do 
 not need this admonition; but there is no subject on which the Northern 
 people and the government itself so greatly suspect your fidelity; and, there 
 fore, you will know how to pardon this repeated counsel. 
 
 Third. I respectfully suggest that the time has arrived when duty does 
 not require, nor interest seek, a continuance of the divisions on the princi 
 ples and events which have led to our present condition. Their heroism in 
 
1IIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 59 
 
 the field and wisdom in the Cabinet during the war; their fortitude under 
 suffering, and patience under wrong, since the war: and, above all, the 
 grandeur of that manhood which they almost universally exhibited in per 
 sistently withholding their assent, under the severest threats, from a scheme 
 which proposed to manacle intelligence and virtue, and turn loose ignorance 
 and vice to inaugurate government and administer law, have made a record 
 of sincerity, devotion, and sense of honor for the Southern people which time 
 must ever brighten and discussion cannot strengthen. Let us, therefore, 
 cease all quarreling over the past and all threatenings for the future, and 
 manfully unite our energies to bring back prosperity to our country and 
 good will among our people. 
 
 Touching the pending election, I will add but one suggestion. It is of 
 secondary importance whom else you choose for your General Assembly; 
 but it is of first importance that you choose honest men. We are suffering 
 for wise and honest legislation. We can never get such legislation unless 
 you elect members whom feed lobbyists cannot buy. A black man who 
 cannot be bought is better than a white man who can, and a Republican who 
 cannot be bought is better than a Democrat who can. The worst possible 
 condition for any people is a body of ignorant and venal legislators, under 
 the control of a band of professional lobbyists, fed by unscrupulous specula 
 tors. No government can be stable, and no country can be prosperous, if 
 these things meet not condemnation by, and correction from, the people. 
 
 BENJ. H. HILL. 
 December 8, 1870. 
 
 This letter, eminently wise, patriotic, and entirely consistent with Mr. 
 Hill s position in 1867 and 1868, was nevertheless generally misconstrued, 
 and furnished the excuse for much abuse from press and politicians. Shortly 
 after this address was published, the lease of the Western and Atlantic Rail 
 road was made by the Governor in pursuance of an act of the Legislature. 
 The act directing the lease of the road was prepared and introduced by a 
 distinguished Democratic member of the House of Representatives. There 
 were two companies bidding for the lease. At the head of one was Mr. 
 Hill, having as associates prominent Democrats and citizens of Georgia. 
 At the head of the other was Governor Brown, having as associates promi 
 nent Republicans of the North. It was soon discovered that the Governor 
 would probably give the preference to those of his o\Vn political faith, and 
 to avoid this result, Mr. Hill s company combined with Governor Brown, 
 forming a new company which secured the lease. Pending the negotiations 
 on the subject of the lease, the prominent Republicans associated with 
 Governor Brown, came to Georgia. Among them was Columbus Delano, 
 Secretary of the Interior. A banquet was given to these gentlemen at the 
 Kimball House, to which Mr. Hill was invited, and at which he made a 
 speech. These three things, the address of December 8, 1870, his associa 
 tion with Governor Brown and other Republicans in the lease of the West 
 ern and Atlantic Railroad, and his speech at the Delano banquet, had a most 
 important effect on his political career. Up to this time he had been the 
 most popular of all the prominent men of Georgia ; he was simply the 
 idol of the people; but these acts changed the whole current of popular love 
 and confidence into one of distrust. Many politicians of the State, who did 
 not like Mr. Hill, made them the pretext for gross misrepresentation and 
 slander. Looking to his own personal advancement, it cannot be denied 
 
60 SENATOR R II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 tli at tliis action of Mr. Hill was unfortunate. It practically condemned him 
 to private station and lost him the United States senatorship in 1873. 
 But when we look at his conduct in the light of subsequent events, we recog 
 nize his pure and patriotic motives. Indeed, the motives that induced him 
 to make a political sacrifice of himself must have been strong. 
 
 As this part of Mr. Hill s life was so greatly misconstrued, I propose to 
 show how unjustly he was treated. Was his letter of December inconsist 
 ent with his course previous to that time ? A careful perusal of the address 
 itself, clearly stating as it does the changed condition of public affairs, is 
 conclusive answer in the negative. It was claimed by his detractors that 
 he had receded from his previous position and was now advocating what he 
 had before so eloquently condemned. This opinion is due to a superficial 
 examination of the address. Mr. Hill nowhere approves as right the meas 
 ures that had become parts of the law of the land. He recognizes them as 
 accomplished facts. To use his own terse expression : " Successful usurpa 
 tion had become law." There was a vast difference between this position 
 and that of those Southern men who favored the acceptance of the Recon 
 struction measures when proposed. Mr. Hill himself, in answer to the ques 
 tion to define the difference between his position as enunciated in this ad 
 dress and that of Republicans in 1867, uses the following emphatic language: 
 " There is just the same difference as that between two sons, one of whom 
 helps assassins to slay his father, and the other, after exposing life and all 
 to prevent the slaughter, and fails, simply and sadly recognizes the fact that 
 his father is dead, and decently buries him, and honestly goes to work for 
 the family. Is there no difference between parricide and filial love?" In 
 truth, Mr. Hill, in the position taken in this celebrated letter, was only in 
 advance of his party. In 1872 the Democratic party, in its national plat 
 form, fully incorporated the principles set forth by Mr. Hill in 1870. The 
 Democratic party, by this course, was not inconsistent and was not sur 
 rendering any one of its great principles, but was simply adapting itself to 
 the changes which the final adoption of the Reconstruction measures made 
 necessary. 
 
 Now as to the lease of the Western and Atlantic Railroad. Was Mr. 
 Hill untrue to his people in becoming one of the lessees of this property ? 
 It was the unanimous opinion that the road should be leased, and Mr. Hill 
 had advocated its lease for thirteen years. Managed by the State it paid 
 nothing, but furnished the means for corrupt party manipulation. Mr. Hill 
 endeavored to obtain control of this great property by a company composed 
 exclusively of Georgians ; finding that he could not do so, he was forced 
 into a business association with men whom in politics he had bitterly de 
 nounced. But the lease was not unpopular for any objection to the policy of 
 leasing, but Governor Brown and his associates were at that time extremely 
 obnoxious to our people. In speaking of the lease, Mr. Hill uses the fol 
 lowing language in a letter written to Hon. John P. King, President of the 
 Georgia Railroad and Banking Company : 
 
 " Besides the desire to see this great work taken out of the control of 
 corrupt party politics, there were two special reasons why I approved this 
 particular bill to lease. The first reason was that I was assured that unless 
 this bill to lease was passed, one nominally to sell, but really to steal the 
 road would pass. The second reason was, that I was assured you would 
 organize the company. Now outside of the magnitude of the interests in 
 volved, I feel a special desire that the gentlemen who are to be the lessees 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 61 
 
 should be such as will secure the confidence of the people, the owners, be 
 cause if the company shall excite odium, that odium will attach to the lease 
 itself, and will extend to all who aided in and approved its adoption. Rumor 
 has many tongues as to the personnel and character of the lease. One is 
 that your road and one in Tennessee are to be the sole indorsers and the 
 chief beneficiaries. If this is well founded, a fierce and bitter contest may 
 be expected. Let me beg you not to permit this. Another rumor is, that 
 the Chief Justice of the State is to be interested as a lessee, and is even to 
 be the president of the company. This is exciting much disparaging com 
 ment. As an individual, I would not say one word against Governor 
 Brown as a lessee. He is able and industrious. But as a chief justice, there 
 is every objection to his connection with this lease. The greatest crime of 
 this corrupt age is the use of official station for personal aggrandizement. 
 You have been the honored associate of men of better habits and better 
 times. I beg you now not to allow your good name to be quoted hereafter as 
 lending countenance, even by association, to this great crime. In my judg 
 ment, this great work ought to be removed from political partisan control." 
 
 But it could not be denied that the lease, as made, was for a while very 
 unpopular in the State, and Mr. Stephens had added to its unpopularity by 
 refusing to take a share in the lease, although he had written to Governor 
 Brown consenting to do so. One of the greatest victories ever won by a 
 public speaker was that of Mr. Hill before the convention of the Georgia 
 Railroad, held in Augusta. The question before the convention was 
 whether or not the stockholders of the road would ratify the action of the 
 president, John P. King, in becoming one of the securities on the bond of 
 the lessees of the State road. Mr. Hill was present to advocate sustaining 
 the indorsement. Robert Toombs and Linton Stephens were present for 
 the purpose of fighting it. The hall in which the convention was held was 
 crowded with earnest and excited men, all against the indorsement and 
 bitterly inimical to the lease. When Mr. Hill arose to speak, instead of 
 being greeted by applause, he was received with hisses and jeers, but when 
 he had concluded his argument this same crowd gave him round after round 
 of enthusiastic applause, and so great was the revolution in their sentiment 
 that the speeches of Toombs and Stephens made no impression upon them, and 
 they voted to sustain the indorsement almost without a dissenting voice. 
 At this day it will certainly be admitted by all that the condemnation of 
 Mr. Hill for becoming one of the lessees was without reason and unjust. 
 
 The third reason for Mr. Hill s unpopularity at this period was his 
 attendance on the banquet given by Governor Bullock to Mr. Delano, and 
 the speech that he made there. It was objected in the first place that he 
 ought not to have attended. It was said that no Southern man ought to 
 have attended a banquet given by Governor Bullock to Northern Republi 
 cans. Was this position correct ? The banquet was given to a distin 
 guished gentleman, who was a member of the Cabinet. It was given by the 
 Governor of the State, and, although a Republican governor, yet an honest 
 man and a gentleman.* It is a striking illustration of the bitterness of 
 those days and the changes which time has wrought, that Mr. Hill should 
 
 * I speak advisedly. Governor Bullock was indicted for embezzlement while gover 
 nor. I was solicitor-general at the time, and aided in his prosecution. The most 
 searching investigation failed to disclose any evidence of his guilt, and he was promptly 
 acquitted by a Democratic jury. This much a sense of justice induces me to write. 
 
62 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 have been condemned for being present at a banquet to a prominent North 
 ern citizen. Now our people welcome all visitors from the North, regard 
 less of politics, have frequently banqueted our worst political enemies, and 
 Governor Bullock is now one of the most honored citizens of Atlanta and a 
 welcome guest at any Southern home. But the speech that Mr. Hill made 
 at the banquet gave much offense to the people, and the expression in it, 
 " that he did not go to be a Democrat," was used by his traducers with ter 
 rible effect ; and yet this expression is thoroughly explained by the context 
 of the speech, and is perfectly unobjectionable. As a matter of interest in 
 this connection, the speech is here given in full. 
 
 Mr. Delano in his speech made the following allusion to the State of 
 Georgia : 
 
 " When I travel over your extensive territory ; when I behold the fertility 
 of your soil, and its peculiar adaptability for the production of that great 
 commodity that yields to our country more wealth than is realized from any 
 other one source ; when I come in contact with your inhabitants, and receive 
 their congratulations and friendly greetings, and enjoy their hospitality, I 
 feel that I am not paying an unjust or undeserved compliment, when I say 
 that this State is one of the most flourishing and one of the most progressive 
 States in the Union, and in the Union she is and she will ever be." 
 
 Mr. Delano gave the following toast : 
 
 " I desire now to give you, gentlemen, as my sentiment, Georgia may 
 she soon have in the Union, in all respects and in all particulars, the place 
 she deserves. 
 
 Governor Bullock called on Hon. Ben. H. Hill to answer to this toast. He 
 said, in substance : 
 
 " In one respect I am very sure that I am the proper person to respond to 
 the toast, * The State of Georgia, for I affect no merit when I say that I 
 love that State. I have loved her in her errors, I have loved her in her wis 
 dom, I have loved her in her prosperity, I have loved her in the days of 
 adversity the days of her sorrows and trials, and thank God, I shall love 
 her to the end. I am glad that the toast was given, The State of Geor 
 gia. I like the toast. I like it because it is of Georgia. I like it because 
 my friend spoke of it as the /State of Georgia. Ah, that is a cheering word ! 
 It has been a very long time since we knew whether we were a State or not. 
 But we are a State now ; we have it from high authority, from the lips of a 
 member of the Cabinet. We are a State at last ! That means reconstruc 
 tion is over. Thank God. It has been a long time getting over ; it has been 
 a hard struggle to get over, but it is over, over, over at last. I like that 
 toast because it came from the distinguished gentleman who is a member of 
 General Grant s Cabinet. I like him, and if all the members of General 
 Grant s Cabinet are like him, I like them all. He spoke of the prosperity of 
 Georgia. These words remind us of the days that are gone, and I hope they 
 are the happy augury of days that are to come. For myself, I feel to-night 
 that I am ten years behind where I really stand. I remember about ten 
 years ago I was able to say, and say conscientiously, that this was the State 
 of Georgia. Just ten years ago I was a Bell and Everett man. Ten years 
 ago the platform of the Bell and Everett party was the Constitution, the 
 Union, and the enforcement of the Laws. That is about all the points that 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 63 
 
 I have now. I am back where I was ten years ago, upon the platform of 
 the Constitution and the enforcement of the law. Some people say that I 
 have come to be a radical. That is a terrible mistake. That can never be, 
 never, never. Some people say that I am not a good Democrat. If I ever 
 was a Democrat, I can honestly say that I did not go to be. I was not a 
 Democrat, certainly, from choice, and if a Democrat at all, I was a Demo 
 crat from necessity. People talk about my having changed. I have not 
 changed a single sentiment you ever heard me express, not one ; but times 
 change ; circumstances change ; issues change ; events change ; interests 
 change ; rights change ; necessities change ; and we should adapt ourselves 
 to them if we expect to prosper. 
 
 Sir, when you return to Washington, honorable and honored as I know 
 you to be, from association, say that the people of Georgia have three ideas : 
 the first is to resist wrong ; the second is to resent insult ; and the third 
 is to submit to the law. The highest type of manhood is exhibited in sub 
 mission to the law. The most disorganizing form of manhood is exhibited 
 in disregard of law. People do not draw distinctions. When you propose 
 to do what I do not approve, I am not a man if I do not disagree with you. 
 When anything becomes law, whether I like it or not, if I do not obey it, I 
 am neither a good citizen nor an honest patriot. Power makes law, and you 
 may argue forever, and after all the question comes back to this : the only 
 safety in society, the only security for property, the only protection for life, 
 the only hope for the future, is undivided, honest, faithful submission to the 
 law, whether we like it or not. 
 
 That is the only idea I have ever had on this subject, and it is worth a 
 life-time to have that idea. If men would not submit to the law because 
 they did not like it, then every man s wish would be his law, and the only 
 law known to them. I do not like some of our laws. I am free to say if I 
 had had the making of them, they would never have been made, never, 
 never, never, but being made, I am not ashamed to say that it is my duty 
 to obey them ; and it is your interest and your duty to obey them also. I 
 want to say something to the people of Georgia, but I cannot do it now. 
 It is said that a man s mind always runs in the direction that he is the most 
 interested in at the particular time in which he is speaking. I trust that 
 our quarrels are over ; I trust that our sufferings are over ; I trust that every 
 man can rise to the high dignity and the glorious liberty of saying that he 
 has buried the past and purposes to live for the future. 
 
 But beyond and deeper than all these questions of propriety, Mr. Hill 
 had a patriotic motive for attending this banquet and making this speech. 
 His motive was to save Georgia from the horrors of another reconstruction. 
 Mr. Hill himself explains fully his motive in a conversation reported by Mr. 
 Henry W. Grady. Mr. Grady makes the following statement : 
 
 " About two years ago, at a banquet to General Gordon, I sat just 
 opposite Mr. Hill. Governor Bullock, one of the invited guests, sat next to 
 Major Crane at the head of the table. Mr. Hill suddenly said to me : * This 
 scene recalls a very important night in my life, that of the Delano banquet. 
 By strange coincidence the tables are arranged precisely as they were on 
 that night, and Governor Bullock occupies precisely the same seat, and I am 
 sitting exactly where I sat that night. I have been thinking of that affair 
 while sitting here, and, after the lapse of more than ten years, I am prepared 
 to say that it was the most patriotic and bravest act of my life. If I had 
 
64 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 the power to judge myself as a patriot and a man by one single act of my 
 life, I would take that night as the measure of my aspiration. You believed 
 it necessary to conciliate the Republican administration, then ? Yes, sir ; 
 I knew then, and we all know now, that a plan had been determined on that 
 would put the States again under military rule, and that would re-enact the 
 horrors and disturbances of reconstruction. I felt that it was absolutely 
 necessary for the prosperity of the State and the safety of the people that 
 this should be prevented. I felt that if the struggle between the races was 
 renewed under even more irritating circumstances than those through which 
 we had already passed, there would be the most horrible results. I believed 
 that if I could get the ear of the gentlemen who visited Atlanta that night, 
 and could tell them candidly and forcibly the real status of affairs, I could pre 
 vent the carrying out of the program of force and oppression, and secure 
 for the State the right to work out its problem in a legitimate way, unawed 
 by bayonets and undisturbed by military force. I felt in my own heart 
 that there was but one way to get an audience of those men, and that was 
 to meet them on that social occasion. I went there and made such a speech 
 as I thought would meet the case, speaking from the depths of a patriotic 
 heart. I was satisfied then, and I know now, that I saved the State by that 
 night s work. I have said that it was a brave act, because it required bravery 
 to face the prejudice of that period and to challenge the criticisms I knew 
 my conduct would provoke. My duty, however, was plain to me, and I did 
 not shrink from it. I have outlived the storm which followed that night, 
 but never, even when it was at its height, did I regret for one moment the 
 course I had taken ; and to-night, reviewing the whole case, I say to you 
 that I had rather see any single thing that I ever did blotted out of my life, 
 than that night s work. 
 
 It is conceded by all men now that the letter of Mr. Hill, in 1870, was 
 wise and consistent, and was adopted by his party two years afterward ; 
 that the lease of the Western and Atlantic Railroad was honestly made, and 
 was the correct policy of the State ; that Mr. Hill s attendance at the Delano 
 banquet and the speech he there made, was dictated by the sincerest motives 
 that ever actuated a patriot s heart. 
 
 And that the expression that "he did not goto be a Democrat," was simply 
 to emphasize the oppressions of the Republican party in its treatment of the 
 South. Yet the criticisms that followed these things were relentless, unspar 
 ing, and cruel, and kept Mr. Hill from public service for years. I have thus 
 been particular in giving the details of this period of Mr. Hill s life, because 
 I think it important that the facts should be thoroughly understood and 
 the truth vindicated. But the result of all these unjust criticisms was to 
 weaken Mr. Hill s influence as a public man, and for several years his utter 
 ances were perverted and his purposes misrepresented. This fact was strik 
 ingly illustrated in the criticism that followed his address before the Alumni 
 Society of the University of Georgia, at the commencement of 1871. This 
 address was prepared with great care, and was the fruit of matured thought 
 and philosophical reflection. Mr. Hill departed from his usual habit and 
 wrote the address in full, and for the first and only time in his life read it 
 to his audience. I venture to say that no speech ever before delivered in 
 Georgia contains more truth, more wisdom, and more love of country, than 
 this one. Since that day, its thoughts have been utilized by many speakers 
 and have received the plaudits of Southern audiences, but so great was the 
 prejudice against Mr. Hill, that when he spoke great truths for the good of 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 65 
 
 bis people, his sentiments were perverted and he was charged with advo 
 cating social equality between the races and with disloyalty to his section. 
 
 In 1872 the Democratic party nominated Horace Greeley for Presi 
 dent, and in its platform adopted the principles enunciated by Mr. Hill 
 in his letter of December, 1870. The " N. D.," as it was called, was 
 regarded by Mr. Hill as an earnest effort on the part of the Democratic 
 party to get rid of all sectional issues, and, if possible, bring about national 
 harmony. He, therefore, gave this movement his most active and enthusi 
 astic support. He canvassed the State, and made many speeches to recon 
 cile his people to the support of one who had been a life-long enemy, and 
 notwithstanding the opposition of the two Stephenses and General Toombs, 
 all three of whom preferred Grant to Greeley, he carried the people of 
 Georgia to the almost unanimous support of Horace Greeley. The Greeley 
 movement was a most disastrous failure, but, notwithstanding this fact, it 
 was regarded by Mr. Hill as the most beneficial post bellum episode in 
 national politics. It broke the crust of Northern prejudice, and furnished 
 proof of the sincere desire of the Southern people to get rid of sectional 
 issues and all questions arising out of the war. In December, 1873, the 
 General Assembly of the State was to elect a United States Senator to suc 
 ceed Joshua Hill, and Mr. Hill was supported by his friends for this position. 
 His opponents were General Gordon, who was idolized by our people because 
 pf his gallant services during the war, and Mr. Stephens, who represented 
 the opposition to the Greeley movement, and who thought to win success 
 on its failure. All three of the candidates addressed the Legislature. The 
 speech ma<Je by Mr. Hill was regarded as a masterly vindication of his 
 political career, and was pronounced one of the ablest discussions of 
 national questions ever heard in this State. But the cloud cast over his 
 political future by the letter of 1870, the lease, and the Delano banquet, had 
 not sufficiently lifted ; and the confidence of the people, that had been 
 estranged from him on account of these things, had not returned, and he 
 was defeated by General Gordon, and did not secure as many votes as Mr. 
 Stephens. During the years 1873 and 1874, Mr. Hill made several political 
 speeches against the Republican party in its treatment of the South. These 
 speeches, in great part, won back for him the love of the people, and in 
 1874 there was a clamor all over the State for his election to Congress from 
 the ninth district. He had, however, purchased a home in the city of 
 Atlanta, although he had not formally removed his residence from the town 
 of Athens, and it was therefore argued against him that he did not reside in 
 the district. For this reason he was defeated by Garnett McMillan. Mr. 
 Hill made no effort whatever to secure the nomination for Congress at this 
 time. Garnett McMillan died before taking his seat. The voice of the State, 
 through the press and through meetings of the citizens, became so earnest for 
 his election to Congress that his friends determined to elect him at all hazards. 
 
 The convention assembled in Gainesville, and for the reason that Mr. Hill 
 had removed from Athens to Atlanta, he did not get a majority of the votes 
 in the convention, but the two thirds rule had been adopted, and the dele 
 gates who supported Mr. Hill represented the wealthiest and most populous 
 counties. They insisted that they represented a large majority of the 
 voters of the district, and it was not right for them to yield the two 
 thirds rule, and they declared their intention of remaining in session and 
 balloting until the day of the election. They remained together for eight 
 days, without a change, except by repeated efforts to break the ranks of Mr. 
 
66 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Hill s supporters by bringing forward local candidates, but, failing in this, 
 they withdrew from the convention and recommended J. B. Estes as a can 
 didate for Congress. Mr. Hill s supporters recommended him. Mr. Hill 
 was very deeply interested in the result of this convention. He felt anxious 
 to go to Congress, not from any personal motive of ambition, but he realized 
 that he could benefit and vindicate his long-slandered people, and he was 
 anxious for an opportunity of defending them before the listening nation. 
 He determined, therefore, to run, and, publishing an address to the people of 
 the district, he announced himself as a candidate. 
 
 In connection with this Gainesville convention, Mr. Grady gives the 
 following account of an interview with Mr. Hill : " Mr. Hill had been beaten 
 by McMillan for the House and beaten by Gordon for the Senate ; the 
 shadow of the Delano banquet unjustly, but cruelly, still hung over his name. 
 His friends felt and he felt, I think, that the struggle he was then engaged 
 in was political life or death. We had hoped to open with at least half the 
 votes and speedily get a nomination under the two thirds rule. I received 
 a bulletin of the first ballot. It stood Hill 28, Bell 33. Astonished and 
 mortified, I hurried to him with the news. I met him at the Wall Street 
 side door of the Kimball House. I read him the dispatch. It struck him 
 hard. He paled instantly and his face filled with grief. He turned away, 
 lifted one foot to a baggage truck which stood on the sidewalk, and was 
 silent for fully a moment ; then he fronted me and said in sad tones, I had 
 not expected this or deserved it. As God is my judge, I do not seek office 
 for office sake, or for the notoriety that comes with it. I believe that I can 
 serve my people and my country to good purpose. For this reason and for 
 this alone I have asked their suffrage. They have decided against me. I 
 shall at once withdraw my name, and never again allow it to go before the 
 people. I do not care to say even now how much of pain and grief there 
 was in his manner and voice as he said this. He spoke as a man facing an 
 irreparable and essential loss." 
 
 But the determination of his friends, as above indicated, paved the way 
 for him to go directly to the people, and he did so, winning an overwhelm 
 ing triumph. His election to Congress caused great rejoicing throughout 
 the State, and indeed throughout the South. The confidence of his people, 
 that misconception had temporarily withdrawn from him 3 returned with 
 enthusiastic love. Mass meetings were held in nearly every city r.ncl town in 
 the State, and resolutions were passed congratulating the people upon the 
 election of one who was able to become the invincible champion of the South 
 in the halls of Congress. A large meeting of the people of Atlanta was 
 held in the hall of the House of Representatives to signalize their joy over 
 his election. Twenty-eight cannons v/ere fired in honor of the twenty-eight 
 delegates who had stood firm in hie support, thus securing his triumph. He 
 was invited to make a speech, and he ctid so in such manner as added greatly 
 to the enthusiasm and expectations of the people. In commenting on Mr. 
 Hill s position in Georgia, just before his election to Congress, Mr. Frank 
 H. Alfriend, in a philosophical analysis of his public course, uses the follow 
 ing eloquent language : 
 
 " Whatever the issue of the present popular demand, seconded by an 
 unprecedented unanimity of appeal from the Southern press, that Mr. Hill 
 be given to the service of the nation, there is significance in the spontaneity 
 of the demonstration and encouragement of a reviving public spirit. Whether 
 Mr. Hill, and men of similar representative genius and character, shall in the 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 67 
 
 early future fill high official positions, involves less of interest to themselves 
 than of pertinence in the question of the extent to which popular sensibility 
 and appreciation have recovered from the demoralization consequent upon 
 the change and turbulence of our recent past. In the entire range of con 
 temporary political biography, there can be found no public man with a 
 personality to be affected less by political promotion or its absence, than 
 Benjamin H. Hill, and with an assured fame, to be disturbed less by the 
 fickle favor of the multitude. Rich in the elements of greatness that have 
 given to mankind its benefactors, Mr. Hill is indeed poor in the arts that 
 have for a score of years been the avenues to political success in America. 
 His sterling honesty and blunt truthfulness and high courage, not less than 
 his massive intellect, give him a noble disdain of fawning upon the masses 
 and catching up the street cry of popular prejudice, and will impel him at 
 any time, without regard to his personal interest, to defend the Thermopylae 
 of what he believes to be truth against a host of assailants. Under anv cir- 
 
 <_/ v 
 
 cumstances Mr. Hill must ever remain a colossal figure in the history of the 
 last two decades of Georgia : to the minds of those who have differed 
 with him, a distinct and formidable power, and to his friends the symbol of 
 the shaping brain and guiding hand that rescued Georgia from the ruin 
 menaced by war and Reconstruction. Office is not necessary to render such 
 a man great in the eyes of his countrymen., Pitt, out of office, was hailed 
 with acclamations by a grateful people, who refused to notice George the 
 Third ; the absence of Cato s statue only reminded the people of the sur 
 passing greatness of the absent patriot. Mr. Hill belongs to a class of 
 public men for whose eminent exemplars we have to look back at least a 
 quarter of a century in American politics, and of whom there have been few, 
 save Peel and Gladstone, among the publicists of England of the present 
 century. Knowing little of the mere tactics of party, nor conversant with 
 the duties of the drill-master, and courting no influence with the chiefs of 
 fifties and the captains of tens, they are yet the brain and the heart of the 
 great popular impulses that make history in its most dignified sense." 
 
CHAPTER VL 
 
 Takes his Seat us a Member of the Forty-fourth Congress, December, 1875 Great Debate 
 with James G. Blaine, on the 10th of January, 1876, on the Subject of Amnesty 
 Powerful Vindication of the South The Scene in the House during this great Dis 
 cussion The Effect of his Speech Received with Great Enthusiasm at the South 
 Editorial of Henry W. Grady on the Speech Mr. Hill is Unanimously Re-elected to 
 the Forty-fifth Congress The Electoral Commission Mr. Hill Supports it His 
 Reasons for so Doing Elected United States Senator on January 8, 1877 Great 
 Enthusiasm of the People over his Triumph His Career in the United States Senate 
 He again Meets in Discussion his old Antagonist, Mr. Blaine The Similarity be 
 tween the Two Men Mr. Hill s Debate with the Judiciary Committee of the Senate 
 on the Pacific Funding Bill Great Speech on the 10th of May, 1879 Comments of 
 a Northern Journalist The Spofford-Kellogg Senatorial Contest Argument against 
 Kellogg Discussion with Senators Butler and Hampton of South Carolina The 
 Attack on William Mahone His Speech on this Occasion Scenes in the Senate dur 
 ing its Delivery His Letter in Reply to an Attack Made on him by Dr. William H. 
 Felton. 
 
 MR. HILL took his seat in Congress, December, 1875. This was the 
 first Democratic Congress since the war. He had never served in 
 the national council, but his fame as an orator, and his political record in 
 Georgia before, during, and since the war, were perfectly well known. His 
 experience in the Confederate States Senate, and his stud} 7 " of public ques 
 tions and his familiarity with national legislation prepared him at once for 
 leadership, and this position he was accorded by unanimous consent. On 
 the 10th of January, 1876, about one month after Mr. Hill took his seat, the 
 great debate on the subject of general amnesty to Southern men came on, 
 Mr. James G. Blaine moving to except Jefferson Davis from its provisions. 
 The discussion that followed was the most dramatic, eloquent, and powerful 
 that ever took place in the halls of Congress. When Blaine had finished his 
 terrible attack on the South, and the wires flashed the intelligence that Ben 
 Hill of Georgia had the floor to reply, the people were in an excited and 
 enthusiastic expectation. It was felt with intense thankfulness that at last 
 the opportunity had come for Southern vindication, and that the man was 
 equal to the opportunity. This vindication had been long delayed. The 
 civilization and humanity of the South in her treatment of prisoners of war 
 had been a portion of stock in trade of Northern slanderers on the floor of 
 Congress, and there seemed to be no one who had the ability to make a 
 defense. 
 
 Mr. Blaine had prepared his attack with great care, and, realizing that 
 Mr. Hill would be the man to make reply, with gesticulation and manner he 
 singled the Georgian from the Democratic side and made his speech at him. 
 The Democrats were not prepared for Mr. Elaine s attack. As Speaker of 
 the House of Representatives in the preceding Congress, he had won the 
 gratitude of the Southern people for his resistance to the force bill. The 
 moment he finished his terrific arraignment, Mr. Hill endeavored to secure 
 the floor to make an immediate reply. In this, however, he did not suc 
 ceed, as both Cox of New York and Kelly of Pennsylvania were recognized 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 69 
 
 by the Speaker. At last Mr. Hill was recognized, whereupon a motion to 
 adjourn was made, thus giving Mr. Hill until the next morning until eleven 
 o clock for preparation. He, however, required no time for preparation. 
 He was, by reason of his services as Confederate States Senator, perfectly 
 familiar with the- whole question, and so soon as Congress adjourned he 
 went to his home. The Southern members had submitted to slander so 
 long, that many of them doubted the wisdom of any reply. They had so 
 long sacrificed principle to a mistaken conception of policy that they were 
 still willing to listen in silence to their traducers. They were timid and 
 very much afraid that the heat and passion of the debate might lead Mr. 
 Hill to say something that would injure the Democratic party. So soon, 
 therefore, as Mr. Hill reached home he was besieged with Democratic mem 
 bers, making suggestions and giving caution. To escape these visitors, he 
 retired to bed about nine o clock, thoroughly disgusted with the pusillani 
 mous spirit of some of his party associates. He did not wish any sugges 
 tions from them. His mind was fully made up, and he was prepared. He 
 knew that he could make a complete defense of his beloved land, and he 
 was not one of those who believed in the policy of silence. Indeed, the 
 character and civilization of his people were dearer to him than party suc 
 cess ; besides, he did not believe that the fearless declaration of truth could 
 injure any just cause. Early the next morning he \vas again annoyed by 
 callers, but refused to see any one or hear any suggestions. At eleven 
 o clock, when he arose in his place to speak for his long maligned section, 
 he faced such an audience as had greeted no man since the war. An able 
 writer in the Chronicle and Sentinel, of Augusta, thus describes this historic 
 scene : 
 
 " It has been given to Georgia to illustrate the records of Congress by 
 the triumph of her sons upon that arena of high debate. Since the great 
 effort of Mr. Hill last Tuesday, I have been running hurriedly through the 
 Globe and other records of Congressional history, and it is only from such 
 sources that a just appreciation can be reached of the powerful voice and in 
 fluence that Georgia has always had at Washington. For more than thirty 
 years past, omitting the four years of war, coming down to a period subse 
 quent to the great career of Crawford, through Berrien and Stephens and 
 Tooiubs, Georgia has stood in the van of States in the character and ability 
 of her representatives in both houses. For nearly a week past, men all over 
 the country have been discussing the burst of another magnificent sunshine 
 from Georgia, and to-day there are few men confronting so splendid a 
 national reputation as he whom Georgians, for a quarter of a century, have 
 called Bon Hill, calling the name always as if it symbolized intellectual 
 powers, embracing might in argument, power of statement, eloquence of 
 thought and action, as Demosthenes meant it in oratory, in brief, as a very 
 Spartacus in the arena of politics as in the legal forum. In Mr. Hill s debut 
 in Congress there has been nothing of the harlequin-like effrontery and 
 eagerness to grasp Congressional honors. There was in his manner, as he 
 arose at eleven o clock last Tuesday to address the House, a profound 
 solemnity, which men feel only when confronted by high duty to which 
 they come with noble resolve. 
 
 " The scene was a memorable one, and in future years, if put upon can 
 vas, the picture would be a proud one for Georgia, as commemorative of the 
 day when one of her sons put to lasting shame the calumnies and reproaches 
 of her enemies. The Senate Chamber was deserted and Senators of both 
 
70 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 parties were early on the floor of the House and eager to secure eligible 
 seats. The attendance in the House was unusually full. Fringing the 
 amphitheater of the floor were the galleries, dense with eager humanity, 
 divided in desire and hope as to the outcome, but animated by a common 
 impulse of expectancy of a display which should be powerful in its conse 
 quences of good or evil. The space in front of the Speaker was filled with 
 men conspicuous in the history of the past, and others who had been promi 
 nent in making the history of our times. Immediately in front of Mr. Hill 
 was seen the strong, gnarled face of ex-Senator Gwin of California, drawn 
 for the first time this session to the Capitol, wearing, despite his character 
 istic air of imperturbable repose and practiced unconcern, a visible expression 
 of blended confidence and anxiety. Ex-Senator Henry S. Foote, who in age 
 haunts like a ghost the Capitol, where in his young manhood he found the 
 theater for the melodrama of his life of cheap political reputation, sat just 
 in front of the clerk s desk. The noble face of Gordon was seen in close 
 proximity to the handsome, clear-cut features of Ransom. As close to Mr. 
 Hill as he could get, was Senator Caperton of West Virginia, Hill s old 
 confrere in the Confederate Senate. The Georgia members were variously 
 located in places of close proximity to Mr. Hill. Gallant Phil Cook had sur 
 rendered his seat to Mr. Hill, and sat with his face to his eminent colleague. 
 Across the narrow aisle sat Hardridge, calm and erect ; Harris sat close to 
 Hill to help him with the authorities he required in his argument ; Smith 
 sat in his own seat, closely watching the scene with more or less anxiety 
 upon his countenance ; Blount and Candler, whose seats are adjacent, were 
 absorbed listeners and spectators Blount with his head upon his hand, his 
 face betraying no particular emotion, and Candler with his face wearing 
 that curious equivoke of expression that utterly forbids one to know whether 
 he is pleased or displeased, entertained or annoyed, amused or disgusted ; 
 Dr. Felton occupied his accustomed seat, and the floor held no more 
 delighted listener to the noble oration of his old class-mate. 
 
 " As the speech continued, I closely watched its effect. -In fifteen minutes 
 from its beginning all anxiety disappeared from the faces of Southern men. 
 He is coming to time, and is as good a champion as we want, said the 
 manly Parsons of Kentucky. * What a man Hill must be in the court 
 house, said Waddell of North Carolina, as the full weight of the powerful 
 argument developed. * He is an ideal speaker, said the veteran Charles 
 James Faulkner, and comes fully up to my expectations. Mr. Faulkner 
 is himself one of the most accomplished orators and debaters in the country, 
 and it was a compliment indeed when further he turned and said, Hill is a 
 man of wonderful power. Proctor Knott quietly turned to Waddell with 
 the remark, That man is a giant. The Republicans were curiously uneasy 
 during the speech. Blaine looked hacked badly, as he unquestionably was, 
 and it required two days to give him such complete recovery as to enable 
 him to make his reply on Thursday. Several times Mr. Hill was interrupted 
 from the Republican side with questions, but the latter were quick to see 
 that he rather courted than avoided interruptions, and let him severely 
 alone until the end of his speech. The speech would excite no surprise 
 before a Georgia audience acquainted with Mr. Hill s oratorical power. 
 Here it is pronounced on all hands a wonderful effort. The argument was 
 severely close and no Republican speaker has been able to make the slightest 
 impression upon its massive front. The peroration is a magnificent appeal 
 for harmony and a splendid expression of the broadest and best American 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 71 
 
 sentiment. Mr. Hill is the recipient by every mail of letters and newspapers, 
 from every section of the country, full of congratulations and thanks. Some 
 of the most earnest of these congratulatory letters are from Union soldiers, 
 who say, in substance, that Mr. Hill has performed a double duty of 
 patriotism in vindicating a section of the country from shameful calumny, 
 and making a powerful plea for national sentiment everywhere. Prominent 
 Northern Democrats are delighted with the speech. They no longer have 
 to fight the * Andersonville Horrors. Twenty thousand copies of the 
 speech have been ordered for early distribution in the North." 
 
 The Southern people received this speech with unbounded enthusiasm, 
 and Mr. Hill received thousands of letters and telegrams conveying to him 
 the gratitude of his people. It is a remarkable proof of the success of the 
 argument, that never again was the charge of cruelty to prisoners of 
 war made against the South by the most reckless of Northern slan 
 derers. Henry W. Grady wrote the following beautiful editorial on this 
 speech : 
 
 MR. HILL S GREAT SPEECH. 
 
 We are enabled this morning to present to our readers a full verbatim 
 report of Mr. Hill s great speech in reply to Mr. Elaine. We print the 
 speech in full, just as it was delivered, omitting only the colloquial debates 
 that bubbled up over the course of the essential argument at odd intervals. 
 
 It rejoices us to see that the sober second thought of the press, and es 
 pecially of the correspondents at Washington, gives Mr. Hill unqualified 
 praise for his grand defense of the South against her slanderers. We have 
 clipped and prepared for print over four columns of extracts from leading 
 papers, in all sections, that put to shame Mr. Hill s detractors and give him 
 his just meed of commendation. 
 
 It is naturally expected, by those who understood Mr. Hill s peculiar 
 surroundings, that he would be criticised sharply on his first speech, by cer 
 tain members of his own party, no matter what sort of a speech he might 
 make. Beyond this, Mr. Hill always makes such speeches as excite com 
 ment. The speech in question startled the House and the galleries, we may 
 be sure. We have the word of an eye-witness, who has heard Mr. Hill 
 over and over again, that he was never so superbly eloquent ; never so 
 grandly impassioned, and yet so coolly poised, as in his last speech. The 
 speech came like a revelation to those who did not know the speaker. Sur 
 prise broke upon the faces of the listeners as the voice of the Georgian 
 swelled into his rounded periods, and became sheer wonder when he got 
 fairly down to his work. He held the House enraptured, and friends and 
 foes alike hung upon every syllable that dropped from his silver tongue. 
 At last, when his splendid peroration was finished, and the echoes of his 
 trumpet-like voice were dying away, Hon. Dan. Voorhees, himself a good 
 orator, sprang to his feet and exclaimed, " That is the best speech that has 
 been spoken in this House for twenty years. It is as sublime as the inspired 
 words that fell from the lips of Paul on Mar s hill." 
 
 After all, let us look quietly and soberly at the speech and the circum 
 stances surrounding it. For the simple purpose of answering the few men 
 who still believe, or profess to believe, that Mr. Hill should not have made 
 the speech, we assume to defend him for a moment. We admit, in the out 
 set, that the revival of this discussion of the Northern and Southern prison 
 treatment is unfortunate for the whole country, and especially so for the 
 
72 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA, 
 
 South. It will renew sectional hatred, revivify the partisan fires, and rein- 
 spire the North to fanaticism. If any Southern member had inaugurated, 
 or in any manner whatever provoked this discussion, he would have been 
 guilty of a blunder, that would have been, as Talleyrand said, worse than a 
 crime. 
 
 But no Southern member was responsible for it. It was wantonly and 
 deliberately sprung by Mr. Elaine, a smart schemer for the Republican 
 Presidential nomination. He arose, and in the most brutal and slanderous 
 manner denounced the Confederate Government for the cruelties alleged to 
 have been practiced at Andersonville. Such another fiendish and malignant 
 assault upon the honor, the chivalry, and good name of a people we do not 
 believe the records of Reconstruction politics as full as they are of brutal 
 slanders will furnish. He made two statements that were positive, con 
 spicuous, and, as Mr. Hill showed, false. He first charged that " Mr. 
 Davis was fully, deliberately guilty, and wantonly cognizant of, and re 
 sponsible for the organized crime and murder of Andersonville." He then 
 said : 
 
 " I now assert deliberately before God, as my judge, knowing the full 
 measure and import of my word, that the cruelties of the Duke of Alva in 
 the Low Countries, the massacre of St. Bartholomew, and the screws and 
 tortures of the Spanish Inquisition did not approach in cruelty the atrocity 
 of Andersonville." 
 
 
 
 His speech absolutely bristled with statements similar to the ones above 
 quoted. Now, on the floor of the House, within the hearing of these slan 
 ders, sat a man delegated by his people to protect their honor before the 
 country ; a man elected because his wonderful power qualified him especially 
 to answer the misrepresentations which, for a long and painful decade, had 
 been heaped upon an unresisting people. This man, above any other man 
 probably in the House, had in his possession facts which dispelled, utterly 
 and triumphantly, every leading assertion made by Blaine. This man knew 
 that the statements of the ex-Speaker, if acquiesced in by silence, would put 
 a miserable and everlasting stain upon the integrity and honor of his 
 people. He knew that they were false, and that he could prove them to 
 be false. 
 
 What was his duty, then, under the circumstances ? To sit supinely in his 
 chair and have it said, that the confidential adviser of Jefferson Davis, with 
 all the facts in his possession, did not dare to rise and contradict what Mr. 
 Blaine had said ? To sit there skulking beneath a false prudence, and let 
 the Republican party scatter Blame s assertions all over the North, coupled 
 with the boast, that though made in open Congress, in the presence of a 
 Democratic majority, in the very face of ex-Confederate senators and 
 generals and congressmen, that not one of them dared to rise, and contro 
 vert the facts as laid down by the ex-Speaker ? We can imagine nothing 
 more absurd and cowardly. Silence, under such circumstances, would have 
 been, as the Savannah News fitly says, " both hypocritical and pusillani 
 
 mous. 
 
 It being admitted, then, and we suppose no intelligent man will, upon re 
 flection, deny that Blaine should have been answered, it is easy to see why, 
 of all other men, Mr. Hill was the man to make it. He was intimately con 
 nected with Mr. Davis during the Andersonville days, and was thoroughly 
 conversant with all the facts in the case. If, then, the slanders of Blaine 
 needed refutation, and Mr. Hill was the best man to refute them (and those 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 73 
 
 propositions seem to us to be self- evident), let us advance to the speech it 
 self, and see how he performed his task a task to which a hundred con 
 siderations of duty imperatively urged him. 
 
 It is acknowledged on all hands that the speech is a masterpiece of elo 
 quence. We seriously doubt if the United States can furnish Mr. Hill s 
 superior, when considered simply as an eloquent speaker. His wonderful 
 effort doubtless did much to revive the old distinction earned for the South 
 by such fiery giants of debate as Clay, Toombs, Cobb, and Berrien. As a 
 piece of soul-stirring, scholarly eloquence, the speech was surprisingly suc 
 cessful, and carried off all the honors. 
 
 As logical effort, it was none the less admirable. Mr. Hill did not make a 
 single assertion that was not sustained by the records. He said many things 
 that were new to his hearers, and unpalatable to some of them. He aston 
 ished his friends as well as his foes by the surprising array of facts and 
 figures. And yet, though the statementsmade in his speech turned Elaine s 
 assault, and made the gentleman ridiculous, and though Mr. Blaine has 
 himself since occupied the floor in his own defense, he did not attempt to 
 contradict a single statement made by Mr. Hill. 
 
 Considered simply as regards its effect in the North, we think the speech 
 admirable in tone and sentiment. It breathed a thorough Union sentiment, 
 and, while firm in its defense of the South, was tender, respectful, and de 
 voted to the whole country. Even when forced, through the necessity of de 
 bate, to allude to the cruelties practiced in Northern prisons, he shrank from 
 the task, and, with a nobility of sentiment that must have touched even his 
 enemies, he says that he shudders from putting a stigma upon either section 
 of the country, because he loves the whole country and is jealous of its 
 honor. How different is this good sentiment from the partisan meanness 
 of Blaine, who, though he pretended to love the Union, takes a delight to 
 put a stigma upon one section of it. 
 
 The whole speech is full of a patriotic fervor, full of love for the re 
 stored Union, and hopeful for its future. There is not a word in it to which 
 any Northern Democrat or Liberal, or intelligent citizen, can object, but 
 much that all of these must commend. As for the Republicans, it was not 
 meant to please them. 
 
 It will be plain, we think, to any man who carefully surveys the situation, 
 that Mr. Hill was right in answering Elaine s mad and reckless assertions. 
 To have permitted them to go to the country, unanswered, would have been 
 virtually to admit their truth a most fatal admission. That Mr. Hill an 
 swered them, eloquently, manfully, dignifiedly, and prudently, cannot be 
 denied, after the authorized report of his speech is read. 
 
 Ben Hill said a grand thing when he confronted Blaine and his angry 
 adherents, and exclaimed, " I tell you that this reckless misrepresentation of 
 the South must stop right here. I put you upon notice that hereafter when 
 you make any assertion against her you must be prepared to substantiate 
 it with proof ! 
 
 We thank God that there is a man in Congress at once bold enough to 
 say such a thing as this, and able enough to enforce it. With all respect 
 to those who have thought and acted otherwise, it is what the South has 
 needed for some time. 
 
 At the expiration of Mr. Hill s term in Congress, he was unanimously re- 
 elected for another term. The spring of 1877 is the darkest period in 
 
74 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 American history. Then was perpetrated that greatest outrage against the 
 Constitution and against the sovereignty of the people. The infamous heel 
 of fraud and bribery was on the fair neck of liberty and law. The voice 
 of the people silenced, and the greatest crime ever committed against free 
 government was executed by the Republican party. Mr. Tilden was elected 
 President of the United States, but by unparalleled and unprecedented 
 wrong was not permitted to take his seat. The country was in the midst 
 of a fearful crisis. The Republican party was unwilling to yield the govern 
 ment, after so long possession. General Grant had possession of the govern 
 ment and had the power and determination to usurp the functions of Con 
 gress, unless some measure of compromise was adopted. It was civil war 
 or compromise. This condition of affairs gave birth to the Electoral Com 
 mission. Democratic patriots were willing to submit to almost any wrong 
 rather than plunge the country into internecine conflict ; as a consequence, 
 all Democratic leaders favored the Electoral Commission. It did not seem 
 possible to them that men who were prominent enough to be selected as 
 members of this Commission could be led, from partisan feeling, to the com 
 mission of perjury, and in order to continue party supremacy, suppress truth, 
 and destroy Constitutional principles. Surely it was not possible for a 
 division, on strictly party lines, on questions involving the very existence of 
 free government. Besides, the Independent judge, David Davis, was to be 
 the umpire in the event of such a contingency, and the Democrats felt that 
 in his hands they could safely commit their cause. 
 
 The Republicans, apprehensive of the independent spirit of the judge, 
 hastened to elect him Senator from Illinois before the Commission was 
 organized, and he, in order to avoid the responsibility of the position as a 
 member of the Commission, resigned his seat on the supreme bench and 
 accepted the senatorship, thus rendering himself ineligible, and so another 
 judge of the Supreme Court, under the terms of the act creating the Com 
 mission, had to be selected, and Justice Bradley was the man. This settled 
 the question, and from that time the Democratic party had no chance. 
 Partisanship overrode patriotism, sectionalism was stronger than the great 
 right of free suffrage, returning boards more potent than ballots, falsehood 
 stronger than truth, and over all facts and against all law the will of the 
 sovereign people was disregarded and Hayes declared elected President. So 
 great and glaring was this outrage perpetrated against free government, that 
 some of the Democrats in the House advocated a resistance to the decla 
 ration of the result as determined by the Commission, and proposed to 
 adopt a policy of filibustering until after the 4th of March. 
 
 Mr. Hill did not favor this policy. In the first place he thought that the 
 Democrats were, in good faith, bound to submit to the decision of the Elec 
 toral Commission, as the party had given its consent to this method of set 
 tlement ; and in the second place, if the plan of delay succeeded in post 
 poning the declaration of the result by Congress, he did not see that any 
 practical good would be accomplished, or how Mr. Tilden could be seated. 
 President Grant was in possession of the government and would enforce the 
 decision of the Electoral Commission, even if it involved the country in 
 civil war. During this exciting period, Mr. Hill was recognized as the 
 leader of Southern Democrats, and his voice and influence were for peace at 
 all hazards. In support of his position, he made the following speech at a 
 Democratic caucus : 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WHITINGS. 
 
 REMARKS MADE BY B. H. HILL, IN THE CAUCUS OF DEMOCRATIC MEMBERS OF 
 
 THE HOUSE, FEBRUARY 12, 1877. 
 
 Mr. Chairman : Those who take counsel of their passions are often 
 honest, but rarely wise. The indignation excited by a sense of wrong 
 springs naturally in an honest heart, but this very indignation may over 
 come the judgment and increase the very wrongs it would remedy. The 
 strength of a wise man is, in great degree, measured by his ability to restrain 
 his indignation and control his feelings. It was my lot to be in the midst 
 of the secession excitement. I listened to those who counseled that move 
 ment. I am not sure I ever listened to more honest men, but I am sure I 
 never listened to more unwise ones. Pardon me, my friends, for I speak 
 with the greatest respect, but I must say that the scene here to-night has 
 brought vividly to my mind some of the scenes I then witnessed. Expres 
 sions have been used here to-night which are identical with some I heard 
 sixteen years ago, and are doubtless .inspired by like honest but excited 
 passions. I did not concur with the counsels of passion then because I 
 believed only evils would result. I do not concur with the counsels of pas 
 sions to-night because I believe still greater evils would result from their 
 adoption. 
 
 I have calmly reviewed our present situation, and feel it is my duty to 
 state frankly my conclusions. This is an hour for frankness. A mistake 
 now cannot be recalled. 
 
 I have carefully considered and weighed the decision and report made by 
 the Electoral Commission in the case of Florida. It is painfully clear to 
 my mind that the majority of that Commission have resolved, right or 
 wrong, to count in Mr. Hayes. They will refuse to see fraud, in order that 
 fraud may have success. I concede that. The result will be a great wrong 
 and a national shame. I concede that also. Can we prevent it ? If we can, 
 we ought. How can it be prevented ? Only one method has been sug 
 gested. That method is, by dilatory motions, to prevent the completion* of 
 the count bv the 4th of March. As a fact I admit that result can be 
 
 p 
 
 reached. But as a remedy, is it wise, and will it be effected ? I think not. 
 
 In the first place, the Constitution enjoins upon us the duty of making 
 the count, and we have all taken an oath to support the Constitution. We 
 cannot be absolved from that oath except by causes we can neither avert 
 nor control. But it is said all our dilatory motions will be according to 
 the rules, and, therefore, not revolutionary. I answer, the rules were made 
 to enable us to discharge our duties, and not to avoid them. We have no 
 right to use the rules, nor any other agency, to enable us to fail in a duty. 
 To do wrong under color and form of law, has been the strength, but also 
 the crime, of the Republican party. It is the very crime which is making 
 fraud omnipotent and of which we now justly complain. 
 
 In the second place, we have passed, at this very session, the law which 
 created this Electoral Commission. Our motives in passing it were patriotic, 
 however wicked may be the manner of its execution. That law pledges us 
 to complete the count, and we passed it in order to complete the count 
 peaceably and by the time prescribed. We cannot repeal that law, for 
 neither the Senate nor the Executive will concur in such repeal. No wrongs 
 and deceptions practiced by others indeed, nothing can justify us in the 
 violation or disregard of that law. 
 
76 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 But in the third place, suppose we determine not to complete the count, 
 and do succeed in preventing it ; what then ? 
 
 We shall certainly thereby prevent the peaceable inauguration of Mr. 
 Hayes, but we shall also as certainly not secure the peaceable inauguration 
 of Mr. Tilden. Neither will have been counted in. This will bring about 
 a contingency not contemplated by the framers of the Constitution nor by 
 the framers of the laws to carry into eifect the Constitution, and, therefore, 
 a contingency which has not been provided for. We shall be without both 
 a President and Vice-President, and without any provision of law consti 
 tutional or statute to secure either. In this contingency w r ho doubts that 
 Grant will continue himself upon us, perhaps for life ; or, that the Senate 
 will put Morton upon us at least until another election can be had ? Had 
 we not better take Hayes peaceably for four years than have either of these 
 on any terms ? 
 
 But suppose we resist this result, and declare Tilden President by a reso 
 lution of this House, without completing the count as required by the Con 
 stitution. What then ? Our enemies will have possession of the govern 
 ment, and will profess great willingness to abide by the Constitution and 
 the laws. We shall be charged with having precipitated a revolution by 
 refusing to obey either the Constitution, or our own law, both of which 
 require, us to complete the count. This result will be charged to have been 
 brought about by a Democratic House controlled by ex-Confederates. 
 Civil war will be inevitable. The end of that war no man can foresee. I 
 believe our free institutions w^ill be finally and forever destroyed. The 
 character of the war will become more and more sectional again, and I do 
 ilot doubt that Louisiana and South Carolina, from whose necks we are so 
 anxious to- lift the heels of oppressors and robbers, will be the greatest vic 
 tims in the universal horror. I believe nothing can justify or excuse a civil 
 war in a popular government. 
 
 Lifting myself, then, above all personal, sectional, and party considera 
 tions looking only, in this dark hour, to the good of our whole country 
 earnestly desiring to perpetuate our free institutions, and taking counsel 
 only of my judgment and sense of duty, I can see no course left us but to 
 go straight forward with the count, in accordance with the Constitution and 
 laws, and trust to the intelligence and virtue of the American people, in due 
 time, to visit proper retribution upon those who commit or accept frauds, for 
 geries, and perjuries, in order to usurp the offices and defeat the popular will. 
 
 But if we take a narrower view of the situation, and look only to the 
 effect upon political parties, we shall be brought to the same conclusions. 
 
 If the course I suggest be adopted, the Republican party will hold the 
 Presidency for four years longer. But they will continue in power solely 
 by frauds committed and accepted only by themselves. Those frauds will 
 surely come to light. The y cannot be concealed. We will bring them to 
 the light. If we fail in our duty, they will bring themselves to the light. 
 In the light of those frauds, when exposed, the people will be able to see 
 what passion and war and falsehood have hitherto prevented them from see 
 ing that the Republican party was never anything but a sectional, uncon 
 stitutional, and revolutionary party. They will see that that party has never 
 had any principle but force, and never any policy but fraud ; and finally 
 they will see that it is the only party now existing which is willing to hold 
 the offices against the will of the people. After the 4th of March that party 
 will become powerless to use force, and will live by no tenure but fraud, and, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 11 
 
 after four years of imbecile infamy, it will go out of power and out of 
 respect forever ! 
 
 On the other hand, the Democratic party will lose the Presidency for 
 four years, but we shall save the peace of the country and end the revolu 
 tion of force which has brought upon the people so much suffering. In the 
 light of this sacrifice the people will be able to see that the Democratic 
 party is the only truly national or constitutional party in existence, and is 
 the only party which regards the good of the people and the integrity of 
 the government as of higher value than the possession of the offices. At 
 the end of two years the States will give us the Senate, as the people have 
 already given us the House, and a Republican President will become utterly 
 harmless for evil. At the end of four years the people will redeem them 
 selves from the rule of both force and fraud by placing the Democracy in 
 full possession of the government, and they will retain that possession gen 
 erations to come. 
 
 These are my views. I express them with diffidence, but in kindness for 
 all. I believe my conclusions are wise, and I know they are honest and 
 patriotic. 
 
 At this time the General Assembly of Georgia was in session and a 
 United States senator was to be elected to succeed Thomas M. Nor 
 wood. Mr. Norwood s elevation to the senatorship was at a time when 
 Southern intelligence and statesmanship were disfranchised by the in 
 iquitous Reconstruction measures. He was a mnn of considerable lit 
 erary culture, a very good speaker, but possessed none of the elements 
 of statesmanship. He had made no record in the Senate. He had 
 listened for six years in silence to the slanders of his section and 
 
 / 
 
 his people. At this time, when the country demanded the presence 
 of all its servants at Washington City, he left his seat and came to 
 Georgia to look after his re-election. His excuse for doing so was 
 that he could do nothing. This was true, but the same reason should 
 have retired him to private life. A senator who could do nothing, 
 and for six years had demonstrated his remarkable and exceptionable 
 capacity in this line, should have recognized the fitness of things and 
 not have labored to impose himself further on a people whose interest 
 demanded that something be done. But Mr. Norwood was a success 
 ful still hunter. He hunted among the legislators of Georgia and the 
 press of the State. To accomplish his purpose he did not hesitate to 
 put in circulation charges against Mr. Hill s fealty to the Democratic 
 party, and at this time, when Mr. Hill was devoting his utmost ca 
 pacity to secure to his party the result of its great victory, and was 
 a trusted leader, the press of Georgia, taking its clew from Mr. Nor 
 wood, began to assault him. The history of politics does not furnish 
 another instance of such inexcusable and groundless accusations made 
 against a public man. It was charged that he had joined the Radi 
 cals, was untrue to his people, and was endeavoring to sell out his 
 party. To such an extent did these attacks go, that some of Mr. Hill s 
 friends in the Legislature deemed it necessary to secure letters from promi 
 nent Democrats at Washington City, sustaining his devotion and loyalty 
 to the party. 
 
 The warm pulse of indignation beats strong even to this dav as I recall 
 these efforts to destroy the usefulness of a statesman whose whole life is a 
 luminous record of unselfish fidelity to public trust. So great persistent, and 
 
78 SENATOR B. If. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 outrageous were these slanders that Mr. Hill was urged by his friends to 
 come to Georgia and vindicate himself before the Legislature. After much 
 entreaty and repeated calls, he was induced to do so. He came to Atlanta, 
 arriving in the morning ; at night he made a speech before the members of 
 the General Assembly, reviewing his political career, conclusively proving 
 not only his party fealty, but the wisdom of every policy which he had 
 advocated. His accusers were overwhelmed and silenced. Immediately 
 after the delivery of the speech he returned to Washington City. This 
 senatorial election was the most remarkable and exciting one that ever took 
 place in Georgia. Mr. Norwood, by the fact of occupancy, by persistent 
 personal appeals, by his shrewd manipulation of all the elements of opposi 
 tion to Mr. Hill, came very near succeeding. The State narrowly missed a 
 great calamity. On the first ballot Mr. Norwood lacked only two votes of 
 success. The Hill men, however, were not disheartened, but were more 
 determined on success. By the most adroit political management, they were 
 enabled to reduce Norwood s vote on the second ballot, and on the third 
 ballot Mr. Hill was elected. The President of the Senate, who presided 
 over the joint Assembly, w^as a Savannah man, and consequently a supporter 
 of Norwood. Under the pretense that the galleries were unsafe, he ordered 
 the door-keeper to refuse to admit any spectators. The true reason was 
 that he feared the pressure of the public would have its effect on the floor, 
 and when the result was declared there were only members, and those who 
 had the privileges of the floor, present. The enthusiasm was intense. Men 
 shouted, wept tears of joy, embraced each other, and went wild with delight. 
 The vast crowd outside knew what the shout meant, took up the glad refrain, 
 and the " rebel yell " was heard once more over what was regarded as a great 
 victory for the South. While all this excitement was going on in Atlanta, 
 Mr. Hill was on his feet in the House of Representatives, making a calm 
 constitutional argument in favor of the Electoral Commission, and when he 
 took his seat, a telegram was handed to him announcing the result. I 
 have frequently heard my father say that his highest ambition was to 
 serve his people in the United States Senate. He regarded this body as 
 the finest deliberative assembly in the world, and he felt that there he 
 could do good work. The noise and tumult of the House did not suit him, 
 and, although he made great reputation there, he was happy that his people 
 had seen fit to place him in a position of wider usefulness, and one far more 
 congenial to his tastes and habits of thought. 
 
 He took his seat March 4, 1877. He served no novitiate, but was recog 
 nized as a leader from the very first. The Senate at this time contained 
 some very great men. In its personnel it recalled the days of Webster, 
 Calhoun, and Clay. The Democrats had Thurman and Lamar. The Repub 
 licans Elaine, Conkling, and Carpenter. Mr. Hill made the Democratic 
 trio equal if not superior to the Republican, and in my judgment the Sen 
 ate has never had at one time six men superior to these in intellectual ca 
 pacity. Mr. Hill met in the Senate his old antagonist, Mr. Elaine, and had 
 several notable contests with him. These two men, while bitter political 
 opponents, were strong personal friends. They mutually admired and re 
 spected each other. They were similar in character and many intellectual 
 qualities. Both were generous, impetuous, and without malice. Both pos 
 sessed that wonderful quality, personal magnetism. Both were frank, open, 
 and without disguise. Both were great debaters and great orators. Mr. 
 Hill s career in the United States Senate was a series of brilliant triumphs. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 79 
 
 He was in all respects fully equipped to meet the intellectual giants of the 
 opposition. In knowledge of the law, in oratory, in logic, in familiarity 
 with legislation, in the weapons of invective and sarcasm, in learning and in 
 readiness, he was the equal of any man in the body. 
 
 Mr. Hill s first great contest, after his entrance in the Senate, was on 
 the bill reported from the Judiciary Committee, proposing to establish a 
 sinking fund to secure the repayment of a loan made by the United States 
 to the Union Pacific and the Central Pacific railroad companies. The bill 
 was the unanimous measure of the committee. Senator Hill took the posi 
 tion that the bill was unconstitutional, in that it impaired the obligation of 
 the contract heretofore made bv the United States with said railroad com- 
 
 p 
 
 panics. He met in this discussion all the members of the committee, and by 
 a speech delivered March 27, 1878, demonstrated his surpassing power as a 
 constitutional lawyer. After the delivery of this speech, his fame as a law 
 yer was established and he was employed in many cases before the United 
 States Supreme Court. Shortly before his sickness he was paid one fee of 
 $25,000 in a case before this court, and if he had lived he would have had 
 a large and lucrative practice before this high tribunal. On the 8th of 
 February, 1878, Senator Hill delivered a speech on the subject of the coin 
 age of silver dollars. It exhibited a minute and comprehensive knowledge 
 of the intricate subject of finance, and excited most favorable comments 
 throughout the country. On the 10th of May, 1879, he delivered a speech 
 in reply to Elaine, Edmunds, and Chandler, which, in the opinion of the 
 writer, is the best he ever made. It is a grand exposition of the dual sys 
 tem of our government, and an eloquent defense of the South and the 
 Democratic party. Senator Vest pronounced it the greatest speech deliv 
 ered in the Senate within a quarter of a century. It created a profound 
 impression, and in writing about it a Northern journalist uses this lan 
 guage : 
 
 BEN HILL. 
 
 Washington Letter to Rochester Evening Express. 
 
 We have a good seat to see him, and we have long wanted to hear him 
 and see some miracle that he would work. He is six feet, straight face, 
 rather thin, firm set, and with an eye born to face any fortune. The man 
 to his left is Butler of South Carolina ; next is Beck, and round him press 
 Eaton and others, who evidently looked for a field day on their side of the 
 hall, for Ben Hill is now their ablest speaker. He is neat but plain in his 
 dress and address. Davis, who is one of the possibilities of the Senate, and 
 one of the pussy billities, too, turns around to face him ; the whole Senate 
 begins to mark the iron face of Hill, as he opens coolly and slowly, with his 
 hands clasped behind him. In this manner he speaks on the great question, 
 now up for ten minutes, without a gesture ; his voice increases a little, and 
 his forefinger comes forward to point at the Senator from New York, or 
 from Maine, or from Vermont. The Georgian soon has his plan opened and 
 presses on to review the speeches of the three leading Republicans just 
 named, and it is evident he is in for a review of the whole of these, and the 
 whole of the question now up, and the whole of the late war. As he advanced, 
 he showed more and more the real orator. I have already said in another 
 letter that he is a graduate of college, and he shows it in his clear-cut, incisive 
 words, never wanting to his thought, never misplaced, though his speech 
 was extemporaneous and continued over three hours. He was bold in his 
 
80 SENATOR B. ff. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 statements, well arranged with his books of reference before him, bold in 
 gesture and voice, sometimes with one hand opened toward the other side 
 of the house, sometimes with both extended, and then striking the attitude 
 in which Henry Clay is pictured in making his farewell. With head and 
 shoulders thrown back, his feet well advanced, and both hands reaching 
 out and downward in calm grace and dignity. I have seen Clay, but never 
 heard him except in conversation ; but I have heard Tom Marshall, who is 
 said to have been much like Clay in style and eloquence. Hill has studied 
 them both and equals if he does not excel them both. 
 
 The greatest contest which Mr. Hill conducted while senator, was the 
 effort to unseat William Pitt Kellogg, senator from Louisiana. This man 
 was one of the most odious representatives of the carpet-bag element, and 
 was peculiarly offensive to the good people of the State to which he had 
 emigrated for political spoils. By the most outrageous and palpable frauds, 
 he had had himself elected United States senator. Mr. Hill was a mem 
 ber of the Committee on Privileges and Elections, and was chairman of the 
 sub-committee sent to Louisiana for the purpose of taking the evidence in the 
 case. The facts there gathered, proved incontestably that Kellogg was not 
 elected to the Senate by the Louisiana Legislature, but by a fragmentary 
 body of persons, assuming to be such Legislature ; and that even if this 
 body was the Legislature, there was no quorum present at the time of the 
 alleged election, and that even this illegal faction were controlled in their 
 votes by open corruption and bribery. 
 
 Mr. Hill made the report of the committee to the Senate, declaring that 
 Kellogg was not entitled to the seat, and his speech in support of the report 
 is the most elaborate, comprehensive, and severely logical that he ever made 
 in that body. It amounted to absolute demonstration. His arraignment of 
 Kellogg and his unholy crew was terrible and unsparing. But the Senate, 
 at a previous session, when the Republicans were in the majority, after a 
 contest, had seated Kellogg, and his friends now took the position that the 
 matter was res adjudicata. This argument drew to its support several of the 
 Democrats, among them the two senators from South Carolina, who stood 
 alone of Southern senators in this position. It was charged that those 
 two senators voted to sustain the point of res adjudicata because of an 
 agreement made between them and the Republicans when Senator Butler s 
 seat was contested at a previous session. This report was so current 
 that Senator Hill, in the conclusion of his speech, made allusion to it, deny 
 ing it with great indignation, and making a beautiful reference to the State 
 of South Carolina. For some reason this speech gave offense to both Sena 
 tors Butler and Hampton, and they made quite bitter attacks on Mr. Hill. 
 His reply was very severe, and left the two South Carolina statesmen in an 
 unenviable attitude. After a prolonged fight, led by Senator Hill for the 
 Democrats, Kellogg was permitted to retain the seat to which he was clearly 
 not elected, and this outrage was consummated against the State of Louisi 
 ana through the aid of the votes of the senators from South Carolina, who 
 voted against their party. The last speech of importance made by Senator 
 Hill in the United States Senate was on March 14, 1881. It was made dur 
 ing the extra session of the Senate, and was entirely impromptu. 
 
 This session witnessed the advent of William Mahone, the political non 
 descript of Virginia. He had been elected by Democratic Readjusters of 
 the Old Dominion, and as both he and his friends had supported the elec- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 81 
 
 tion of Hancock for President, it was reasonably expected that he would in 
 the Senate vote with the party that had elected him ; but when the Senate 
 assembled Mahone refused to participate in the Democratic caucus, and it 
 soon became an open secret that the little Readjuster had effected an under 
 standing with the Republicans, and would vote with them in the organi 
 zation of the Senate. As the Democrats had a majority, counting Mahone 
 and David Davis, as soon as the Senate met on the morning of March 14, a 
 motion was made to organize and elect officers, and it was in the debate 
 growing out of this motion that Mr. Hill made his celebrated attack uncover 
 ing the political traitor to his party and to his State. The mere formal 
 selection of officers did not interest Senator Hill, but he had a scorn and 4 
 contempt for political jugglery and treachery, and he saw in this con 
 duct of Mahone an effort to form a coalition with the Federal adminis 
 tration for the purpose of dividing the South, and by the help of the negroes 
 to get control of the State governments. It soon became clear that such 
 was the purpose of the Republicans and Mahone and his followers. It was 
 expected by its originators that this scheme would find support among what 
 was known as the Independent Democrats of the South, and that the State 
 of Georgia would furnish two prominent recruits who had been recently 
 defeated for re-election to Congress. Mr. Hill s attack was the first gun 
 fired by the Democrats against this corrupt coalition to divide the South, 
 and it was so terrible and effective that it made the scheme odious, defeat 
 ing it in its very inception. 
 
 In the winter of 1881, Mr. Hill occupied a seat a portion of the session 
 of the Senate, but took little part in its deliberation, making only one short 
 speech denouncing the sham of Civil Service Reform as practiced by the 
 Republicans. He had undergone two operations for the dread disease which 
 eventually destroyed his life, and its possible return was a never-lifting 
 shadow. Notwithstanding this fact, he was preparing a speech on the race 
 question. He thought that he had a solution to this great problem, but un 
 fortunately for his country, he was not permitted to deliver it. 
 
 The last political article ever written by Mr. Hill was his letter in reply 
 to the attack made on- him by Dr. William H. Felton. This attack on Mr. 
 Hill stands alone as the most unprovoked and groundless assault ever made 
 by one public man against another. Dr. Felton, in his better moments, I 
 think, regretted it. Some months before my father s death he wrote him a 
 letter, endeavoring to renew his friendship. This letter, however, did not 
 contain any expression of regret for his unjustifiable assault on one who had 
 been his life-long friend, and when I read it to my father, he made this 
 simple comment : " Dr. Felton feels that he has greatly wronged me, but 
 has not the manliness to acknowledge it." I publish the article of my father 
 in reply to Dr. Felton, not because of the personal features contained in it, 
 but because of the discussion of public questions growing out of the political 
 situation at the time it was written. 
 
CHAPTER VII. 
 
 X. 
 
 General Statement of Mr. Hill s Political Career His Career as a Lawyer Resolutions 
 of the Supreme Court of Georgia He made a Great Deal of Money Practicing 
 L aw His Experiment in Planting in Southwest Georgia Great Financial Loss 
 His Princely Manner of Living His Generosity His Character as Husband and 
 Father His Private Life f*ure Domestic Lives of Georgia s Great Men Mr. Hill s 
 Letter to his Wife from, Richmond, Va. Mr. Grady s Personal Reminiscence of 
 Mr. Hill s Home Life His Letter to his Son Advice about Political Office. 
 
 IN the sketch thus far, I have confined myself almost exclusively to the 
 political career of Senator Hill. I realize fully how meager and unsat 
 isfactory is the account I have written. I could not, without occupying 
 space, much better filled by his own thoughts, give the many interesting 
 details of a life unusually crowded with dramatic events. In contemplating 
 the lives of great men, even the most trivial incident is full of interest, but 
 the important phase of value is to be found in the logic of their public 
 careers, and not in the detailed narrative of personal history. The really 
 great men of the world have been those who have impressed their per 
 sonality upon the age in which they lived. Such men are monumental, and 
 have an influence not limited by time or bounded by the grave. Of this 
 class was the subject of this memoir. 
 
 In person he possessed great physical beauty and strength. He stood 
 erect, six feet one and one half inches high, perfect in proportion and sym 
 metry. His head he invariably carried slightly inclined to the right ; it 
 was unusually large, and covered with light-brown hair, straight and very 
 fine ; his complexion was clear ; his forehead broad and high ; his eyes the 
 " oratorical gray." Indeed, upon form and feature " every god had set 
 his seal to give the world assurance of a man." 
 
 Whatever might be his work for the next day, he never studied late at 
 night, but went to bed early, and rose with the sun. While not disapprov 
 ing, he belonged to no order or secret society, but was from boyhood a 
 member of the Methodist Church. In habit he was absolutely free from 
 vice ; no unclean or profane word ever soiled his lips. While he did not 
 condemn the moderate use of wine, or a social game, for himself he never 
 touched spirituous liquors, and did not know one card from another. In 
 mind, heart, physique, and conduct, he was an extraordinary type of pure 
 and noble manhood. 
 
 He was a man of the rarest and most impressive individuality. He 
 relied almost entirely upon his own intellectual powers and resources, and 
 with striking originality solved great problems of State and arrived at cor 
 rect conclusions. Such a man does not depend upon office for either power 
 or influence. I think I do not go beyond the limits of truth when I state 
 that no man ever lived in Georgia who has more deeply and lastingly im 
 pressed himself upon the thought of the people and achieved more lasting 
 distinction than Senator Hill, and yet his official life did not reach a dozen 
 years, an.4 four of these were given to the " Lost C*Rse," But- whether j n 
 
 83 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 83 
 
 office or out, he was always a leader and a potential factor in the great 
 political problems confronting the South, for nearly thirty years. 
 
 To summarize his public career by periods. From 1851 to 1861 his 
 course was signalized by the most intense devotion to the Union, and his 
 earnest service was given to save that Union from destruction at the hands 
 of extremists North and South. This object he regarded as the supreme 
 duty of statesmanship and as the first obligation of patriotism. To the 
 preservation of the Union he consecrated the power of his mind and the 
 eloquence of his tongue for ten years. He stood a Georgia Gibraltar against 
 the mad waves of slavery agitation and secession folly. But deeper than 
 his love for the Union was his love for his own State, and although his 
 warning and prophetic voice was unheeded, he gave unreserved allegiance to 
 his own people, and from 1861 to 1865 the South had no wiser champion, 
 no son more unselfish and devoted. From 1865 to the day of his death, he 
 labored to make the restored Union one of honor to both sections. Every 
 where and at all times he defended his beloved South, her motives and her 
 history, but he never failed to appeal for cessation of strife and a union of 
 love. The keynote to all his public utterances was denunciation of section 
 alism ; the motive power of his political conduct a patriotism not limited to 
 sections, but embracing the whole country. Impartial history will declare 
 that his life was that of a patriot-statesman. In this character his fame will 
 expand and strengthen as time advances and his course is studied. In the 
 language of another, " Grand as was his intellectual stature, great as a 
 lawyer and orator and distinguished as a statesman, and though her history is 
 lustrous with the story of his prowess, Georgia most of all will crown him 
 with the laurel that the Romans awarded to eminence in patriotism." 
 
 The great civic chieftain of the Confederacy, while holding in admiration 
 his surpassing eloquence and profound statesmanship, called him " Hill the 
 faithful." Prouder title can no man wear. It will endure when the chaplet 
 of intellectual qualities has faded away. Faithful to his country, faithful to 
 every trust, faithful to his God ! As the Georgian of the future contem 
 plates the effigies in the Pantheon of his native State, his eye will rest long 
 and lovingly upon one towering figure, and looking, his thoughts will go 
 back through the great crises of his country s history : through the mad 
 days of slavery and secession, through the dark days of fratricidal strife, 
 through the terrible days of Reconstruction dishonor, through the brighter 
 days of restored union, and high above, more enduring than the applause of 
 senates and peoples, will be the eulogy to unswerving fidelity pronounced by 
 grateful hearts. 
 
 I have not attempted to follow Mr. Hill s career as a lawyer. It can be 
 summed up in the general statement that it was a triumphant ascent ; rapid, 
 brilliant, and lasting. His forensic efforts were never reported, and live 
 only in the memories of those who heard them. Nearly every court-house 
 in Georgia has its associations connected with some famous legal victory, 
 some client s life, liberty, or property saved. His legal knowledge was 
 profound, but was the original deductions of a great mind from the study of 
 the principles and logic of the law. He rarely ever consulted decisions of 
 1 courts, and was in no sense a case lawyer. He established legal propositions 
 from his mastery of the reason of the law, and did not rely upon the 
 opinions of judges. He was equally potential with courts as with juries. 
 Like his great English prototype, Erskine, he seems to have invented a 
 machine by the secret use of which, in court, he could make the head of 
 
84 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 the judge nod assent to his propositions, and what Lord Brougham said of 
 Erskine might with equal truth have been said of Hill : " That juries have 
 declared that they felt it impossible to remove their looks from him when he 
 had riveted, and, as it were, fascinated them by his first glance, and it used 
 to be a common remark of men who observed his motions, that they 
 resembled those of a race horse, as light, as limber, as much betokening 
 strength and speed, as free from all gross superfluity or encumbrance." An 
 interesting volume could be written, filled with anecdotes of Mr. Hill s dex 
 terity as a lawyer, and with incidents showing his marvelous gifts as an 
 advocate. In the opinion of his professional brethren, he was easily the 
 foremost lawyer of the South at the date of his death. The estimate in 
 which he was held by the bar of the State is fittingly set forth in the fol 
 lowing memorial and resolutions reported to the Supreme Court by a com 
 mittee of eminent lawyers : 
 
 Benjamin Harvey Hill having been for many years a distinguished prac 
 titioner at the bar of this court, it is eminently fitting and appropriate that its 
 records should contain some lasting memento of his unsurpassed ability, his 
 brilliant genius, and his matchless eloquence as a lawyer and an advocate. 
 
 The legal profession has been honored by some of the proudest names in 
 the history of the world, but in all the shining list it would be difficult to 
 find one who, in a comparatively short life, more brilliantly exemplified the 
 learning, the honors, and the successes of that noble profession than the 
 illustrious lawyer to whose memory we offer this tribute of affection and 
 respect. Let his honored name shine on the records of this tribunal, and let 
 it go down to history side by side with the names of Berrien and the Charl- 
 tons, Starnes and the Millers, Nisbet and Stephenses, Lumpkin and the 
 Cobbs, Warner and the Doughertys, Cone, Colquitt, and Holt, and the in 
 numerable host of renowned men who, in their day and generation, shed un 
 dying luster on their profession, and left to their survivors and the world a 
 legacy of virtuous achievements, richer far than shekels of gold or shekels 
 of silver. 
 
 Mr. Hill s days on earth were less than three score years ; yet where can 
 one be found who, in so brief a period, was more abundant in labors or 
 grander in achievement ? What lawyer ever received a better patronage, 
 or won more victories in the court-house, or enjoyed a larger professional 
 income? 
 
 Mr. Hill was admitted to plead and practice law in the county of Meri- 
 wether, in the year 1845, when he was twenty-two years of age. He did not 
 have to wait and toil and grow old before becoming a lawyer, but just as 
 soon as he had obtained license to practice and had opened an office for that 
 purpose, with a heroic bound he vaulted into the professional lists a verita 
 ble self-reliant knight, panoplied for the contest, and ready with invincible 
 might and unfailing courage to break lances with the bravest, the mightiest, 
 and the best who chanced to come against him. 
 
 It has been the fate of some of the best lawyers that ever lived to pass 
 through years of discouragement, anxiety, and study in the beginning of 
 their professional career, waiting impatiently for cases and clients ; but such 
 was not the fate of Mr. Hill. From the very outset, and before he or his 
 friends had a right to expect it, business and patrons poured in upon him 
 from all sides, until very soon he was employed in almost every case of 
 importance in the courts which he was accustomed to attend. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 85 
 
 Such was the popular confidence in Mr. Hill s ability and eloquence as a 
 lawyer, that his services were demanded in important cases all over the 
 State, and frequently in other States of the Union. 
 
 Mr. Hill s successes at the bar were extraordinary. He very seldom lost 
 a case that ought to have been gained, and he has gained very many that 
 ought to have been lost. He rarely found a cause too heavy to be carried 
 by him, and when he failed it was not for want of ability, skill, or fidelity 
 in the advocate, but because of the inherent weakness of the cause itself. 
 
 As a lawyer he was able, self-possessed, courageous, and invincible. He 
 carried judges with him by the force of unanswerable logic, and he swayed 
 the juries by an eloquence which was absolutely resistless. Benjamin Har 
 vey Hill seems to have always been great. He was an uncommon child; 
 he was an extraordinary boy ; he was a great lawyer ; he was a matchless 
 orator ; and he was a grand statesman. 
 
 In all the numerous positions of trust and responsibility which Mr. Hill 
 occupied in his life, he never failed to distinguish himself and to honor the 
 position. He was a Richard Coaur de Lion at the bar, an Ivanhoe before 
 the people, and a Chevalier Bayard in the Senate. When such a man dies 
 in the full vigor of his manhood, well may the world stand still and exclaim 
 with the Psalmist, " Behold, thou hast made my days as a hand breadth, and 
 mine age is as nothing before thee ; verily, every man at his best state is 
 altogether vanity." 
 
 We append the following resolutions : 
 
 Resolved, That in the death of Benjamin Harvey Hill the legal profession 
 of this State lost its ablest champion, its most eloquent advocate, and its 
 brightest ornament. 
 
 Resolved, That we who survive him will treasure in affectionate memory 
 his shining virtues and brilliant achievements, and will ever point with just 
 pride to his character and his deeds as a rich legacy left us for the encour 
 agement of .our hopes and our endeavors. 
 
 Mr. Hill made more money by his profession, for the time actually engaged 
 in its practice, than any lawyer in the South, and possibly in the United 
 States. He was in every important case in Georgia, and named his own 
 fees. In the fourteen years of his practice, up to 1860, he made at least a 
 half million of dollars, and during this period he served one term in the 
 lower house of the General Assembly, one term in the upper house, made a 
 canvass for Congress, for Governor, and twice as Presidential Elector for the 
 State at large. During the war he did not give much of his time to his 
 practice, being completely engrossed by his duties as Confederate States 
 Senator. After the war he resumed his practice, but gave much of his 
 attention to planting in southwest Georgia. From 1865 to the day of his 
 death, his annual professional income was not less than $30,000. Some of 
 his fees were enormous. One of $65,000, one of $50,000, and several of 
 $25,000. Yet, with all this money, he died a poor man, leaving to his 
 widow only a home and a policy of insurance of $10,000 on his life. The 
 explanation of this fact is to be found in several causes. He knew little of 
 business methods and never made a lucky investment. He never refused to 
 indorse for a friend, and in one instance had to pay a security debt of 
 $10,000 for a man who had no special claim on him. Indeed, I doubt if he 
 ever refused an appeal for pecuniary help. He was most lavish and princely 
 in expenditures on his family and home. He never denied wife or children 
 
86 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 the gratification of any wish or caprice. His home in La Grange, where 
 he passed the happiest years of his life, was one of the most magnificent in 
 Georgia. A great house, with large Corinthian columns, surrounded by 
 beautiful grounds, with granite walks leading to a massive iron gate 250 
 yards from the house. He spent at least $50,000 in fitting up and beautify- 
 ing this place, and here, for years, he indulged in the most lavish hospitality, 
 his house nearly always being crowded with company. 
 
 In 1867 he moved to Athens, Ga., purchasing an elegant home for 
 $20,000, and in 1872 he changed his residence to Atlanta, buying 
 his place on Peachtree Street, for which he paid $20,000, and 
 afterward $10,000 was expended in improvements. In addition to his 
 munificent family expenses, he gave away a great deal of money to 
 his less fortunate relatives. Indeed, his was a rarely liberal and generous 
 nature. He made money without an effort and spent it like a prince. He 
 loved money for the pleasure of giving it to those he loved and to those in 
 need. Besides his lavish expenditures and gifts of charity, he lost, on plant 
 ing, over a quarter of a million of dollars immediately after the war. Losing 
 confidence in the purity and uprightness of the judiciary under a Radical 
 administration, and under military government, he invested largely in lands 
 in southwest Georgia. Under the impression that cotton could not be success 
 fully made with free negro labor, or with white labor, and the high price of 
 the staple, lands in the cotton belt commanded very high prices. Mr. Hill 
 bought four of the largest plantations in southwest Georgia, each containing 
 about 5000 acres. He erected comfortable houses for his laborers, and built 
 on each place a school-house. His intention was to educate the negro, and, v 
 if possible, elevate him to some little appreciation of his citizenship. He 
 prepared to plant on an immense scale. In a short time it was demon 
 strated that cotton could be as successfully made by free labor as by slave 
 labor. As a result cotton went down from thirty to ten cents a pound, the 
 value of land decreased in proportion, and in a few years Mr. Hill found 
 himself nearly $300,000 in debt as a result of his experiment. His planta 
 tions he sold at a great sacrifice and he resumed the active practice of his 
 profession to make money to pay his planting debts. This he had done at 
 the date of his death. 
 
 It is a striking illustration of the confidence that he felt in his ability to 
 make money, that his heavy indebtedness at this time did not alter his 
 generous methods of living. He never felt depressed by his debts, and 
 refused to compromise any of them, but paid every dollar with interest. To 
 those who love and hoard money, this is not a successful financial record. 
 Men who make money usually grow to love it and die rich in gold, but poor 
 in a record of good deeds and unregretted by mankind. " This man was 
 molded differently and leaves his family better and sweeter legacy than- 
 millions could have been. The consciousness that he had lived honestly and 
 done good, that his pleasure had been to make them happy and to hold 
 nothing too dear that could contribute to their comfort, that with ungrudg 
 ing hand to them and to the world he had given freely and had found joy 
 in the giving." 
 
 I would be false to the sweetest memories of my life were I to conclude 
 this sketch without allusion to the exceeding beauty of Mr. Hill s home life. 
 In contemplating the lives of Georgia s great men it is a cause for pride 
 that all of them had happy homes. Slander, which ever loves to attack the 
 pure, in some instances aimed its envenomed dart at the character of some 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 87 
 
 of her prominent men, but in the light of truth, it is a fact to be ever cher 
 ished that the State s greatest sons were also her best and purest men in the 
 sacred relations of home. The loyalty and love of the home circle is the 
 truest and holiest inspiration to great endeavor. Happy is the man of genius 
 and ambition who is wedded to a woman who can feel for him affectionate 
 sympathy and give to him intellectual encouragement. Such was the for 
 tunate lot of Mr. Hill. His conjugal felicity was perfect. His wife s com 
 panionship was an inspiration never failing, ever exalted. He always 
 delighted to ascribe his success to her influence. I am sure it will not be 
 considered indelicate for me to incorporate, at this place, two letters written 
 by my father to my mother during the terrible days of our Civil War. 
 They show in what loving confidence he held her after twenty years of 
 married life. The letter, dated February 7, 1864, will be found valuable for 
 its description of the condition of our country at that time. 
 
 RICHMOND, VA., February 7, 1864. 
 
 My Dearest Wife : I have never seen as much gayety in society as has 
 existed in Richmond during this winter. Being with Hennie,* I have 
 been occasionally thrown in the current. But it is true I have never passed 
 a winter so replete with anxiety and trouble. I have not been sad because 
 others have been gay, although I think gayety now is out of place and not 
 at all calculated to make one feel cheerful. Nor have I been sad only be 
 cause I have been absent from my dear wife and children, for, though 
 absence from them is always unhappiness, it has often occurred and not 
 produced such heaviness of spirit. 
 
 There is a monitor ever whispering to me that this is the crisis of my 
 country. The next few months must determine the destiny of millions 
 of human beings. In my judgment the question of the independence of 
 the Confederate States has become a question of secondary importance. 
 The greater question is whether the people of this Continent shall have 
 good and peaceful government in any form during this generation. It is 
 very certain, the policy which the dominant party in the United States now 
 seek to accomplish, cannot exist with or under a free government. Even if 
 established, it can only be sustained by absolute power, accompanied with 
 uniform oppression. This revolution is the result of feeling, not judgment ; 
 of passion, not statesmanship. Its whole progress has been distinguished by 
 an utter absence of reason, humanity, and ordinary good motives. It had 
 its origin in mutual and foolish crimination. Even now, after three years of 
 conflict ; after four hundred thousand human beings of the same habits, 
 language, and race have been slain by each other ; after three thousand 
 millions of debt have been incurred and five thousand millions of property 
 destroyed, the only staple of statesmanship is hatred and abuse, and the only 
 plan proposed to terminate the conflict is to continue to slaughter and lay 
 waste. And all this by a people who have been taught from infancy to 
 venerate a common ancestry ; whose courage in a common struggle gave them 
 national existence, and whose wisdom in a common council gave them a 
 form of government which all the world was asked to imitate as the very 
 best form to secure liberty without licentiousness, and order without 
 
 * His daughter. 
 
88 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 oppression ; by a people who were sending their missionaries to teach the 
 gospel of peace and love to all the earth, and who claim to excel in all the 
 arts and to have added to learning in every science ; and by a people, let 
 me add, who in very truth, had made more rapid progress in wealth, in 
 social comfort and refinement, in general education and prosperity, than anv 
 people whom the heavens had ever refreshed with showers or cheered with 
 sunshine. Behold, how these disciples of Christ and boasting exemplars of 
 free government abuse, calumniate, rob, and slay each other, and how may 
 the infidel not mock and the despot not laugh ! 
 
 In the midst of this insane condition of things, I am not only a grown-up 
 man, with my faculties in their matured strength, but I am even a chosen 
 counselor in the highest deliberative body of one party to the conflict. 
 Could I be alive to the crushing responsibility, and not feel anxious ? And 
 if, under the weight of such responsibility, I am powerless for good, can I 
 feel otherwise than sad ? Yet my mind is not dark or doubtful as to what 
 ought to be done. From the beginning my vision has been clear as to 
 right, duty, and policy. Reason and not the sword, discussion and not 
 slaughter, reform and not disintegration, compromise and not defiance, were 
 the plain dictates of wise statesmanship for the solution of all the differences, 
 real and imaginary, between the two parties. But these dictates were made 
 utterly impracticable by the furious passions which preceded and inaugurated 
 the revolution. Before and during the early days of the contest, the 
 Southern people, especially the politicians and the press, did and said many 
 indiscreet and unwise things. The entire temper and manner of secession 
 were wrong. 
 
 But step by step the dominant party of the United States have passed 
 from indiscretion to folly, from folly to error, from error to madness, and 
 now from madness to wicked purpose, until nothing but the degrada 
 tion, subjugation, and ruin of the Southern people will satisfy them. They 
 no longer wage war to restore the Union under the Constitution ; but they 
 clearly make union impossible, and trample upon the Constitution, in order 
 that they may emancipate the negro, subject the white man, and subvert the 
 entire social system of the Southern States. Constitutional government is 
 to be indeed, is already destroyed because its existence is incompatible with 
 the accomplishment of their despotic and wicked designs. The reverses 
 which attended our arms during the past year, and the consequent partial 
 despondency of our people, have induced their enemies to believe that this 
 end they propose can now be speedily accomplished ; and like the beast, whose 
 rage increases as he gets nearer his victim, the prospect seems to stimulate 
 their malice and whet their gluttonous appetite for ruin. Another con 
 sideration is urging them forward to success in the ensuing campaign. 
 This is the last year of the present administration, unless it can be renewed 
 by the sword or the ballot. A successful campaign by the Federal army in 
 the summer will render it unnecessary for Mr. Lincoln to prolong his power 
 by the sword. He can, with military success in the field, carry the election 
 at the ballot-box. With only partial success he may lose the election, and 
 with disaster to his army he will lose his power, for the sword will fall from 
 his grasp, and he and his whole party will be driven from power and from 
 respectability for all time, and Abolitionism will become a by-word and a 
 reproach for generations to come. 
 
 The defeat of Mr. Lincoln and his party, then, in 1864, is the great 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 89 
 
 objective point of all the efforts of patriotism. His election was the occasion 
 for secession, and disruption, and war. His defeat alone can restore concord, 
 reason, and peace. The Northern people elected him. It was the hour 
 of their madness and infatuation. It is titting that they should defeat and 
 repudiate him. It will be the hour of their restoration to good sense, good 
 feeling, and good government. We will then be in a condition to hear and 
 discuss terms with honor. Peace will return, hope will revive, mourning will 
 continue only for the noble heroes who have fallen in the struggle for honor, 
 and shame remain only for the wickedness that impelled them to the fight. 
 
 What can we do to help in this defeat of Lincoln, of despotism, and 
 indefinite war and immeasurable ruin. We can do two things : 
 
 First, we must gather up all our energies for successful battles in the 
 spring and summer. Every man who can be spared from home must repair 
 to the army. Every man who must remain at home must work to support 
 that army. Croakers must take courage. Speculators must stop their hoard 
 ing. Traders must suspend their gains. Critics must forbear their com 
 plaints. The straggler must return with new zeal to his faithful comrade in 
 arms ; and army and people, with one accord, must surrender themselves in 
 faith to God, and in fact to their country. Let none plan to be left out in 
 this fight. Let none desire to be left out. It is the fight in whose victory 
 all the efforts of the past and the hopes of the future will find fruition, and 
 in whose defeat all the glory of the past and all the hopes of the future will 
 find shame and ruin. 
 
 Secondly, while we are thus fighting this enemy of all good government 
 in America, let us recognize the fact that Mr. Lincoln and his fanatical party 
 do not constitute all the North. There are many there who are not lost to 
 all reason and who are willing to deal justly. We ought to make it dis 
 tinctly known that when they shall defeat Mr. Lincoln and his party, and 
 drive them from power, and repudiate the wild war policy which now pre 
 vails, we are ready, upon their invitation, to meet them in convention and 
 settle all our difficulties by the rules of reason and right, which a Christian 
 and civilized people ought to have relied on from the beginning. 
 
 Are we, as a people, capable of this high and manifestly correct position? 
 God of our fathers, are we ? Is anger appeased ? Is revenge satiated ? Is 
 ambition content? Has folly learned a lesson, or wickedness received suffi 
 cient rebuke ? Has the press discovered that spleen is not argument, and 
 venality is not patriotism ? 
 
 Alas, alas ! I am sad, because I find very few who, in my judgment, are 
 wide awake to the character of this crisis, the issues that hang upon it, and the 
 means of rescue from its awful threatenings. I pray God that the future 
 may prove me to be blind and weak, and that they who see not as I see may 
 prove to be wise and sufficient, for, indeed, I am almost one, and they in truth 
 are very many. 
 
 Excuse me, dear light of my life and my comfort in every sorrow, for 
 wearying you with the recital of my country s troubles. 
 
 The causes that led to the conflict, and the sad and prophetic forebodings 
 outlined in this letter, show not more the writer s wisdom than his unselfish 
 devotion to his country. 
 
90 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 LETTER TO HIS WIFE. 
 
 RICHMOND, VA., February 14, 1864. 
 
 This day is like my own heart-idol bright, sweet, and comforting. 
 You ought to be very happy, if to bless others be the best source of happi 
 ness. Recently, I have found my thoughts absorbed for hours, studying 
 your character. The subject is certainly not new, but beauties are ever de 
 veloping the last always the loveliest. 
 
 The de arest of all words are wife, home, and child. They mean love, 
 comfort, and hope, when defined by my experience. I have never found but 
 one thought, which your character suggested, which troubled me ; and this 
 thought is a perpetual trouble. You are so much better than I that I often 
 feel humbled. I have often strained myself to perform something good and 
 noble that I might feel worthy to be your husband. In qualities that ele 
 vate and dignify ; in virtues that are pure, sincere, and steadfast, I never 
 saw the equal of my wife. Eighteen years of companionship have been 
 eighteen years of admiration for your ever-increasing worth. If I cannot 
 compensate you with the return of a character equal to your own in instrinsic 
 merit, I have at least the very comforting reflection that it has ever been my 
 business to serve you, my delight to please you, and my ambition to be like you. 
 
 It saddens me to turn from your character to the analysis of my own. 
 But I can claim some virtues, though I cannot be what my desires would 
 make me. I would be useful to all men Heaven knows I would ; but alas, 
 alas ! how feeble are my efforts and feebler my powers ? My sphere is dif 
 ferent from yours. You are equal to your duties. I am utterly unequal to 
 mine. I see the storm which is sweeping over my country, prostrating in its 
 path the glories of the past, the blessings of the present, and almost all the 
 hopes of the future, and I know it is but a hurricane of passion, hate, and 
 ambition, and I would lift my voice to stay its fury, but the voice is sound 
 less in the universal roar, and I am helpless. 
 
 If I had power equal to my wishes, this earth should be a paradise, and 
 no living creature should feel pain. The virtue of universal good-will I can 
 claim. I can also admire good deeds in others. I envy no man, but I would 
 emulate the best. My energies are not equal to my desires, and seeing, as I 
 do, much that ought to be done, and yet doing myself so little, I cannot but 
 feel discontented with myself. 
 
 But if to appreciate one s companion be the virtue of domestic life, then 
 this is my solid merit, for whether I have a country or not, even a home or 
 not, I expect to die as I have lived, my wife s worshiper. 
 
 One week from to-day and I shall be speeding away to the trysting 
 place my wife s home and my children s play-ground. Never did a caged 
 eagle look to the clear, bright heavens with a more earnest longing, nor the 1 
 famished deer leap to the cooling water-brook with a more cheerful bound. 
 O God, my heart is glad ! my heart is glad ! Home, sweet home ; children, 
 good children ; wife, dear wife. How like descending dews on the 
 parched grass, do thoughts of resting there, and with these, fall upon my 
 tired spirit. 
 
 Blithe are the notes of the singing bluebird, tender the petals of the 
 budding flower, and bright is the dawn of the breaking day, when cold win 
 ter ends the frosty reign, and balmy spring blesses the earth with smiling 
 

 c. 
 
 POKTRAIT OF SENATOR HILL S WIFE. 
 
 (From a Photograph taken in 1891.) 
 
i 
 
HIS LIFE. SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. Oi 
 
 freshness and queenly beauty ; but far more blithe and tender and cheerful 
 is the heart of him, who, when chilling absence is over, is permitted to re 
 turn to a home where love and confidence make a perpetual spring-time for 
 the soul. 
 
 Unworthy as I am, this happiness is mine ; and whatever other favors a 
 kind and wise providence may withhold or grant, for this alone I may daily 
 and hourly say : " Bless the Lord, O my soul, and all that is within me 
 bless his holy name." 
 
 Remember me kindly to all the household, and kiss the dear children for 
 the happy returning father. 
 
 Your devoted husband, 
 
 B. H. HILL. 
 
 He was ever the most affectionate, the most generous, the most 
 iudulgent parent. I never heard fall from his lips a word of harshness 
 to any one of his children. He made them his companions, and found his 
 highest pleasure in planning for their happiness. He magnified their 
 virtues and never saw their faults. Henry Grady gives the following 
 personal reminiscences of Mr. Hill s home life in La Grange. 
 
 PERSONAL REMINISCENCES OF MR. HILL. 
 
 "The first time I ever saw Mr. Hill was in the winter of 1867. I had 
 gone to La Grange to spend my Christmas vacation with young Ben Hill, 
 who was then named Cicero Hill. I have never seen a happier home than 
 that into which I was welcomed that winter day. I have never seen a man 
 more unaffectedly happy and affectionate than was the husband and father. 
 Mrs. Hill, lovely no less in face and figure than in character, was full of 
 goodness and courtesy. Miss Hill, now Mrs. Thompson, charming, 
 accomplished, and brilliant, was the idol of her father s heart ; the two sons 
 were smart, manly young fellows, and the youngest daughter interesting and 
 pretty. As for Mr. Hill, nothing was too trivial to engage his attention if it 
 only related to any member of his family. He was playful, genial, and af 
 fectionate always. He made companions of his children, and was as ready 
 to romp with his boys as to advise with them as to their future. Emory 
 Speer and myself were added to the family group that gathered in the 
 library night after night and charming nights they were. Mr. Hill 
 usually led the conversation, though there was restraint upon no one. He 
 was then deeply interested in the Reconstruction problem, and would 
 discuss it earnestly and eloquently then*just as earnestly interest himself 
 in the details of our day s hunting, or assist us in the plans for the morrow, 
 or go over the town gossip with his wife, or discuss with his daughter a pair 
 of $1500 horses that he had just had sent out from Kentucky for her 
 especial use. Before the family separated for the night there were earnest 
 Christian prayers, at the close of which each son and daughter kissed the 
 father and mother good-night. 
 
 "Such was Mr. Hill s home life when I first knew him. Never was 
 there a happier family. Surrounded with every luxury, all in health and 
 cheerfulness, each member devoted to the others, wife and children proud 
 of the father, who in turn adored them all they made an impression on my 
 
92 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 1 
 
 young mind that has never been effaced. I little thought, then, that the first 
 time I should recall its details, thus particularly, should be to pay a passing 
 tribute to the father, then the picture of health and strength now wasted 
 away and dead ! 
 
 This was a true description of our home life until the children were 
 grown and the family separated. I deem it not inappropriate to insert 
 here a letter he wrote to me in 1881, as it illustrates his parental affection. 
 The language of praise, while very precious as showing in what regard he 
 held me, I willingly admit is far beyond my deserts, and can only be at 
 tributed to the partial opinion of a very loving father. 
 
 UNITED STATES SENATE CHAMBER, 
 
 WASHINGTON, January 9, 1881. 
 
 My Dear Son : The snow is falling rapidly again, and I cannot go to church, 
 so I will write you a letter. In your last you alluded to a position, possibly 
 to become vacant in May, which you might get. For two years past I have 
 had this place in view for you, but did not so intimate to you for two 
 reasons : first, because I did not wish to excite expectation that might not be 
 realized ; and second, because I hoped to be able to surprise you with a tender 
 of the place if I could control it. I have had in my life so many blessings 
 that I ought not to complain of anything nor regret anj^thing personal to 
 myself. Few men who have lived through such times have enjoyed so 
 much real happiness as I have enjoyed ; but if I w T ere to express any regret 
 or designate any great error of my life, it would be that I had ever con 
 nected myself with party politics or accepted a political office. When I 
 began life, I never intended to do either. I was diverted from this by those 
 political movements which I believed tended to disunion as the result of 
 sectional animosities, and which I also believed would eventuate in Southern 
 defeat and humiliation. I entered the political current to arrest these evils 
 and have never been able to get out of the current. At two periods of our 
 history I feel and I know I did great good to our people, and this conscious 
 ness alone reconciles me to a step which changed the character and career 
 of my whole life. If you would be happy or useful or self-respecting, I 
 would advise you to let party politics and political positions severely alone. 
 But positions in the line of your profession are very different. By devoting 
 yourself to a broad and elevated study of your profession, you will find 
 yourself growing constantly in knowledge, wisdom, usefulness, wealth, or 
 independence, and real happiness. If position is offered as a reward for 
 your professional proficiency you can properly accept it, both as a result of 
 previous efforts and as a means of further improvement. If you were ap 
 pointed at your age to the place spoken of, with such a mind as you possess, 
 with such moral habits and studious methods, with such excellent character 
 and well balanced judgment, and last, though not least, with a wife so 
 happy in your success, and so worthy of companionship in all the highest 
 and best walks of life, I do not see why you should not make a reputation 
 for judicial learning and power quite as profound as that of John Marshall. 
 I hope, before I die, to enter you on the course suggested and have fixed on 
 the vacancy suggested as a starting point. In no event allow this or any 
 other expectancy to elate you or affect your regular business course, for we 
 may be disappointed, and after all he alone can be successful and independ- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WAITINGS. 93 
 
 ent who makes himself the real source of success and independence. Such 
 a man positions may aid, but the want of them can never destroy him. As 
 your mother knows all I do, and has been the mainspring of my life s suc 
 cess, I have allowed her to read this letter. Love to Mary. 
 
 Your affectionate father, 
 
 B. H. HILL. 
 
 In this letter there are two facts which should be especially emphasized. 
 First, the high motives that ought to influence aspirants for public station ; 
 and second, the advice to young men never to accept political office. Not 
 withstanding the eminence to which he attained, he frequently expressed 
 his regret to me that he had ever accepted office. A regret that only a 
 consciousness of great service to his country alleviated. His conviction that 
 men should only accept position who were capable of fully discharging its 
 duties and responsibilities was very strong. He had a great contempt for 
 aspiring incompetency, and on several occasions, notably in his Historical 
 Address and in his speech in reply to Butler and Hampton in the United 
 States Senate, gave utterance to his views on this subject. He, and not Mr. 
 Cleveland, was the author of the patriotic sentiment, expressed in slightly 
 different language, that "public office is a public trust." As for himself, he 
 ever approached the service of his country in a spirit of consecration. 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 His Sickness Touching Account by Mr. Grady Surgical Operations Their Effect 
 Apparently Restored to Health Third and Last Operation A Great Mistake His 
 Surgeon Abandons Hope Trip to Eureka Springs Incidents Connected with his 
 Stay at Eureka Springs Not Benefited Returns Home Reception in Atlanta 
 Editorial by Mr. Grady Incidents Connected with his Sickness in Atlanta Won 
 derful Patience and Heroism Touching Evidences of Sympathy from the People 
 Letter from Jefferson Davis Letter from Paul H. Hayne Universal Interest in his 
 Condition Closing Scenes His Last Words His Death, August 16, 1882. 
 
 SENATOR HILL S sickness and death is one of the sad mysteries of 
 life, which only Infinite intelligence can make clear. Born on a farm, 
 reared between the plow handles, with a physique remarkable for its robust 
 strength and beauty, without hereditary disease in his family, with a life 
 singularly clean and pure and free from any kind of intemperate habit, yet 
 in the very vigor of his manhood at a time when most potential for valu 
 able services to his family and country he was stricken with that terrible 
 disease that has baffled the knowledge of science and the skill of surgery. 
 The day after Senator Hill s death, Mr. Grady published in the Atlanta 
 Constitution an account of his sickness from data furnished to him by the 
 writer. The narrative is circumstantiallv correct, and written with such 
 
 * * 
 
 beauty and pathos that I feel I can do no better than to publish it in full. 
 
 ME. HILL S SICKNESS. 
 
 " When Mr. Hill was first elected to the Senate, the President of the 
 Senate announced his election for the term of six years. 
 
 " Speaker Gus Bacon added, You had better say for the term of his 
 natural life. 
 
 " No one dreamed, as the speaker made this flattering amendment in 
 deference to the senator s ability, that he would not live through a single 
 term. He was then in the very prime of life of perfect health and vigor 
 temperate in habit, decorous, lusty, and apparently good for twenty years of 
 active service. 
 
 "Just about four years ago, Senator Hill noticed a pimple on the left side 
 of his tongue. It was not larger than a pin s head, if so large. It was 
 hardly so much- a pimple as a hair-like crack in the tongue, and was scarcely 
 perceptible to the eye. Mr. Hill had a tooth with a jagged edge, and 
 imagined that this had abrased the surface of the tongue, and that the 
 nicotine from smoking had perhaps poisoned the abrasion. He let the 
 matter go on for a year without giving it attention. Finding that it was an 
 obstinate sore, he then asked the advice of local physicians. After treating 
 it with astringents awhile, and being uncertain as to what it was, they 
 advised that he had better go to Philadelphia and consult Dr. Gross. 
 
 " On his trip North, in response to this advice, Mr. Hill went to New York. 
 While there, lie met Mr, A, J. Requier, formerly of Mobile, who, learning 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 95 
 
 of his trouble, advised him at once to see a Dr. Bayard, a homoeopathic 
 physician of distinction, and an uncle of Senator Bayard. Mr. Requier 
 urged this point, citing a remarkable cure that Dr. Bayard had made. Mr. 
 Hill, upon this advice, sought Dr. Bayard, who at once pronounced the sore 
 a benign ulcer and treated it as such. 
 
 " In the mean time the public had become aware of the trouble. A 
 violent campaign was in progress in the State, and Mr. Hill stated that a 
 sore on his tongue would prevent his taking an active part in it. There was 
 some criticism of this statement, those who insisted upon the senator s 
 participation derisively alluding to it as l a campaign cancer. Little alarm 
 was felt among Mr. Hill s friends or the public. He remained under Dr. 
 Bayard s treatment for about eight months, that gentleman insisting all 
 the time that it was not epithelioma. At length Dr. Ridley advised Mr. Hill 
 that, whether the sore was an ulcer or cancer, it had assumed a threatening 
 shape, and urged that he at once go to a surgeon. Mr. Hill reported this 
 advice to Dr. Bayard, who still insisted that the disease was not cancer, and 
 that it would be cured without resort to the knife. The senator urged that 
 it was affecting his general health, and after some further discussion notified 
 Dr. Bayard flatly that he had determined to take decisive steps with 
 the disease. Dr. Bayard reiterated his former opinion, but, of course, could 
 offer no further objection. 
 
 " Mr. Hill then went to New York for the purpose of consulting Dr. J. 
 R. Wood. He had been advised by Dr. Walsh, and some other surgeon of 
 Washington, that his trouble was probably cancer, and that he should 
 consult Dr. Wood. While on his way to Dr. Wood s office, he passed the 
 office of Dr. Lewis Sayre & Son, and went in. These gentlemen examined 
 his tongue, and pronounced it, probably, epithelioma. They proposed that, 
 if he wished it, they would summon some professional friends and have a 
 microscopic examination of the discharge made. Upon learning that he 
 intended to consult Dr. Gross finally, they advised him to go at once, as Dr. 
 Gross stood at the head of the profession. With an anxiety that may 
 be imagined, the senator went to Philadelphia. Dr. Gross was at Cape 
 May. Taking the first train, Mr. Hill sought him at the seaside. Upon 
 ascertaining what was wanted, the doctor took the senator to a private 
 room. 
 
 " This was on July 19, 1881. 
 
 " After a full examination Dr. Gross sat down, and said with great 
 deliberation : 
 
 " Senator, do you wish me to tell you exactly what is the matter with 
 you? 
 
 " < I do. 
 
 " Well, sir, you have cancer of the tongue. 
 
 " What is the remedy ? 
 
 " There is only one. 
 
 111 And that is? 
 
 " The knife. 
 
 " Right here, I wish to incorporate one thing Dr. Willis Westmoreland 
 told me six months ago. He said : 
 
 " When I first saw Mr. Hill s tongue it could have been cured by the 
 simplest sort of operation. The cancer was not one fourth as big as a small 
 pea. A mere clipping of the tongue would have removed all traces of it. 
 I was not then perfectly sure that it was a- cancer, but I should have subjected 
 
96 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 it to a test that would have decided it in a week or two. Had I dreamed 
 its true character would not have been ascertained in nearly a year, Mr. Hill 
 would never have left my office till I had removed it. I heard in about ten 
 days that it had yielded to astringents, and was astounded to hear a month 
 or so afterward that it was still troubling Mr. Hill, and being treated as a 
 benign ulcer. I then urged his friends to have him consult a surgeon at 
 once. From the moment of the first operation I have never had the 
 slightest hope of his recovery. 
 
 " To return to the scene of July 19. When Senator Hill understood the 
 situation, he insisted that the knife should be used at once. He was informed 
 that the operation must be a heroic one, and that he might die while it was 
 being performed. He still insisted that no time should be lost. Dr. Gross 
 then agreed to return to Philadelphia on the ensuing day, and designated 
 Jefferson Hospital as the best place for the operation on account of its 
 superior light and facilities. The senator was entirely alone. He told me 
 of the agony he endured the night before the operation. He never closed 
 his eyes. His Avhole life, with its bitter struggles, its splendid present, and 
 the possibilities of his future, came in review before him. He said that as 
 he thought of his vigor, his abounding health and strength, it seemed impos 
 sible that he should be doomed to early and irrevocable death. He wrote 
 a letter to his son-in-law, Dr. Ridley, announcing the decision of Dr. Gross. 
 With the morning he was ready for the knife. 
 
 " None of his family knew that an operation was to be performed until 
 it was all over. In consideration for their feelings he spared them the 
 suffering he endured. His son, B. H. Hill, Jr., first learned of it in a Rich 
 mond paper, which he read at Rawley Springs. He at once started for 
 Philadelphia, arriving simultaneously with Dr. Ridley. They went together 
 to the hospital. Upon seeing them Mr. Hill, still under prostration, inclined 
 his head and burst into tears. 
 
 " It is needless to account the alternations of hope and despair that have 
 moved the public from that 21st of July until the end. One remarkable 
 thing is the confidence of the physicians who had charge of the case. The 
 hopeful spirit of the press was based on the opinions of those who should 
 have known, and on the insistent hope of Mr. Hill himself. In fact, among 
 friend, family, and physicians, there was hope to the very last. This was 
 inspired by the fortitude of the patient and his superb physical strength, 
 which seemed to defy the ravages of the knife, and to invite the most heroic 
 surgery. When his son Ben went to see him at Atlantic City, he stopped 
 in Philadelphia. There he saw Dr. Gross, who assured him that his father 
 was doing well, that there was no trace of the disease, and that he only 
 needed sea air, appetite, and confidence to hasten into perfect health. Ben 
 told me afterward how happy this assurance made him, and with what a 
 light heart he started for the seashore. 
 
 " Upon reaching his father, he was inexpressibly shocked at his appear 
 ance. The wound in his neck was fearful, its inflamed and ugly edges being 
 emphasized by the pallor and thinness of the senator, who had lost forty 
 pounds in less than as many days. He was in constant pain, and was unable 
 to eat an ounce of solid food, and was kept alive only by stimulants. His 
 son sent for Dr. Gross and had another examination made. At its con 
 clusion the doctor walked from the room, beckoning to Ben, Jr., to follow 
 him. Once in another room he turned, and with streaming eyes, for he had 
 learned to IQYG his patient, said : 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 97 
 
 " There is not the slightest hope for your father s recovery. I feel it 
 ray dutv to inform you, as his eldest son, of this fact. 
 
 " This was on the 20th of March, and this was the first time that Dr. 
 Gross had pronounced the case hopeless. 
 
 "Mr. Hill never recovered from the effects of the last operation, which 
 must be considered a most unfortunate and ill-advised piece of surgery, in 
 view of what followed it. The history of that operation is peculiar, as I 
 had it from a member of the family. After the second operation, there was 
 a slight swelling of the gland that demanded attention. Mr. Hill went to 
 Philadelphia and Dr. Gross told him that the small lump that had formed 
 on the gland must be taken out. For the third time, therefore, the senator 
 was put under the knife. He understood thoroughly that only a slight 
 operation was to be performed. When he awaked from the influence of 
 the ether, he said he felt as if the entire side of his face and neck had been 
 taken off. He was horrified to discover that the entire glands had been 
 removed and that he had been subjected to a more heroic and exhaustive 
 cutting than ever before. From this shock from the exhaustion induced 
 by the severity of the operation he never entirely rallied. His spirits had 
 been buoyant, his faith unshaken, up to that time. After that his nervous 
 system was shattered, his spirits flagged, and he resigned himself to the 
 worst. 
 
 " It appears that the surgeons determined on a change of plan after they 
 had their patient under the influence of ether. They had intended to only 
 remove the small lumps that had swollen on the gland. Upon examination 
 they found that the whole gland was affected, and the younger Dr. Gross 
 insisted that the whole gland must be taken out. The suggestion was 
 heroic, and the elder Dr. Gross hesitated. His son insisted, and, it is said, 
 took the knife and proceeded upon the terrible work. His father acquies 
 cing, it w-as accomplished, the knife being sent clear through from the 
 outside of the neck tothe young flesh that had grown in the place ravaged 
 by the second operation from the inside of the mouth. Of course, the 
 surgeons acted for the best. If the knife had been able to reach beyond 
 the cancerous taint, as they hoped, and if the patient whose marvelous 
 strength and fortitude they relied on could have stood the shock and 
 pain consequent upon the cutting, he would have emerged from that terri 
 ble ordeal sound and cured. 
 
 " But it failed. The wound never healed. The cancerous taint ate its 
 way from behind the reach of the knife to the front once more. The 
 patient for weeks, unable to open his mouth or take solid food, wasted away. 
 The constant and racking pain, that never gave him one instant of relief, 
 was deadened by opiates. Between the keen, relentless agony, the use of 
 drugs, the lack of food, and the loss of flesh and strength, Mr. Hill lost his 
 nerve and will. The admirable fortitude that had sustained him up to that 
 time the superb calmness with which he met all ugly symptoms, and with 
 which he directed the treatment of his case all this was gone. His whole 
 system was shattered. He never lost his sense of Christian resignation 
 not one word of complaint did he utter. But he was unable to control 
 himself. The appearance of even a casual acquaintance would throw him 
 into tears. He could scarcely command his voice for ordinary utterances. 
 He took no interest in affairs, and it required persuasion often to make him 
 take the beef tea and other liquids by which his life was sustained. 
 
 " Had Mr, Hill been aware of what was proposed in this third operation 
 
98 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 he would not have submitted to it. Indeed, for a long time, he hesitated 
 as to whether he should have even the second operation performed. He 
 was strongly advised to go to Eureka to try the waters and abandon the 
 knife. He talked with Mr. W. P. Orme and others who had been there, 
 and the wonderful stories they told had almost persuaded him, when he met 
 Mr. Gustin, of Macon, who had been to the springs for cancer and had 
 failed to get relief. He gave up the idea of the springs and went back to 
 Washington. It appears that there were two mistakes in Mr. Hill s case. 
 
 " First. He was kept under mild treatment for eight months, which 
 allowed the cancerous poison to get into his blood. Mr. Hill himself said, 
 when near the end, concerning the mistakes of his case and the dogmatic 
 tenacity with which the profession clings to an accepted theory : I am 
 the victim of bigotry.* He said this in no spirit of bitterness and hardly 
 of criticism, but as one stating a fact in sadness. 
 
 c* 
 
 " Second. The third operation, which hurried the end, should have been 
 omitted. 
 
 " On this last point Ben Hill, Jr., told me that a physician, thoroughly 
 acquainted with his father s case, said his life might have been prolonged 
 for several years, had it not been for this third operation, which struck him 
 down. It is remarkable to see how rapidly he sunk under it. A full length 
 picture, taken just before this cutting, shows that he was in fine general 
 health, stalwart, full, and strong. The face is clean shaven, and it is one of 
 the handsomest pictures he ever had taken. I saw him just about this time. 
 He was never ruddier, more hopeful or cheerful. His step was elastic, his 
 eye was bright, his appetite good. It must have been a horrible pain and 
 suffering that so surely slaughtered the strong man I saw that day. It is 
 but just to say that Dr. Westmoreland contends that the third operation 
 was not ill-advised. He sustains the course of Dr. Gross, and says if it had 
 not been performed death would have come possibly earlier certainly in 
 more horrible shape. It is proper to say also that the family esteem Dr. 
 Gross highly, as all Georgians must, for his devotion to Mr. Hill, and even 
 those laymen who consider the last operation wrong must remember that 
 they doubt the wisdom, of the first surgeon of America, and one whose 
 whole heart was with his patient. 
 
 "It will be remembered that during the sickness following the third 
 cutting it was reported the senator was dead. This rumor was caused as 
 follows : The long gash in the neck left by the knife was sewed up, leaving 
 a corner open for the escape of the pus. The pus accumulated under the 
 flesh, and swelling very rapidly pressed against the wind-pipe, almost suf 
 focating him. Governor Brown called on him one afternoon when this was 
 
 zj 
 
 at its worst. He found Mr. Hill in high fever, with rapid pulse, gasping 
 for breath, and perfectly unintelligible in his attempts to talk. He was very 
 much alarmed, and told me since that he thought Mr. Hill was dying. Dr. 
 Garnett was summoned, but said that he dared not use the knife where 
 other surgeons had been cutting. Just as the pressure was becoming in 
 tolerable, the tender young flesh on the inside of his mouth burst under the 
 distention and the pus escaped, giving instant relief. The fourth and last 
 operation was the simple slitting open of the surface wound to prevent a 
 recurrence of this danger. 
 
 "Shortly after this it was determined to carry Mr. Hill to Eureka 
 Springs. Those who were most familiar with the case felt that there was 
 little hope, even in the famed waters of that resort, but the family desired 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 99 
 
 that every chance should be taken. After a most trying journey, which, 
 however, he bore much better than was expected, the distinguished invalid 
 found himself at Eureka. He was accompanied by his family and by Dr. 
 Wright the devoted surgeon who had charge of Mr. Hill s wound from 
 the first day he entered the hospital. From Eureka there came conflicting 
 news. One day the dispatches would indicate that a cure was effected, and 
 the next day that death was impending. It was soon discovered that Mr. 
 Hill could not drink enough of the water to do any good, if indeed there 
 was any virtue in the water. His family was discussing the policy of 
 bringing him back to Georgia, where he could have the comforts of home 
 and the companionship of his family. He finally cut this discussion by 
 announcing that he was coming back to Georgia. Said he : 
 
 " Whatever God may have in the future, I am willing to bear without 
 a murmur. But if I must die, I will go back to the old State that gave me 
 birth and die on her soil and among my own people. 
 
 " Mr. Hill had gained considerable strength while at Eureka, and was 
 buoyant and happy when he found himself fairly on his way home. As he got 
 out of the wagon that brought him to the train, he proposed to wrestle for 
 a wager with one of his companions, and said : * I ain t near being a dead 
 man yet. Even up to this time his disease baffled the closest observers. 
 Dr. Wright, who knew more of it, perhaps, than any other man, told Ben, 
 Jr., that his father would be in the Senate again within a month. A day or 
 two afterward, as they were passing through Louisville, he said : 
 
 " * Your father cannot live much longer. 
 
 " How will death probably come ? 
 
 " Through inanition and wearing out. 
 
 " But how is that? The food he now takes will sustain him on indefi 
 nitely. 
 
 " l He will soon acquire such an aversion to food that he will neither 
 take it nor retain it. This, with the ravage of the disease, will soon bring 
 the end. 
 
 " No event in my memory so moved Atlanta as the arrival of Mr. Hill 
 on his return from Eureka. The whole city wore a funereal aspect. Men 
 spoke in low and solemn tones, and the weight of a great sorrow pressed on 
 the hearts of young and old. At the depot a great crowd gathered, and the 
 streets through which his carriage was to pass were lined with his people for 
 the entire distance. As he came from the car, way was made for him. He 
 lifted his hat and walked steadily, though slowly. Hundreds of strong men 
 wept as they saw this great man, so stricken and yet so gallant but in 
 perfect silence he moved on to his carriage. Not a word was spoken as the 
 carriage rolled through the masses who stood with bare heads and dimmed 
 eyes, but the scene was impressive beyond comparison." 
 
 Mr. Grady wrote the following beautiful editorial on the day Mr. Hill 
 arrived at home : 
 
 " COMING HOME AGAIN. 
 
 " At one o clock to-day Senator Hill will reach Atlanta, accompanied by 
 his family. 
 
 " The greatest orator that this country has produced since Clay and 
 Webster 3 comes home dumb and silent. The voice that a few months ago 
 
100 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 rang through the Senate Chamber, and revived the glories of Southern 
 eloquence, struggles to lisp a simple sentence. The handsome form that was 
 so full of health and vigor, when it was last seen on these streets, is stricken 
 and prostrate. The life that was a sunburst in its light and brilliance but a 
 short time since, is clouded and dark with the shadow of disease. A career 
 that was of the loftiest, and led to loftier heights, is checked, perhaps 
 ended, and the great man worn with pain, weary of wandering, lifts his 
 dimmed eyes toward his home, and comes back to his people once more. 
 God only knows how their hearts go out to him, and with what intense 
 sympathy they have made his sorrow their own. 
 
 " He will find to-day, when he enters the depot, thousands of his friends, 
 with bowed heads and earnest faces, awaiting his coming. His whole people 
 have been anxious to testify, in some way that he can appreciate, their grief 
 and sympathy. They wished to take the horses from his carriage that our 
 oldest and most venerable citizens might, with tender and loving hands, lead 
 him to his home. The fear that they might endanger the life that is so 
 precious, or strain the system that has borne so much, has left in uncertain 
 shape what would have been the most remarkable demonstration ever seen 
 in this city. Whatever is done, Mr. Hill may know that every heart in the 
 great city aches witli his sorrow ; that thousands of eyes unused to tears will 
 grow dim to-day as they look upon his carriage, and in the quiet hush of 
 our busy streets he will find more profound consideration than any display 
 could show. If he could only know the depth and earnestness of the feeling 
 that pervades the whole city, he would find a consolation deeper than words 
 can express. If the love, the prayers, the sympathy, and the sorrow of fifty 
 thousand citizens, without one exception, could put into human hands the 
 miraculous power to cure that rested in the finger of the divine Nazarene, 
 Mr. Hill would to-day rise from his bed, and carry in his renewed health 
 the testimony of the affections of a whole people. May God, in his infinite 
 mercy, grant what human skill cannot achieve or human hearts command." 
 
 " From the day of Mr. Hill s arrival in Atlanta, he steadily declined. 
 The temporary strength he had gained at Eureka, the natural rally of his 
 system against the prostration caused by the knife was lost, and day after 
 day found him weaker than before. He still received his friends, and a 
 daily stream of visitors paid their respects and tendered their sympathy. 
 He was able for some two or three weeks to talk intelligibly, though the 
 absorbent cotton in his mouth deadened the voice, and made the syllables 
 indistinct. He was fond of company, and his mind was as alert and his 
 interest in current affairs as vivid as ever. He seemed anxious to impress 
 upon his visitors this fact, and also that his general health was perfect and 
 his system undisturbed. 
 
 " I am as well as I ever was, if it was not for this wound, he would say, 
 lifting his white fingers in a pitiful way to his bandaged face. He was per 
 fectly happy, I think, during those long sunny days. He said to me once, 
 looking at the sunshine streaming through his windows, and his family 
 gathered about him: If it were not for this pain, I should feel that I were 
 in heaven. He went out riding twice, and enjoyed the familiar scenes 
 through which he was driven. He recognized almost every one who spoke 
 to him, and returned their salutations with a smile. He walked about the 
 house without trouble, and one day I saw him standing alone in his front 
 yard like a great statue of himself pale, bandaged, mournful, with the 
 
LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. , ,;>, 101 
 
 ** 
 
 noonday sun streaming on his head and the flowers springing about his feet. 
 As we saluted him, he lifted his hand with the old royal grace, and, bending 
 his body stiffly to one side, smiled in a tender and graceful way. But these 
 days were soon over. 
 
 " When he reached Atlanta there were two distinct wounds. One ex 
 tended from the center of the chin back an inch perhaps the other from 
 under the ear toward the chin. There was a firm, broad strip of flesh 
 between these wounds, but this finally gave way and there was but one 
 wound, extending from the middle of the chin to beneath the left ear. The 
 disease then struck deeper, and the cancer ate its way toward the arteries 
 and the lungs. The road to death was now marked by small epochs that 
 came with increasing frequency as the end was neared. 
 
 "On July 12, it was discovered that his speech was so indistinct he could 
 scarcely be understood, and a writing pad, with pencil attached, was bought 
 for him. From this time forward he wrote what he had to say, abandoning 
 the effort to talk almost entirely. During his whole sickness the only 
 impatience he showed was when he could not make himself understood by 
 speech. And I have thought that this was perhaps the crucial trial to him. 
 What a pitiful travesty it was. That the most eloquent of Americans, on 
 whose utterance the nation hung entranced, and the hautboy sweetness of 
 whose voice enchanted all hearers should be so crippled and gashed that he 
 could not convey to his family the simplest message of love or inquiry. 
 That the strong man, with mind as alert and powerful as ever, groaned in 
 anguish when he found himself dumb indeed, and was forced to write the 
 words he could not speak. 
 
 " Mr. Hill was first informed, positively, that his disease was cancer, and 
 that there was no hope for his life, on the 18th of July on the day before 
 the meeting of the gubernatorial convention. He had steadily believed, up 
 to this time, that his disease was not cancer and that some relief would be 
 afforded. At last, however, it was impossible to disguise its true nature any 
 longer. On the Sunday previous to the 18th he had found it impossible to 
 swallow even the liquid food on which he had subsisted for months. Deg 
 lutition, accomplished day after day with more pain, at last was impossible, 
 and it seemed that starvation was definitely ahead of him. A tube, how 
 ever, was forced down his throat, and through this a few drops of milk 
 administered. The next day the tube was taken out and it was discovered 
 that he could swallow a little milk without it. But it was feared that the 
 throat would permanently close at any moment. On Tuesday he was in 
 formed of his actual condition. It created no surprise and was received 
 without emotion. Shortly afterward, with great pain and difficulty, he 
 swallowed about an ounce of milk. At last, impressed with the agony 
 caused by the effort, he put the cup to one side and said, That is the last 
 thing I will ever drink. He then busied himself by making his will a duty 
 that he had put off up to this time. And thus, while the great convention 
 was bustling and throbbing a few squares off, and politicians were rushing 
 to and fro with their petty ambitions, this great man sat in the shadow of 
 death and made preparation to bid farewell to the earth and all earthly 
 things at the very summit of fame, enjoying all the honor that a devoted 
 people could give, and with all the glory that eloquence and statesmanship 
 could bring. What a lesson of the folly of things his sad fate conveyed to 
 the men who thought that all in all was involved in their scrambles and 
 aspirations in the capitol ! 
 
102 
 
 V t * * 
 
 * < O 
 
 <.. < tj 
 
 t 
 
 
 .SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 * t i t> 
 
 "There were several reasons that induced those about Mr. Hill to believe 
 that the end was fast approaching at this time. His alarming weakness, 
 the sudden but not unexpected closing of the throat, the pain with which 
 he swallowed even a few drops of milk, the irritation of his stomach, the 
 deepening ravage of his wound, all combined to fill this conviction. In 
 addition to this a message had just been received that dispelled the last 
 vestige of hope from even the heart of his son, who had hoped against 
 hope for months. There was a physician in Chicago of great fame and 
 character, who had taken a hopeful view of Mr. Hill s case from the begin 
 ning, and who had a remedy or treatment that had been very successful 
 with cancer. The family corresponded with him for months, and he was 
 disposed to believe, while declining to accept any compensation, that Mr. 
 Hill s case was not hopeless. His remedy, while a very severe one, had 
 effected fine results, and I believe was tried on Mr. Hill for a few days, but 
 abandoned because it threatened to prostrate him. At last Ben, Jr., had a 
 thorough diagnosis of his father s condition made and sent it to this Chi 
 cago surgeon, with the request that he would examine it carefully, and if 
 there was the slightest possibility of a cure, in his opinion, that he would 
 come at once to Atlanta. On the 17th of July a letter was received in 
 which the physician stated that from the diagnosis he was satisfied that 
 there was not a shadow of hope, and that, while he was willing to give any 
 time or trouble to the cure of Senator Hill or the amelioration of his con 
 dition, he felt that a journey to Atlanta with that view would simply 
 raise false hopes and be without effect. After this, there was nothing for 
 even those who were most devoted to him to do except to sit with folded 
 hands and wait for the end. Indeed, when they saw the hourly and relent 
 less suffering under which he was bowed it seemed almost a mercy that his 
 pain should be soothed and his aching heart be stilled even though it was 
 Death itself that brought the relief. 
 
 " Up to the last Mr. Hill did not decline to receive his friends, even 
 though the visits involved the most affecting consequences. Scarcely a 
 man ever entered that awful, but benign presence, without showing an 
 emotion that was perceptible even to the dull eyes of the sufferer. Men 
 who for years had not shed a tear, and who might have thought that all the 
 fountains of tenderness were dried within their breasts, found themselves 
 blinded when they held Mr. Hill s hand and looked into his face. When 
 Governor Brown called to see him it was several minutes before either 
 could speak. With hands clasped and heads bowed, the two senators sobbed, 
 and their frames shook with uncontrollable emotion. When Governor 
 Colquitt called for the first time, he sat down near Mr. Hill. The senator 
 reached out his wan hand, laid it in the governor s, and said : * I have 
 wanted to see you a long time. Governor Colquitt was completely over 
 come. He bent his head in his hands, while the tears ran through his 
 fingers. Mr. Hill was just as much affected. This was the history of 
 almost every visit. There was a pathos in Mr. Hill s condition and circum 
 stance that overswept and melted even the stoutest heart. Men whose 
 acquaintance with him was but slight, when they saw him sitting there so 
 helpless and yet so resigned, were unable to control themselves. He usually 
 wrote something for each visitor, and in almost all cases gave them his 
 autograph. Even to the last, this was written in a firm, flowing hand. 
 What he wrote was usually of a religious vein, and I quote a sentence given 
 to Mr. Howard Van Epps and he cherishes the scrap of paper on which it 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 103 
 
 is written as a precious treasure as an evidence of what was occupying his 
 mind : I am in perfect health except my wound. That pains me very 
 much. My future is uncertain as to time, but not as to fate. I am perfectly 
 resigned. God will take care of me. There is some work that I should 
 
 ^j 
 
 like to finish before I go, but God s will be done. 
 
 " Such, in brief, is the story of this sickness this never-lifting shadow 
 that deepened so quickly into death. It is but the merest outline. No mor 
 tal pen can fill out the picture. The roughest hand would falter and the 
 sternest eye grow dim in attempting to write down the pathos and the sorrow 
 of this Iliad. Never, perhaps, was so much of gentleness and courage allied 
 for endurance. The uncomplaining resignation of a Christian the engag 
 ing tenderness of a child the lofty calmness of a philosopher the sturdy 
 fortitude of a stoic, combined in the sick life of this man, with a genius that 
 had never halted before inquiry, and a pride and a courage that had borne 
 all things before it, he never even challenged the justness of his affliction, but 
 bowed his head under it unquestioning and silent. With a tongue whose 
 eloquence had been irresistible, and hands at whose invocation whole peoples 
 had risen to do his bidding, he raised neither in supplication that his impend 
 ing fate might be averted; but with the one taught submission to the God 
 that even then oppressed him, and with the other reached out to his loved 
 ones, and gathered them to his heart. Through all of the horrible ordeal, 
 through pain so fierce and unrelenting that death itself was a blessing 
 through long days and nights of contemplation, when the strong man 
 must have rebelled against the Fate that pressed upon him so inexora 
 bly there was never a word of complaint or outcry. The child that died un 
 conscious in its mother s arms could never have left those who loved it a more 
 perfect assurance of its ineffable and eternal peace and those who with pa 
 tience and tenderness faced this sad tragedy to the end, found their hearts 
 irradiated, and their tears dried at last, in a light at once divine in its source 
 and splendor ! 
 
 Little can be added to the details of this narrative, and nothing to its 
 tenderness and pathos. I would, however, say something of the wonderful 
 patience of the sufferer, and something of the loving interest of the people 
 in him, as he lay so many days on a martyr s couch. As soon as I heard 
 of the first operation, I went to my father, and from that day to the end I 
 was constantly with him. I witnessed his sufferings, as agonizing as ever 
 borne by man, and I bear testimony that no word of complaint, or murmur 
 of rebellion, ever escaped his lips. He was always full of consideration for 
 his loved ones. The first operation he kept entirely from them until it was 
 all over. I can never forget the scene just before the second operation. 
 My mother and myself were with him, and I never saw such absolute self- 
 control, such nerve, and such cheerfulness. Although he was about to 
 undergo an ordeal, the result of which was uncertain, for the surgeons had 
 told him it might result in death, yet, up to the moment when the last word 
 of farewell was spoken, he talked brightly and happily to us. I wanted to 
 go with him to the surgeon s room, but to this he would not consent. I 
 shall never forget his happy smile and cheerful voice as he kissed my 
 mother good-by, and, putting his arm around me, begged that I would 
 remember my promise to stay with her. In a short time he was brought 
 back to us speechless and helpless. He rapidly recovered from the effects 
 of this operation, and in a few weeks was apparently in his usual good 
 
104 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 health. He resumed his seat the following winter in the Senate, and 
 participated in its proceedings. The only apparent effect of the opera 
 tion was a slight lisp, caused by the tongue growing to the bottom 
 of the mouth, when healing, but this the surgeons assured him could 
 be easily remedied. As Mr. Grady has said, he was never in better 
 general health than when the third and last operation was performed. 
 He weighed 180 pounds, at least five pounds more than ever before 
 in his life ; but from the effects of this operation he never recovered. 
 Some members of his family, myself among the number, were very 
 much opposed to such heroic treatment, urging him to try other 
 remedies before resorting to the knife, but he thought the course he 
 followed was the wiser one, and while at the hospital he wrote my 
 wife the following letter on the subject : 
 
 PHILADELPHIA, October 4, 1881. 
 
 My Dear Daughter: Your letter was so sweet and full of love 
 it gave me great pleasure to receive it. I have loved you better 
 recently than ever before, and feel for you as for my own daughter. 
 God has given me such noble children that I should be wicked in 
 deed to complain of any affliction that he may send upon me. But 
 his blessings have been countless. All along through the terrible 
 period of war, as well as through times of peace, my pathway has 
 been strewn with comfort and joys which ought to satisfy any one 
 in this life. Whatever shall befall me during the small remnant of my 
 pilgrimage, I shall submit without murmuring. " Thy will be done " is the 
 prayer of every breath. I think I could be of service to my dear children 
 and the country if I could live out the days a vigorous constitution would 
 allow me. But God knows better than I can know what is in the future, 
 and whatsoever He doeth will be best. You and Ben and very many 
 friends are urging me to go to Eureka Springs. I think I owe it to myself, 
 my family, and my State, to exhaust all the remedies for my trouble. I am 
 now submitting to surgical treatment, because, if that treatment fails, it will 
 still be time enough to try other remedies ; whereas, if I try other remedies 
 first and they fail, it will then be too late to try surgery. The surgeons 
 assure me my disease is altogether local, and that there is no impurity in 
 my blood. My perfect health is a strong confirmation of the correctness of 
 this theory. Thus far there is no symptom of the return of the disease, and 
 every day I grow better. God bless you and save you and your dear 
 husband from all evil. 
 
 Affectionately your father, 
 
 B. H. HILL. 
 
 It was only after our last interview with Dr. Gross, when the great sur 
 geon, after an examination, left the room without a word, and I followed to 
 hear from his trembling lips the saddest words that had ever fallen upon 
 my ears, that my father consented to go to Eureka Springs. He realized 
 the meaning of Dr. Gross s silent departure, although I kept the terrible 
 announcement in my own heart. I will not dwell upon the particulars of 
 the long trip to Eureka, nor of the two months of alternate hope and de 
 spair passed there. During those long days he seemed to be gathering 
 strength for the extreme hour. He rarely spoke, for the pain of speech was 
 very great. Day by day he sat silent, his great eyes, luminous with thought, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 105 
 
 gazing at the blue mountains far in the distance, and there seemed to steal 
 into his heart the rest and peace of the everlasting hills. " He lifted up his 
 eyes unto the hills from whence cometh help." What visions must have 
 come before him as he thus sat communing with himself and his God. I 
 doubt little that his whole life passed in review before him. Visions of his 
 pure boyhood, the old farm-house and the red hills ; visions of the beautiful 
 face of his loving mother, and the proud face of his happy father, as he came 
 back to them, in their humble home, bearing the highest honors of his col 
 lege. Visions of his triumphant life as he mounted so rapidly into fame ; 
 of his victories at tttfe bar, on the hustings, in the Senate. He heard again 
 the applause of listening multitudes, and saw again the rapt and grateful 
 eyes of his countrymen as they hung upon the music of his words. Blessed 
 visions of wife, home, and children. Before this terrible disease struck 
 him down, how strong he was, how abounding in health and vigor, how 
 potential for service to his country. Ah, sun-crowned and shadowless to 
 him was life ! All these visions and thoughts must have come to him, and 
 all these memories, these blessings, and these aspirations lie must now give 
 up ; and yet, never a word of regret for himself, or rebellion at the inex 
 plicable mystery of his lot, ever escaped him. 
 
 When his feeble lips uttered any word of lament, it was for his loved 
 ones, for his country. The burden on his heart was the lost power to serve 
 them. One day he said to us : " It is astonishing how the horrors of death 
 diminish as it approaches. How riches, honor, position, the world s applause, 
 dwindle into insignificance. I should like to live ; I feel that I could be of 
 more use to my country and family than I have ever been. But, after all, 
 what does it matter? A few years, and I must pass away at best. Those 
 of my children who have been unfortunate, I would like to help more and 
 lift them up over the rough places, but if I am taken they will perhaps rely 
 more upon themselves and trust more to Him ; so, in any event, I am sub 
 missive. I lean upon the everlasting arm and my trust is Christ. If the 
 Christian religion is a fable, a fable ? how can it be ? how could it start ? 
 could anything be purer, more beautiful, more unselfish ? I do not think I 
 shall be saved by my own merits, oh, no ! I have done a thousand things I 
 ought not to have done, but through the merits of Christ who died for me." 
 
 And so every word he spoke, every line traced by his trembling hand, 
 when too feeble to speak, was of his country, his family, and his God. 
 During those days of suffering he was not forgotten by his countrymen. As 
 he never ceased to think of them, so they never ceased to think of him. 
 From all over the land, from the North as well as the South, came mes 
 sages and letters of love and sympathy. Hundreds of remedies for his dread 
 disease were forwarded to him, with earnest prayers that he would use them. 
 His colleagues in the Senate, headed by his bitterest political opponent, sent 
 to him tenderest words of regret for his absence, sympathy for his suffering, 
 and prayers for his return. The great leader of the Confederacy, from his 
 seclusion, wrote as follows : 
 
 BEAUVOIE, HARRISON Co., Miss., 
 
 July 19, 1882. 
 HON. B. H. HILL. 
 
 My Very Dear ffiiend: I am so solicitous about your welfare that I 
 write to ask for direct information in regard to your health. Ever mindful 
 of your generous and cordial support given to me in times of trial and when 
 
106 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 in deepest adversity, times when the timid and self-seeking desert, as rats 
 fly from a sinking ship, I have suffered in your suffering and fervently 
 prayed for your relief. For my sake, for your sake, and that of your 
 family and of your country, now so needing your service, may Our Father 
 give you health and strength and length of days. 
 
 Hopefully and faithfully yours, 
 
 JEFFERSON DAVIS. 
 
 The sweetest singer in all our Southland wrote to me this touching mes 
 
 sage 
 
 My Dear Sir : I trust you received my answer to your courteous letter 
 of some weeks ago. My present purpose in writing is to express to you and 
 your family, in far stronger terms than before, the sorrow that I and all our 
 neighbors feel in hearing of the terrible condition of that great, good, 
 heroic man your father. It seems incomprehensible that in the youth of 
 his fame and usefulness, such a calamity should have come upon one of the 
 few statesmen our country can now boast of ; but I declare before God that 
 I, for one, believe his magnificent heroism, his majestic patience, his Chris 
 tian faith under torture, which recall the fabled sufferings of Prometheus, 
 must furnish an example that can never die, and in his death he shall be the 
 means of calling many to the loftiest heights, perhaps, of a long forgotten 
 belief. Even such consolations are feeble now to the " near and dear ones," 
 called to witness a husband s and father s anguish. The sympathies of 
 Georgia, the South, the whole United States are with them. From one 
 who may soon be called upon himself to pass through the " valley of the 
 shadow," receive these few lines of profound condolence. I am, 
 
 Most truly yours, 
 
 PAUL H. HAYNE. 
 
 It would be impossible to give the thousands of similar messages that 
 came to brighten the darkness of his sick-room. They came from high and 
 low, from friends and strangers, from every section of this broad land, and 
 the sufferer was deeply touched and comforted by these evidences of the 
 loving thought of the people. Some weeks before his death, he wrote on his 
 pad, to me, "As my son and secretary you ought to acknowledge the receipt 
 of every letter, thanking the writer for me, and you ought to preserve every 
 letter ; you may want them if I die, and I will certainly want them if I live." 
 And what more need I write ? Years have passed since that sad day, and 
 many sorrows have entered the home which he left desolate. The shadow 
 has never lifted, and for me will never lift. I cannot dwell upon the clos 
 ing scenes of this great life. His last words, uttered distinctly the day 
 before his death, " Almost home," will be ever treasured in the hearts of 
 Christians. As the sun rose on the morning of the 16th of August, 1882, so 
 his great spirit went to meet the Son of Righteousness. 
 
 In the solemn stillness of the early dawn, 
 
 In the rosy radiance of the waking morn, 
 He slept and his spirit, winging its flight 
 
 To Heaven, as silently and softly passed away 
 As the tired twilight falls asleep in night, 
 
 And the dreaming dawn wakes to day. 
 
HTS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 107 
 
 lie is buried in beautiful Oakland the first of his family to rest in that 
 silent city. Over his grave, the faithful companion of his life, and the son, 
 whose proudest heritage is his name, have placed a simple shaft of pure 
 white marble, truest symbol of his character, and on it the inscription of 
 his birth and death, and the beautiful expression of that faith which sus 
 tained him until the end, as, when too feeble to speak, he wrote : " If 
 a grain of corn will die and then rise again in so much beauty, why may not 
 I die and rise again in infinite beauty and life ? How is the last a greater 
 mystery than the first? And by so much as I exceed the grain of corn in 
 this life, why may I not exceed it in the new life ? How can we limit the 
 power of Him who made the grain of corn, and then made the same grain 
 again in such wonderful newness of life ? : 
 
CHAPTER IX. 
 
 Profound and Universal Grief throughout the Country Memorial Meetings Action of 
 the Governor Of the Mayor of the City of Atlanta His Funeral Scenes and Inci 
 dents in the City the Day of his Burial Movement to Erect a Monument to his 
 Memory Its Success Statue Erected on Peachtree Street in the City of Atlanta 
 Inscriptions on the Same Conclusion of the Memoir. 
 
 death of Senator Hill caused profound sorrow throughout the 
 United States. Georgia mourned him as her most gifted and best be 
 loved son : the South mourned him as her most invincible champion ; the 
 country mourned him as its patriotic statesman. In every city and town 
 in the State, the citizens met in mass meetings to give expression to their 
 bereavement and to bear eloquent testimony of their love and admiration. 
 His long suffering, borne with such patience and heroism, drew all hearts to 
 him, and over his grave love broke its alabaster vase of precious ointment. 
 The loss of his service to his country was universally regarded as irreparable. 
 He died just when he was most needed. Although he had reached great 
 fame, it was felt that he was not at his zenith. It would be impossible in 
 the compass of this volume, indeed it would require several volumes, to give 
 the many tributes from the press and people. I can only select a few of 
 the many eloquent eulogies pronounced upon him as citizen, lawyer, and 
 statesman. These eulogies were confined to no section or to the members 
 of one party, but eloquent orators, North and South, Democrats and Repub 
 licans, united their voices in praise of the dead statesman and in lamen 
 tation over his loss. The day of his burial was a day of general grief in 
 Georgia. In every town and city in the State business was suspended and 
 the grief -stricken citizens gathered in response to the tolling of the church 
 bells to give utterance to their sorrow. In the City of Atlanta the public 
 buildings and all the stores were closed, and every house was draped in the 
 insignia of mourning. Thousands came from every portion of the State to 
 be present at the funeral, and from the church to the cemetery the streets 
 were thronged witli silent and sorrowful multitudes. No such tribute was 
 ever paid to a Georgian before. Governor Colquitt, representing the entire 
 State, issued the following proclamation : 
 
 I 
 
 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT, ATLANTA, GA., 
 To the People of Georgia: . August 16, 1882. 
 
 I announce with deepest sorrow that your Senator, Benjamin H. Hill, 
 departed this life at five o clock this morning. After a protracted term of 
 suffering, almost unparalleled, he passed away to his rest in perfect peace. 
 His life and fame the people of his beloved State will place among its 
 proudest and dearest treasures. In sympathy with the profound and uni 
 versal grief that moves the hearts of our entire community, I direct that the 
 Capitol be draped in mourning, the flag thereon be displayed at half-mast, 
 and that the offices of the Executive Department be closed on the day of the 
 burial of the illustrious dead. ALFRED H. COLQUITT, 
 
 Governor. 
 
 108 i 
 
- 
 
 33 
 J- 
 
 x 
 o 
 
 c 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 r: 
 
 i; 
 s 
 
i T f 
 
 r r < t 
 
 < > t < 
 < 
 
 OT 
 
 f T I I 
 
 * t 
 t i t 
 
 
 * * 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 109 
 
 In obedience to the call of the Mayor of the City of Atlanta, her citi 
 zens gathered the day after his death in the hall of the House of Represen 
 tatives, and while the body of the Senator was lying in state at his home, 
 his fellow-citizens paid beautiful and touching tributes to his memory. 
 These proceedings are given in another place. Similar action was had in 
 all the cities and towns in the State. The Legislature, at its next session, 
 ordered painted a portrait to accompany those of her sons who had made 
 illustrious her past history, and the General Assembly, in joint session, met 
 together in memorial exercises, and eloquent eulogies were pronounced by 
 the members. Many of these were remarkably able analyses of the politi 
 cal character of the dead statesman, claiming for him great wisdom, patri 
 otism, and consistency in his career, and I regret that I cannot, for want of 
 space, insert them in this volume. 
 
 Soon after his death a movement was started by the people to raise a 
 fund to erect a monument to his memory. An association was formed to 
 give practical shape to the movement, and in a short time sufficient con 
 tributions were secured. The eminent sculptor, Alexander Doyle, of 
 New York, was intrusted with the work. In 1885 he completed his task, 
 and the magnificent statue of Senator Hill, which now stands on Peachtree 
 Street, was erected to his memory by his loving countrymen. The statue 
 is of Italian marble, of heroic size, and is a splendid work of art, and a 
 good likeness of Mr. Hill. Upon it the following inscriptions were 
 placed : 
 
 On the south side "Benjamin Harvey Hill. Born September 14, 1823. 
 Died August 16, 1882. This monument is erected by his fellow-citizens in 
 commemoration of the indomitable courage, unrivaled eloquence and de 
 voted patriotism characterizing the illustrious dead." On the east side 
 "Member of the House of Representatives of Georgia during 1851 and 
 1852 ; Senator of Georgia during 1859 and 1860; Member of the Conven 
 tion of 1861. Beloved in private life, distinguished at the bar, and eminent 
 in public relations, he was at all times the champion of human liberty." 
 On the west side " Member of the Provisional Congress of the Confeder 
 ate States ; Senator of the Confederate States from 1861 to 1865; Member 
 of the House of Representatives of the United States from 1875 to 1877; 
 Senator of the United States from 1877 to the date of his death." On 
 the north side " We are in the house of our fathers, our brothers are 
 our companions, and we are at home to stay, thank God. Amnesty 
 Speech, January 11, 1876. Who saves this country, saves himself, saves 
 all things, and all things saved do bless him. Who lets his country die, lets 
 all things die, dies himself ignobly, and all things dying curse him. Notes 
 on the Situation. The union under the Constitution knows no section, but 
 does know all the States. Speech in the United States Senate, June 11, 1876." 
 
 The unveiling of this statue was a most interesting and memorable 
 event in Georgia. A full account, taken from the Constitution, is given 
 further on in this volume, with the eloquent speeches made on that occa 
 sion. This was the first monument erected by Georgians to one of her 
 statesmen. But the monument which he himself has erected in the hearts 
 of his countrymen, bv a life of faithful service, will endure when marble 
 shall have crumbled into dust. 
 
PART SECOND. 
 
 BEN HILL S BURIAL THE GREAT GEORGIAN SENATOR S LAST OF EARTH THE 
 SCENES IN ATLANTA DURING THE PROGRESS OF THE FUNERAL GEN. 
 EVANS S ABLE SERMON. 
 
 EXTRACT FROM ATLANTA CONSTITUTION. 
 
 IT is over. The last scone in the calamity has been enacted. Yesterday, 
 in Georgia soil, was laid the ashes of her greatest son. On the fresh sod 
 of his grave mingled the tears of the whole State, for, when Atlanta stood in 
 her weeds of mourning, there came not only kindly words of sympathy from 
 her sister cities, but also friends, who claimed a share in the general grief. 
 Mr. Hill was a man of the people, sprung from their midst, rising to his 
 splendid heights on their devotion, and placing himself in their affections 
 beyond the love which mighty men are wont to win. For four days the 
 city had been draped in the habiliments of sorrow, and her bells had tolled 
 the story of her hero s death. Yet the realization of the affliction seemed to 
 come only in its last sad scene. Atlanta has been crowded often before, but 
 never for such a cause. In the thronged streets there was a sacred silence, 
 and in the moving crowds the countenances of men told of the gloom that 
 shadowed that great gathering. The voice of music was hushed, and the 
 sound of revel was not heard. Of the dead, tender and beautiful things 
 \vere said, and men spoke of him as of one whose like they should never see 
 again. A more genuine tribute has never fallen on any grave to keep its 
 flowers fresh in sweet and everlasting remembrance. The streets were 
 crowded, though business had been suspended. 
 
 One purpose animated the great crowd, and it was to pay their last 
 respects to the memory of the great man gone. 
 
 From the home to the church the procession passed through long lines of 
 people of all classes. A more general outpouring was never seen in Atlanta. 
 No political opinion, no difference in social caste, and no artificial distinction 
 prevented the mingling of the masses in their common sorrow. The city 
 seemed deserted except in the streets which led toward the church where the 
 sacred rites were to be performed. It may be said that Atlanta devoted 
 yesterday to the memory of Senator Hill, and a more general tribute was 
 never laid by any people on the grave of a great man. With his memory 
 the day is embalmed by the touching expressions of the general grief 
 which marked it. 
 
 * 
 
 FUNERAL SERMON BY REV. CLEMENT A. EVANS. 
 
 Religion claims the illustrious man whose decease is so deeply deplored, 
 and whose name all men delight to honor, as altogether her own, finally and 
 forever. Willing that the plaudits of all tongues shall be heard, she reserves 
 
 ^j f ^j j 
 
 to herself to say the best words about her departed son. The fame she gives 
 him transcends the fretted earthly shore where all human renown is spent, 
 and widens over the sphere where angels enjoy glory, honor, and immortal 
 ity. Faith is jealous, with godly jealousy, of the luster that should glow 
 around his name. The transient brilliance which great temporal achieve 
 ment lent him is permitted as time s appropriate tribute, but for herself the 
 religion of Jesus Christ irradiates his departing presence with light from 
 heaven brighter than all present splendor a light that shines through the 
 
 110 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. Ill 
 
 portals which admit him from his affliction into the enjoyment of " the far 
 more exceeding and eternal weight of glory." 
 
 These selected scriptures set forth that faith in which trusted those hopes 
 he felt, the submission to God he made of himself, his dying testimony, and 
 the home he now enjoys. They arc not read for exposition or comment, 
 but are set as chords that will respond in sympathy as we touch here and 
 there the tuneful strings of the great life whose music always aroused and 
 often entranced, whose sweetest melody was poured forth in the final 
 strain. 
 
 On Wednesday last, as the sun was rising, the spirit of Benjamin Harvey 
 Hill ascended to heaven. The silver cord was loosed, the golden bowl was 
 broken, and the spirit returned to God who gave it. The subdued sobs of 
 the loving household were followed by the swift telegram which informed 
 the Union that it had lost a great citizen; the tongue of the bell above the 
 Capitol build ing told this city the sad tidings, daily listened for, that the State 
 of Georgia had lost a senator ; and these mournful sounds of sorrow were 
 quickly followed by the mellow cadenced peal from the aspirant spire of the 
 church of God, which spoke indeed in grief, but announced to all the world 
 that a wearied, trusting soul, made pure through Christ, had entered home 
 at last. 
 
 Draped cities deplore his fall ; commerce clothes itself in sable ; society 
 suspends its appointed pleasures ; flags droop half way the mast, and by all 
 tokens the general sense of bereavement is declared. The governments, 
 municipal, state, and national, take instant and honorable note of this death. 
 The bar blend their appreciation with the general voice. The people, in mass 
 meetings throughout the State, strive in vain to utter the popular affection 
 for the great sufferer who had served them in his strength and now had sunk 
 in their midst under the burden of a mysterious malady. From our whole 
 country come testimonials of his broad fame, and this historic hour passes on 
 and away freighted with the richest words that tongues most gifted can ut 
 ter and pens most felicitous can write. Be it my work in this sacred place 
 -not to relate the well-known biography not to praise beyond due but 
 to so touch the great, vibrating life of Senator Hill, that its rich, resonant 
 tones may reach the living and make melody in their hearts unto the Lord ! 
 God speed the utterance and give grace to the hearers ! 
 
 It was home sweet hallowed home, graced by the saintly mother which 
 was the alma mater of his religious life. The rudiments of Christ s match 
 less doctrine were first embedded in his capacious brain by the mother s hand. 
 Then came the direct appeal of the minister of the church the consent of 
 the young heart, and his conversion in Troup when he was fourteen years of 
 age. " I was converted there," is the testimony of his own lips. His ac 
 ceptance of Christ seems to have been without reserve, and it placed him on 
 the bright roll of the twice-born children of God. He laid his head in the 
 lap of religion, gave his heart in early surrender to its charms, and conse 
 crated himself unto Christ in the dew of his youth. 
 
 Afterward, he bore his faith manfully through the peculiar perils of his 
 college course. " He was a pure boy," says State Commissioner Orr, his col 
 lege mate, "There was not the shadow of immorality on his character." 
 When the highest honor of his class blushed upon him, when unwonted flat 
 teries fell thickly around him, when worldly hope stood him in the open 
 wicket to the path of fame and showed him the higher summits accessible 
 to his aggressive genius, he was still, thank God, a Christian, 
 
112 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 We may use the vivid recollections of many yet living men to show us 
 the manly figure, instinct with oratorio action, and the speaking face, lit with 
 the fires of eloquence, that now first drew the gaze of men in a boy s speech 
 from the college platform. Two great senators, Preston and Berrien, lis 
 tened, looked, saw power enthroning itself, applauded the youth, and, join 
 ing in the common enthusiasm, inspired him to attempt the steep ascent to 
 human greatness. Perhaps it was by the inspirations of this success he 
 gathered up the purpose and powers that lay within him in boulders yet un- 
 chiseled. The rock was smitten, internal fountains lay locked within. In 
 the double streams of duty to God and country, the united waters began to 
 flow. Earth s highest places, with never-failing hope of Heaven combined, 
 was the possibility of his coming life. 
 
 Marriage came next, with the woman ever worthy of him, always devoted 
 to him, ever dear to him, and for whom his trembling fingers traced the last 
 word, " Dearest," and afterward wrote no more. A family, fond beyond ex 
 pression and proud of him, even to idolatry, gathered about him first and last. 
 The home altar of prayer arose, in which, as the priest of his house, he con 
 secrated them to God. The church at La Grange where he went to reside 
 in the practice of law enjoyed at once his liberality and his labor. I would 
 also, with the proper emphasis, mark the earliest public service in which his 
 magical powers of speech were used for the good of his State. Called forth 
 by his neighbors, he put himself upon the side of personal sobriety and the 
 duty of civil government to give protection against temptation in a series of 
 speeches made in Troup immediately after the close of his college life. His 
 views were supported by his own example. Unpledged, he lived and died a 
 sober man, having abstained wholly through all his life. He reasoned with 
 Paul-like penetration of a temperance that stands upon righteousness, and 
 hoped for the judgment to come. This was more than thirty years ago. 
 Ideas on this momentous subject of intemperance have moved on since then. 
 Statesmen look at it now by the light of the public welfare, the judiciary 
 are wearied by its breach of la\v and brood of crimes, and citizens see wealth, 
 peace, and purity wither by its blast. The testimony of Senator Hill s 
 opinion and examples, from first to last, was against a wrong by which our 
 country suffers in almost every home in all its vast dominion. 
 
 His entrance into public life seems to have been imperative. His people, 
 pleased by his manners and proud of his gifts, pushed him out into that 
 fierce light which beats upon all public men. He found himself, almost be 
 fore he knew it, in the midst of the dangerous whirl. 
 
 Few men wholly escape the perils of public life. The billowy ocean has 
 buried in its dark unfathomed caves more navies than it floats. The haz 
 ards of political strife must be met by good men, but let him who sets his 
 prow seaward, and pushes out from the safe bays where the still waters are, 
 take heed lest his boat be beaten to pieces by the boisterous billows, or 
 strand on some rocky coast. Some have thus ventured lost all made ship 
 wreck of faith in man, in God, and every claim of Heaven then gone down 
 between the jaws of waves that opened wide to take them in. Others have 
 suffered themselves to be tossed about until the rigging was rent, spars splin 
 tered, and all their moral machinery tumbled into such mal-adjustments 
 that they rolled in helpless drift on the great sea of public life ; and yet, 
 after all have righted up, renewed their strength, readjusted their relations 
 to God and man, and gone by His grace in glorious beauty into the haven 
 of eternal rest. Not many have sailed those seas, weathering every tern- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 113 
 
 pest, without the wrenching of a bolt. Still, some men have thus lived in 
 public service, and all men may so live as to preserve their firmness of 
 faith, serenity of spirit, and purity of life amidst the most riotous political 
 turbulence. 
 
 Senator Hill did not escape these perils of which I speak, nor would his 
 most partial friend declare that he was unaffected by them. His first error, 
 however, was strangely caused by his reverence. He conceived, as he told 
 me, that public men should not be officious in religion lest they bring reproach 
 upon the cause. His views, of course, w r ere wrong. The prevalence of his 
 opinion, and its extension to all men in secular business, would paralyze the 
 arm of the laity and commit the administration of human redemption to 
 a close corporation of clergy. No condition of religion would be more 
 deplorable. But he formed this opinion in the beginning with a clear con 
 science, and declined to officiate in religion after his open entrance into 
 politics. After that, I am sure his religious joy began to decline, and yet 
 in all his career, whether possessing or lacking the joy of salvation, he held 
 fast to the cardinal doctrine taught by that Divine Saviour who, with incom 
 parable speech, revealed the fathomless truths of man s only faith. This 
 helm, his fixed faith in all that Christ is and taught, kept the prow of his 
 life pointing heavenward even while it was tossed about on the tremulous 
 waves of his uncommon career. 
 
 I revive with sincere pleasure the recollection of a personal incident that 
 bears on this stage of his spiritual life. We walked together one day, while 
 in the old state capitol at Milledgeville, r.nd sat down on the bank of the 
 Oconee River. It was in 1860, when the fearful question of the Union s 
 disruption was tossing all minds in a tempest of trouble. He was dreadfully 
 afraid of secession, and I, many years his junior, could not share his alarm. 
 We were both members of the State Senate, citizens of the State, members 
 of the church, and responsible for the part we were taking. The die, how 
 ever, was cast, and nothing could stay the calamity. As we sat and talked, 
 he suddenly said to me : "Is it not strange that we, who are both Christians, 
 should trust so much, in this matter, to human wisdom ? We are praying 
 men, and yet how we differ ! I am afraid," said he, " as much of the moral 
 as of the political dangers of secession." Soon after I went to war, for which 
 I was most fitted, and he went into tli3 councils of the new government, for 
 which he was so well adapted, and we met no more for ten dreary years. 
 
 Senator Hill never for a moment faltered in his faith. Some great intel 
 lects have so far suffered the intrusion of doubt as to suspend their faith for 
 a season contingent on the result of research into the doctrine of Christ. 
 Thus Sir William Jones, in the noon of his mental power, made a deep study 
 of the claims of Christianity, ending in his full acceptance of all its great 
 truth. So Webster once sought mental peace by patient thought, and recorded 
 his conclusion thus : " Philosophical argument has sometimes shaken my 
 reason for the faith which is in me, but my heart has always assured and 
 reassured me that the gospel of Jesus Christ must be a divine reality." 
 Howell Cobb, the great Georgian, was disquieted in mind, until, like the 
 noble Bereaus, he searched whether these things averred of Christ were so, 
 and closed his quest by acquisition of the pearl of great price. But such 
 men were never infidels. They had not debauched their brains by lewd 
 liaisons with doctrines that would debase society, disrupt government and 
 destroy the foundation of human welfare. They only indulged in doubt in 
 order to pursue truth. But Senator Hill never had even these doubts, nor 
 
114 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 the m cd of them. " My conclusions about the religion of the Bible came," 
 said he, " through reason, faith, and prayer." With these three cords he 
 constructed the cable that ever held him to "the anchor cast within the veil." 
 Which of the three can be dispensed with ? Without reason in religion we 
 have a blind belief which is sure to err a superstition that yields all right 
 of mind to find the will of God. Without faith it is as impossible to be 
 religious as it is to see without sight. Without prayer, who can drive faith 
 and reason twin steeds in the chariot of religion up the steps to heaven ? 
 But with these combined, we may lay hold on the great gospel hope and 
 bind ourselves there with a firmness that nothing can break. And the 
 testimony of such a witness, who knows whereof he affirms, is of more weight 
 than the utterances of ten thousand men who know not what they say. We 
 may set the wisdom of the august senator, matchless in eloquence, learned 
 in law, sagacious in statesmanship, versed in history and philosophy, noble in 
 patriotism, of large knowledge of the human heart and rips experience in 
 religion we may set, I say, his definite declarations about the religion of 
 Christ with overwhelming force against the vague, vapid generalities which 
 now and then fall in flippant speech from the lips of arrant infidels. Joined 
 with him there is a galaxy of witnesses for the Christian faith shining out 
 from the firmament of our national and State governments. Their testimony, 
 that "light is come into the world," cannot be discredited by the opaque 
 stars, unlit by God s glory, which wander amidst the divine array of the uni 
 verse and declare that there is no God. 
 
 Our country is Christian. It is not infidel. It can never be so until it 
 suffers subversion from the foundation stone. The great Webster spoke 
 truly when he said that Christianity is the common law of the United States. 
 Happy that people whose rulers are righteous men. The good genius of 
 civil government smiles with happy heart upon the state whose God is the 
 Lord ! 
 
 It was a cheering reflection for this brilliant statesman, who drew so much 
 attention to himself, that in all his life no sentiment escaped his lips that 
 would suggest a doubt concerning the Christian faith ; no profane nor low 
 word was ever uttered to be caught up and repeated ; nor revel of any sort 
 induced any to err from the strictest morality ; and he stood, unimpeachable 
 of offense against his young countrymen. In his influence over young men 
 he fulfilled the duty of a statesman as laid down in the ancient books of state 
 craft, that the rulers teach the youth by precept and example how to govern 
 first themselves and next the commonwealth. I have seen them grasp his 
 hand with manly emotion and go away with his last words of Christian 
 counsel. Would that all may emulate both his greatness and his faith. 
 
 In all this period of worldly strife he never ceased to reverence the 
 sanctuary. His liberality did not abate When I wrote to him in Wash 
 ington for his subscription to complete this church, he replied by telegram in 
 a sum advanced beyond every giver, and I cut it down to equality with the 
 foremost contribution. He tendered me, when he himself was already feel 
 ing the pang of pain in his tongue, one hundred dollars a month to sustain 
 a reverend and eminent sufferer at Eureka Springs. lie would give to the 
 poor whatever amount was required to meet a need, and he fostered the 
 charity of his wife by his generous endowments. This church made him a 
 trustee, expressive of its confidence, and he departed this life in the love of 
 his brothers with that official mantle on his shoulders. 
 
 This traverse with rapid stride over the active life of this illustrious man 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, ANT) WRITINGS. 11> 
 
 has been made with scarcely an allusion to his civic career. But his com 
 rades in our country s councils, his brethren of the bar, his fellow-men of all 
 pursuits, have already begun to utter a vast volume of praises descriptive of 
 his course. I am borne by a single purpose over those periods of his earliest 
 history on through the stormy times of the Confederacy into the murky 
 gloom of the Reconstruction era, in all of which I see his good angel hover 
 with anxiety about him and seek to keep him steadfast in the faith. Still 
 on, in State and national triumphs, evidently ascending in fame and accumu 
 lating power until God, with a touch as light as a feather s fall, makes a 
 minute wound like the gash of a cambric needle upon his wondrous tongue, 
 and doomed him to certain death. 
 
 Two years ago, at my house, he told me of this trouble. The secret was 
 already getting out, but men could scarcely believe. He was being urged 
 to speak on the questions of the hour all over the State ; but he could not, 
 must not ; in very truth he desired not to enter the warm affray of friends 
 which was then at its heat. Sadly he contemplated, even then, the possibility 
 of being silenced by disease. The whole sad story is now only too well 
 known, and we are left the heritage of wealth which his sufferings yielded. 
 
 I will name as one happy result of this tragic close of his life that Senator 
 Hill s suffering has developed to our view the great love which the people 
 of his State had for him. He enjoyed through life unmistakable proofs of 
 popular affection, which gave me no surprise after the first day in which it 
 was my good fortune to hear him speak. I was just entering on manhood, 
 and he was just commencing his brilliant canvass for the chief magistracy 
 of our great State. I stood among a multitude and beheld with rising won 
 der the great tides of eloquence pouring out in mysterious powers from 
 thrilling voice, glorious eyes, courtly grace of gesture, mien, and smile, until 
 he swept my heart from off its feet and took it to himself. He has not 
 always turned my head, but I have never recalled my affection. He was 
 not a man of the people in the common meaning of that term. His constitu 
 tional reserve, his fondness for thinking alone, his studious habits, and his 
 family attachments kept him away from the social world. But he was, after 
 all, a true tribune of the people. He loved them in pure benevolence. His 
 speeches are full of lofty sentiments concerning the claims of the humblest 
 man. No one was readier than he to render the lowliest colored man his 
 just rights under the law as a fellow- being. 
 
 There was, therefore, a generous outflow of the popular heart to him. 
 I am sure that in the first decade of his political life he was more popular 
 than his party platforms. Pie drew his friends to him after the manner of 
 Henry Clay, and the defeats of both in contests for popular suffrage arose 
 from similar causes. There was ever a State pride in his eloquence, and 
 now and then he was the idol of the people. Yet he suffered his impetuous 
 thoughts to bear him beyond all popular following, and sometimes strangely 
 dared to brave the people he loved by declaring opinions far ahead of the 
 times, and assuming attitudes that thev could not understand. But he 
 
 m 
 
 yearned after popular affection with all his great heart, and God gave him, 
 by suffering, the revelation of the love he pined to know. 
 
 Two years ripened the mellow fruit for his taste. Suffering such as he 
 endured with Christian heroism called unto the deep of sympathy to send 
 forth its most precious treasures, and it responded. Friends who had loved 
 him long, loved him more than ever, and generous foes laid down all 
 weapons of assault and wrote in tears of his greatness, and the country s 
 
116 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 loss. Eminent national leaders, touched with the sadness of his stroke, 
 hastened to cheer him with warm assurance of sympathy. He was followed 
 from place to place, in his search for life, with streams of universal thought 
 and feeling and prayer. And when, at last, he entered Georgia to leave it 
 no more until the gate of Heaven opened for him, his people thronged all 
 stations to see his face again. Then, this capital city opened her arms to 
 him. Uncovered, silent, tearful, stood the people in sorrowful ranks as he 
 passed through them to his home. They would have borne him in their 
 arms. And from that moment on until this hour, the demonstration has not 
 ceased. 
 
 Oh, how priceless is a people s love ! The mere reward of the majority 
 vote cast for a candidate is insufficient wealth ; the exalted office that 
 appears so tempting to ambition is often a barren peak that topples over an 
 abyss ; the shouts of a multitude when harangue stirs enthusiasm into 
 frenzy are poor plaudits unsatisfactory to a great soul. But the genuine 
 love of the people expressed in ballots of tears that vote away their hearts 
 to him who unselfishly serves them, is the richest, most radiant glory that 
 man can win, and wear this side of heaven ! What epitaph announcing 
 temporal fame can excel the simple inscription that may be rightly cut 
 on this senator s monumental column : He died beloved of his people ! 
 
 I would look once more into the results of his suffering and trace, as far 
 as possible, the designs of God in this singular and startling stroke by which 
 our noble senator fell. It is not curiosity, but intelligent interest, that 
 prompts us to ascertain the final conclusions arrived at by great minds on the 
 subject of religion. It was natural that earnest inquiry was made concern 
 ing the dying views of that great mind, which for twenty-five years had 
 been engaged in thought over a nation imperiled, two great peoples at war, 
 a land disorganized, together with massive related subjects that concern the 
 well-being of States and peoples. Accustomed to great thoughts in all his 
 life, what would be his thoughts in his dying hour? I will answer this 
 question with a few selections from his dying declarations. 
 
 Senator Hill believed that he suffered in the kind and continuance of his 
 malady by the will of God, for the good of men. Men suffer often as the 
 instruments of God. The Divine Teacher instructs the dull children of men 
 by startling pictures, and uses conspicuous objects to arrest attention. Had 
 this widely known sufferer died after brief illness, or by ordinary disease, 
 the impressive utterances of his last days would not have been given to the 
 world ; or had the same words fallen from the lips of one without his fame, 
 they would not have affected a continent. His mighty faith almost Paul- 
 like in power is now the heritage of the whole church, and the knowledge 
 of his sublime trust will cheer the hearts of millions. 
 
 The tragical suffering of Jesus had a logical purpose. The glory to 
 follow was not the end aimed at, but it was only the ante-advent splendors 
 that burst fresh around him when he ascended his throne : the Son of Man 
 suffered for the good of man, and the disciple would not be above his Lord. 
 Jesus went unto death in order to fulfill a law whose strength, whose scope 
 we do not know, and whose white blazeless fire burns on in all the universe 
 wherever there is wrong, and it is the purpose of God through him to turn 
 away that awful tide from every believing soul. 
 
 Senator Hill saw God s Providence in his strange affliction and was 
 resigned. In response to one of my questions, he wrote these words of sweet 
 submission ; " I am willing for God to have his own way." His resignation 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 117 
 
 to suffering was not the submission of a caged eagle. It was not the quiet 
 of a lion thralled. It was the rest of a noble heart and brain upon the 
 immovable truth that God reigns. His subrnissiveness was without reserve. 
 Not once did a murmur escape his lips. We wonder at the total absence of 
 impatience betokened by gesture, look, or word. 
 
 Surely no other faith in God can bring peace to the mind of man. Less 
 than this great trust in Providence, and this resignation to the will of God, 
 leaves us to suffer all the pangs of uncertainty, and to fret away existence 
 until the shock of death bursts on our startled souls the face of the ever- 
 present personal God. 
 
 Senator Hill bore witness often, both in speech and writing, of his un 
 questioning acceptance of all the vital truths of religion. " Faith in Christ 
 only," as the ground of human claim on the mercy of God, was clearly seen 
 by him. He wrote down this credo : "I believe that God is a living God, 
 and that Christ came into the world to save sinners, and he will save me." 
 Thus he added assurance to his faith and was persuaded that his soul was 
 safe in the keeping of its Lord. Another slip of that pad, whose scattered 
 leaves will enrich the minds and cheer the hearts of thousands, contains this 
 cumulative testimony of his sure hope : " I am confident of a home in heaven. 
 I never had more faith." He was on a summit of trust, and saw an inheri 
 tance assured to him by the word of God, which endureth forever ! 
 
 Once the conversation was on the need of thoroughness in faith and life 
 in order to usefulness and peace. We were digging at the roots of the great 
 question of godlikeness in man s nature and actions. Why should an un 
 willing or a partial service be given to God ? As the colloquy went on, 
 the listening senator signed for the writing-pad, and this luminous sentence 
 blazed from his pen : " Nothing but consecration will do." 
 
 A life half -purposed, a love limited, a service grudgingly given, were 
 unworthy that religion whose author and finisher is a consecrated Christ. 
 
 At another time I asked the dying senator to indicate some Scripture he 
 would like to have read. Speaking very promptly, he said, " Read me 
 Paul s* letter to the Corinthians on the resurrection." Accordingly, I read 
 all the great* chapter relating to that majestic question. It was a crucial 
 question in the days of the apostle. Materialists even then denied all 
 resurrection and asked, " How are the dead raised up and with what body 
 do they come ? It is a modern issue as well, and will be in debate until 
 the trump sound and the living are startled by the rising of the dead. I 
 paused, after reading, to hear the great Georgian say what he thought, in 
 this awful hour, when eternity was lending its ethereal force to his mighty 
 intellect. 
 
 And this is what he wrote : " If a grain of corn will die and then rise 
 again in so much beauty, why may not I die and then rise again in infinite 
 beauty and life ? How is the last a greater mystery than the first ? And 
 by so much as I exceed the grain of corn in this life why may I not exceed 
 it in the new life ? How can we limit the power of Him who made the 
 grain of corn and then made the same grain again in such wonderful new 
 ness of life ? " I leave these pointed questions, with their vast and rich 
 suggestions, to be the comfort of every one who is looking in hope for the 
 general resurrection from the dead and the life of the world to come 
 through our Lord Jesus Christ. 
 
 I am now discoursing of the greatest moments of his great life, and come 
 to the crowning hour that became more and more sublime to the close. When 
 
118 SENATOR S. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 I first called to see him, immediately on his return from Eureka, I found 
 him resting on his bed, worn by travel. I walked in and took him by the 
 hand a moment. Looking at me with his noble eyes filled with tears, 
 he spoke the first words of salutation with a dramatic action of hands and 
 a glow of features which I shall never forget. Putting his hand on his 
 heart he said, with a difficult but distinct utterance, " All right here," and 
 then lifting his hand up he pointed his ever eloquent finger heavenward, and 
 added, "All right there." He had answered my anxious eyes, that looked 
 the question which was on my heart. It was an answer of peace on earth 
 between God and man, and was the fitting prelude to all the great sayings 
 which followed. 
 
 He was now also in perfect peace, " all right ! in his own heart with all 
 men. The transient animosities, sprung in the course of ardent political con 
 flicts, were all silenced, subdued, and sunk into oblivion. The stricken states 
 man died without a trace of bitterness in his soul. His eminent antagonists, 
 far and near, in state and nation, disarmed themselves and gave him friendly 
 fellowship of heart and hand. With a most felicitous gesture of both 
 extended outspread palms, and with his old, happy, innocent smile, he 
 responded some time ago to my remark concerning his peace with men. 
 With wonderful generosity he attributed the occasional differences which 
 arose between him and others to misunderstanding of his views and mis 
 take of the matters in question. 
 
 But in all his life, Ben Hill never did a more graceful thing than when 
 he made his last visit to the portrait of his mother, which hung in one of 
 his rooms. When President Garfield placed his manly arm around his 
 venerable mother in the presence of the vast multitudes that witnessed his 
 inauguration, and kissed her with lips fresh from pronouncing the obligation 
 of the presidential office, he drew unto himself the warm heart of American 
 motherhood forever. 
 
 It seemed to us all indeed (God bless his memory !) as a bow of promise 
 clasping in one all the mother-loving manly men of our whole nation, and 
 as the token given by the chief magistrate that we, the brothers of our 
 country s mother should never, never more have bitterness or cause of strife. 
 
 So when the great senator went as a child to gaze upon his mother s 
 pictured face and murmured, " I will soon see her," he left the sons of 
 this State and the Union a lesson of filial love they should never forget. 
 The portrait shows a dear, old, good face, well traced by marks of intelli 
 gence. The wrinkles are there, the stoop of age, and other signs of failing 
 life. Long since she went away, but the wasted statesman became a boy 
 again in feeling, gazed with a true, adoring love upon the portrait, and then 
 above the faded picture looked with eyes that saw home, Heaven, and 
 mother all in one vision of transcendent glory ! 
 
 Heaven brightened on him as his days of dreadful suffering dragged 
 along. Once he wrote for me, " But for the good I had hoped to do my 
 family and country, I should regard the announcement I must die as joy 
 ful tidings. I cannot suppress a certain elation at the thought of going." 
 
 The world already has possession of his last words. The Christian world, 
 in song and speech, will repeat them in many tongues for many ages. They 
 comprehend all that man can nobly live for in this life or enjoy in the world 
 to come. It was a few hours preceding his death, when he was rapidly sink 
 ing and had not written nor spoken a word for many hours. I sat by his 
 side, holding his band. Opening his eyes and arousing himself for a moment 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 119 
 
 he recognized inc. The light of life came full into his eyes once more, and 
 with a slight effort he spoke out in clear, full, and even triumphant accent 
 the deathless legend of a soul conquering in Christ and in full view of heaven, 
 " Almost home ! 
 
 lean add nothing that would display to advantage the unadorned beauty 
 of those final words. He said them ascending to the skies, and very soon 
 his great and good spirit entered eternity, and he was not almost but alto 
 gether and forever home at last. 
 
 He has heard plaudits sweeter than ever saluted his ear on earth. The 
 King, in his beauty, has met him ; the Father s house has opened to him ; and 
 in such a home as God can constructor his faithful human child he lives, 
 immortal, painless, sinless, and in perpetual peace ! 
 
 What power, what station, what realms grasped by the greatest men are 
 comparable with this eternal home ! The loftiest eminence attained on earth 
 is only a diminished pattern of the heavenly hills. All the luster of human 
 greatness should make the distinguished princes among men aspire the more 
 after the glory that excelleth. When earthly crowns are cast at the 
 Redeemer s feet they are but a light from his transfiguring presence that 
 outblazes all suns. Men are greatest when they give the greater glory of 
 all their achievements to God, and so live that when they fail on earth they 
 find a home not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. May the Great 
 God and Father of us all comfort this family who mourn an irreparable 
 loss ; may He guide our government by the counsels of His will, and grant 
 us all through Christ to meet our brother Hill again in his happy heavenly 
 Home. 
 
HON. B. H. HILL, AS A MAN, A LAWYER, A STATESMAN, A 
 
 , CHRISTIAN. 
 
 MEMOEIAL BY KEV. E. W. SPEER, D.D. 
 
 IT has been my good fortune to know Senator Hill long and intimately. 
 I have rambled with him through the fields and woods, when they were 
 clothed in the emerald robes of spring, or dressed in the prismatic tints of 
 autumn. I have visited with him the hovels of the poor and needy. I 
 have seen him in the flush of public triumph, and in the unreserved freedom 
 of the domestic circle. I have seen him on occasions that show the manly 
 strength of character; and, what is better, on occasions that show the manly 
 weakness of the human heart ; and I can declare that in all the gentle 
 humanities of life, he had the tenderness of a woman enshrined in the heart 
 of a man. The great sympathies and virtues of a noble and generous 
 nature were as strongly developed in him as the muscular powers of his 
 athletic frame, or the capacities of his mighty intellect. He honored his 
 parents with a reverence most profound and enduring. I have seen his lips 
 quiver with emotion, and his eyes fill with tears, when he spoke of the sac 
 rifices of his father and mother to procure for him the advantage of col 
 legiate culture. He loved his brothers and sisters with an energy of soul 
 that shrank from no services or sacrifices that would promote their welfare, 
 or the welfare of their children. He regarded his wife and children with 
 an affection almost idolatrous. Writing from Richmond, Va., when he was 
 a senator of the Confederate States, to his wife in La Grange, he said : 
 " A caged eagle does not look up into the clear blue sky and long for free 
 dom to soar heavenward more than I long for home, and wife, and children." 
 He delighted to ascribe his successful career to the stimulating influence of 
 conjugal affection. And I am. persuaded that it was from the pure fountain 
 of domestic felicity that Senator Hill drew, not only much of the beauty, 
 but much of the force of his character. .Every faculty of his mind and 
 every impulse of his will deriving added strength and fervor from the 
 warmth and glow of his domestic affections. But I forbear to dwell on a 
 topic whose sacredness shrinks from the most distant approach to public 
 discussion. 
 
 Had the Senator s disposition to hoard, equaled his capacity to acquire 
 wealth, he might have been one of the richest men in Georgia. But fortun 
 ately for him, and for others, the love of money never acquired the mastery 
 over his higher and nobler attributes. He ever cultivated a spirit and a 
 habit of the largest liberality and beneficence. Liberal as he was to the 
 public institutions of religion, of education, and of philanthropy ; yet, if I 
 mistake not, his munificent contributions to churches, colleges, and the 
 Orphan s Home at Decatur, would make up but a small part of the history 
 of his life-long beneficence. The private charities which he dispensed year 
 by year and day by day, could they be recalled, would fill a larger and 
 brighter page. Living as I did near his residence in La Grange, I could, 
 
 120 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 121 
 
 from personal observation, say of him, what Goldsmith so inimitably says of 
 the village preacher : 
 
 His house was known to all the vagrant trai*, 
 He chid their wanderings, but relieved their pain. 
 Careless their merits or their faults to scan, 
 His pity gave ere charity began. 
 
 Inspiration itself declares, "He that hath pity on the poor lendeth " 
 not giveth " lendeth to the Lord, and that which he hath given will He 
 pay him again." If this be true, how great will be the payments hereafter 
 received by those generous philanthropists, who, like Senator Hill, have 
 given munificent sums publicly when it was proper so to do by way of ex 
 ample, but whose bounty has often followed indigent want to its most 
 obscure hiding places, and relieved misery known only to God and the 
 stewards of his bounty. Such deeds of kindness may never be known on 
 earth, but they will be remembered in that great day when the King shall 
 sit upon the throne in his glory, and before him shall be gathered all nations, 
 and he shall say to them on his right hand, " Come ye blessed of my Father, 
 inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. 
 For I was a hungered and ye gave me meat, I was thirsty and ye gave me 
 drink, I was a stranger and ye took me in, naked and ye clothed me. Inas 
 much as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have 
 done it unto me." 
 
 It is but echoing the opinions of those most competent to judge, to say 
 that Mr. Hill had few equals, and no superiors at the bar. There may have 
 been lawyers more thoroughly conversant with special departments of pro 
 fessional lore. But I doubt whether there was another who united in a 
 higher degree, so comprehensive a knowledge of the general principles of 
 jurisprudence with reasoning powers of such superlative excellence, and 
 trained by such assiduous culture. 
 
 I cannot trace in detail the course of his professional life, from the open 
 ing of his office in La Grange, in 1844, or convey any just conception of the 
 labor he performed or the intellectual ability he displayed, in reaching the 
 summit of his profession. 
 
 At the very beginning of his forensic career, he laid the foundation of 
 his legal acquirements, deep and broad, in a thorough knowledge of the 
 Common Law grappling with and mastering its most perplexing subtleties 
 and obsolete technicalities. 
 
 It is not surprising that with such natural endowments and indomitable 
 industry, he achieved instant and brilliant success among competitors of 
 ripe experience and rare ability. 
 
 When he first came forward, unknown as yet to the State, and scarcely 
 known to himself, he grappled with such champions of the forum as Walter 
 T. Colquitt, Seaborn Jones, Julius C. Alford, and Edward Y. Hill. These 
 veterans of the law were not slow in discovering that in their youthful com 
 petitor they had a " foeman worthy of their steel." They paid him the high 
 compliment of compelling him to put forth all his power by employing 
 against him all their own. 
 
 Time would fail, even had I the requisite data, to enumerate the impor 
 tant cases in which he was employed. Many of them are still referred to 
 by his professional brethren as examples of the highest juridical ability. 
 
 I venture the opinion that, for the last twenty years, not only the people. 
 
122 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 but the lawyers of Georgia, would have relied upon his knowledge and 
 ability, for the exposition and maintenance of any legal principle before any 
 legal tribunal, in preference to the knowledge and ability of any other 
 jurist in the Southern States. Nor was he less powerful before a jury than 
 before the bench. 
 
 It was marvelous to observe the ease and dexterity with which he could 
 discard the abstruse reasoning, suited only to men of professional culture, 
 and substitute therefor the robust common sense and perspicuous statement 
 of facts suited to the comprehension of a jury. 
 
 He was not surpassed by Stephens in his luminous analysis of a case ; and 
 he was more than the equal of Toombs in the skill with which he touched 
 the chords of human sensibility, until his hearers responded to every senti 
 ment that he felt of pity or of indignation. 
 
 But his record as a statesman is not a whit less brilliant than his record as 
 a jurist. The mere length and variety of the services which he rendered the 
 State first in its General Assemblv, then as a member of the Confederate 
 
 * * 
 
 Congress, then as a representative from this district, lastly as a senator of 
 the United States would be sufficient of itself to secure him a permanent 
 and conspicuous place in our political history. But he has better titles to 
 remembrance than any that mere official longevity can impart. Public life 
 was not necessary to his fame, and he never held his title to consideration 
 by the precarious tenure of public favor or popular suffrage. The truth is, 
 Senator Hill had no talent for political wire-working, for electioneering 
 legerdemain, for wearisome correspondence with local great men, for 
 franking cart-loads of documents to the four winds. Even in the daily 
 routine of legislation he did not take an active part. But when great in 
 terests were at stake and strong passions excited, when some political Mara 
 thon or Waterloo had to be fought, then he girded on the whole panoply of 
 his power, and displayed such moral heroism and such transcendent gifts 
 of speech that a Chatham or a Mirabeau might have envied him. It has 
 been said of some renowned orators, such as Sheridan, Canning, Fisher 
 Ames, and William Pinckney, that they were more of rhetoricians than 
 logicians ; that they dealt more in metaphors and similes than in facts and 
 arguments. Such a criticism could not be justly predicated of Mr. Hill. 
 His positions were taken clearly, boldly, strongly without wordy amplifi 
 cation or partisan vehemence. In listening to him, you felt that your under 
 standing was addressed in behalf of a reasonable proposition, which rested 
 on something more substantial than sentimental refinement or rhetorical 
 exaggeration. You could not fail to be impressed with the soundness of 
 his principles, the elevation of his sentiments, and the fervor of his 
 patriotism. 
 
 Among what may be termed the third generation of American states 
 men since the adoption of the Federal Constitution the generation succeed 
 ing Clay, Calhoun, and Webster there has been no man of a more marked 
 character, of more pronounced qualities, or of more vigorous powers in de 
 bate. Growing up to manhood an enthusiastic admirer of Henry Clay, he 
 cherished a profound reverence for the Constitution as a covenant of Union 
 between the States. As a natural consequence, he was opposed to secession. 
 Not that he was indifferent to the rights of the States. He valued, as much 
 as any man could possibly value, the principle of State sovereignty. He 
 looked upon the organization of these separate and independent republics of 
 different ages, sizes, geographical positions, and social interests, as furnishing 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 123 
 
 an organism of incalculable value for a wise and beneficent administration 
 of local affairs, and the protection of local and individual rights. But at 
 the same time he regarded the Constitutional Union, which bound these 
 separate and independent sovereignties into a well compacted nation, as an 
 approximation to the perfection of political wisdom a Constitution un 
 matched by the Amphictyonic League of the ancient Greeks, and incompara 
 bly superior to the confederated governments of Switzerland and the Nether 
 lands. 
 
 Nevertheless, when his honest and strenuous efforts to avert the horrors 
 of a civil war proved abortive, he espoused the cause of the South with a 
 generous zeal that did not pause to calculate how tragic might be his fate if 
 the conflict should terminate disastrously to his people. 
 
 From the organization of the Confederate Government at Montgomery 
 to its overthrow at Richmond, we find Senator Hill intrusted with the most 
 important duties, and discharging those duties with unwearied diligence and 
 consummate ability. In the Confederate Congress, composed of the ablest 
 men of the South, he stood forth the acknowledged peer of the most dis 
 tinguished of his associates. 
 
 There were very few of the Southern statesmen, who would not have 
 confessed, when they agreed with Senator Hill, that he expressed their 
 opinions better than they could have expressed them. And tire bitterest of 
 his opponents were obliged to concede that he maintained his own views 
 with transcendent ability and power. 
 
 I do not mean to say that he always escaped censure then, or that he 
 has not, since then, been misunderstood and even willfully and grossly mis 
 represented. 
 
 He has not escaped the fate which in all countries especially all free 
 countries, awaits commanding talent and eminent position, and which no 
 great man in our history has escaped not even Washington himself. 
 
 Astronomers tell us that the most difficult problem in that sublime 
 science is to construct a lense that will not distort the object that it reflects. 
 They assure us that a hair s-breadth deviation from the true curve in the 
 specular mirror will dim the splendor of Sirius or disfigure the belts of 
 Orion. Even so the most brilliant stars of the political firmament are shorn 
 of all their glory when contemplated through the distorting lenses of per 
 sonal rivalry and partisan prejudice. 
 
 But if full and impartial justice is not meted out to men of towering 
 greatness while they live, it is very certain to be accorded to them when 
 they are dead. There is not an intelligent man in Georgia who will not 
 concede that our dead Senator won his lofty position by superb talents, 
 laborious service, and patriotic devotion to the public good. 
 
 As a representative, and senator of the United States, while ever ready 
 to defend the South against unjust attacks and illiberal imputations, he 
 proved himself capable of embracing the whole country in the comprehen 
 sive affection of his large and patriotic heart. 
 
 But alas ! alas ! he has fallen ; almost at the threshold of his senatorial 
 career, and at a time when we were looking to him for public services which 
 no other Southern statesman could perform, or, at least, perform so well. 
 
 A solemn and religious regard to spiritual and eternal things," said 
 Daniel Webster, "is an essential element in all true greatness." We rejoice 
 that our deceased senator did not lack this " essential element "of greatness. 
 
 He embraced the religion of the Gospel at an early period of his life, upon 
 
124 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 studious examination and sincere conviction. He was a firm believer, not 
 bigoted or boastful, but unswerving in loyalty to the doctrines of the Chris 
 tian faith. The reality of his religion was evinced by the calm serenity 
 with which, for days, and weeks, and months, he confronted the King of 
 Terrors. 
 
 At the most critical moments, when the chances in favor of, and against 
 his recovery seemed equally balanced, he rejoiced that a higher wisdom than 
 his own would determine the event. 
 
 There is a moral grandeur in the closing scenes of his life that eclipses 
 the brightest triumphs of all his previous career. 
 
 His work is done nobly done ! Never more in the temples of justice, 
 or the halls of legislation, or on the hustings, will be heard the magical tones 
 of his voice. But the lessons of his successful life and triumphant death 
 will not be forgotten. Of such as him, we may say with the poet : 
 
 The dead are like the stars by day 
 
 Withdrawn from mortal eye ; 
 B"t not extinct, they hold their way 
 
 In glory through the sky. 
 
Extract from the Atlanta Constitution. 
 MEETING OF CITIZENS OF ATLANTA. 
 
 IF every boy and young man in Georgia, or even in the whole country, 
 could have entered the solemn presence of the dead senator yesterday, 
 and witnessed what was done and said there, what an influence it 
 would have had in inspiring them with ennobling thoughts and laudable 
 ambitions. They could have seen how a grand and beautiful life awakens 
 love in the breasts of the people, and how fathers and mothers point their 
 children to lives that are worthy of emulation. Men and women, leading 
 by the hand their little children, carried them in and showed them the cold, 
 still face and silent lips that had uttered such patriotic sentiments while in 
 life, and which spoke yet so eloquently even in death. 
 
 Yesterday, at twelve o clock, the hall of the House of Representatives was 
 filled with a large assemblage of the most prominent men of Atlanta, who 
 had gathered in response to the call for a citizens meeting to take suitable 
 action on the death of Senator Hill. The meeting was called to order by 
 Mayor English, who spoke as follows : 
 
 MAYOR ENGLISH S ADDRESS. 
 
 " Fellow-citizens of Atlanta : From the most ancient times in the 
 world s history, it has been deemed just and decorous, when a public ser 
 vant is stricken unto death, for his people to assemble and do honor to what 
 was noble in his character and worthy of gratitude in his career. 
 
 " In obedience to that unvaried custom, as mayor of this city, I have 
 called you together that, through your representatives, and by your assent, 
 you might publicly pay well-deserved and grateful respect to the memory 
 of your late senator Hon. Benjamin H. Hill. 
 
 " I shall not attempt to anticipate the terms in which that tribute will 
 be expressed by this sympathetic assembly or by a review of the familiar 
 services of the great statesman whose body now lies in the icy embrace of 
 death. Though they are interwoven like threads of gold in the woof of our 
 State and national history, they may be easily traced by all who read its 
 several chapters since he entered upon the stage of public life. 
 
 That his character was conspicuous in those gracious and ennobling 
 virtues that constitute greatness among men, is testified to in the general 
 sorrow which is manifested everywhere in this Union over the news of his 
 death. Looking back over his illustrious services, considering the grand 
 opportunities by which he was surrounded when stricken down, and the 
 hopes his fellow-citizens had rested on the triumphs of his intellect and 
 genius in the future, we have but feeble language left us to express our 
 grief and to voice our sense of loss. As an earnest patriot and lofty states 
 man, it will be long before we look upon another who can claim our con 
 fidence and admiration as the peer of Benjamin Harvey Hill." 
 
 Mr. English concluded his address by calling Senator Joseph E. Brown 
 to preside. 
 
 125 
 
126 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 SENATOR BROWN S ADDRESS. 
 
 On taking the chair, Senator Brown said : 
 
 " Mr. President : There are times when individuals, and families, and 
 relatives are called upon to mourn. There are times of greater importance, 
 when communities, States, and nations mourn. Georgia to-day bows her 
 head in solemn grief, and all her sons and daughters grieve. Her sister 
 States tender their warmest sympathies. But why all this mourning ? 
 Georgia has lost her ablest senator, one of her most distinguished statesmen, 
 her brightest lawyer, her greatest orator. The form the noble form of 
 Benjamin H. Hill has passed behind the veil no more to be seen in this life. 
 His eloquent tongue, hushed in death, will no more be heard by listening 
 senates and admiring multitudes. Well may Georgia weep. 
 
 "Twenty-five years ago the most prominent figures in public life, aye 
 the most distinguished public servants in Georgia, were Robert Toombs, 
 Alexander H. Stephens, Charles J. Jenkins, Howell Cobb, Herschel V. 
 Johnson, Hiram Warner, and Benjamin H. Hill, the latter much the young 
 est of any of those named. A few years after the war Howell Cobb, one of 
 the most gifted of the number, and one most beloved by his friends, was 
 called hence. Two or three years ago Herschel V. Johnson, one possessed 
 of purity and individuality, not surpassed anywhere, passed away. Not a 
 year ago Hiram Warner, the greatest jurist of Georgia, the distinguished 
 chief justice, was called hence to his final reward. Governor Jenkins, 
 General Toombs, Mr. Stephens, and Mr. Hill, aged in the order named, 
 were left behind. Of these distinguished men, Hill was nearly twenty 
 years younger than the oldest and some eleven years younger than the 
 youngest of the remaining number. His health was perfect, his physical 
 strength was great, all his faculties were in full play, and, in looking upon 
 those men, how natural to say that those older ones will pass away, but Hill 
 will yet live to do the State twenty years of great service, and yet how in 
 scrutable are the ways of Providence. To-day, while the others are in 
 their usual health, ripe with age and experience, that youngest, probably 
 that brightest, I might say, and that most promising, lies in the cold em 
 brace of death. 
 
 " But we mourn not as those without hope. Senator Hill has passed away 
 from the busy scenes of this life, but he has passed to the future and better 
 world as we believe. While he was a member of the church, he was en 
 gaged in the busy work of life and in the service of the State, and as all in 
 his situation do, neglected too much his religious privileges one of the 
 griefs of his life. But before he was called away, he was sanctified by af 
 fliction and purified by suffering in a manner that probably falls to the lot 
 of few men in this world. We would not really have supposed, in view of 
 his fine prospects, that in view of his laudable ambition, his high opportuni 
 ties, and his grand talents, that his mind would have been more or less fixed 
 upon the things of this world, and he could not have met such a fate with 
 out murmur. But when affliction came, and its heavy hand was laid upon 
 him, how remarkable it was to see him suffer with all the patience of a Job, 
 and to see what sublime faith and resignation characterized his whole course 
 during his affliction. Senator Hill has passed from among us, but he is not 
 dead. We have the faith to believe that to-day his spirit rests in the para 
 dise of God." 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WAITINGS. 127 
 
 Senator Brown s address was delivered in a quiet and most impressive 
 manner, and was listened to with strictest attention. When he concluded, 
 the audience was visibly affected, and there were many eyes wet with tears. 
 Old men and young men wept alike as the words of eulogy were spoken of 
 the dead senator. 
 
 THE KESOLTJTIONS PASSED. 
 
 At the conclusion of Senator Brown s remarks Major Benjamin Crane 
 arose, and in a voice full of emotion, said : 
 
 " Mr. Chairman : At a meeting called yesterday morning by his honor, 
 the Mayor, of a few of our citizens for the purpose of preparing business for 
 the consideration of this meeting, I was instructed to submit the resolutions 
 which I hold in my hand." 
 
 Major Crane then read the resolutions as follows, slowly, and in a man 
 ner which was deeply impressive : 
 
 The citizens of the city of Atlanta, sorrowing in heart, and recognizing 
 the magnitude of their personal and public loss, are this day met together in 
 solemn assembly to do honor to the character and services of Benjahiin Har 
 vey Hill, late senator from the State of Georgia in the Congress of the 
 United States. 
 
 It has been so ordered, in the wisdom of God, that in the flower of his 
 manhood and the most hopeful season of his usefulness to humanity, he 
 should be taken from the walks of a noble career, his body returned to its 
 kindred dust and his spirit recalled to the eternal companionship of its au 
 thor. By this dissolution of the bonds of earthly kinship, friendship, and 
 service, we feel that a deep bereavement has come upon us as individuals and 
 as a people ; that our beloved State has lost an illustrious son, a peerless 
 advocate, and an unswerving defender of her rights, her liberties, and her 
 honor ; that the country has been deprived of one of its wisest counselors, 
 most eloquent orators, and sagacious statesmen. In the midst of our mourn 
 ing we remember with gratitude the loyalty, the earnestness, and the self- 
 sacrificing spirit of his services at all times to his mother State and to the 
 nation. The events of his long and useful career are forever embalmed in 
 the memories of the people and written upon the imperishable records of the 
 age to which his name and labors gave luster. The fame of the one and the 
 examples of the others will survive among the generations yet to come, 
 quickening emulation, stimulating patriotism, and dignifying public virtue. 
 For these exalted purposes his life has been conspicuous, and in the achieve 
 ments of his untune!} 7 - finished career he has bequeathed to his people and to 
 posterity the richest treasures of his well-spent years ; be it therefore 
 
 RESOLVED, That we bow obediently to the unknowable Providence of the 
 all-wise God in removing from our midst and from life our late fellow-citi 
 zen, friend, and public servant, Hon. Benjamin Harvey Hill ; 
 
 Resolved, That in this season of public grief, we mingle our tribute of 
 affection with those expressions of respect and sorrow that are universal 
 throughout the commonwealth, and that have found voice among his com 
 patriots in all portions of the Union ; 
 
 Resolved, That we herewith record our sincere estimate of the character 
 and services of the illustrious dead : 
 
 Benjamin Harvey Hill, scholar, patriot, statesman, Christian. He was an 
 early student of history and philosophy, that he might be useful to bis 
 
128 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 fellow-men in all the trusts and duties of a citizen. He was ever the friend 
 and advocate of the people in maintenance of their private and public rights. 
 He was a champion of the weak and humble in every forum of law and 
 liberty, and his matchless eloquence enforced justice in the high tribunals, 
 where it was heard to demand civil and religious freedom for the citizen, 
 protection for the life and property of the individual and the rights of sov 
 ereign States, the blessings of constitutional government, and the perpetuity 
 of the Union of the fathers. Faithful to every commission, diligent to 
 every trust, and noble in every purpose, as well as wise in council, dauntless 
 in peril, magnanimous in triumph. He was devoted in the home circle, 
 lovable in social companionship, and humble in the sanctuary. Honor and 
 integrity were helmet and shield to him ; truth his weapon in every conflict 
 with error and prejudice and oppression. On his tomb his grateful people 
 lay the laurel wreath in testimony of his civil glory, and immortelles in 
 mt nory of his Christian graces and his useful life ; 
 
 ^esolved, That the Mayor and General Council be requested to dedicate 
 a page in the records of the city to the memory of the illustrious dead, and 
 spread thereon these resolutions, and that an engrossed copy be transmitted 
 to the family of the deceased in token of the deep sympathy of this com 
 munity with them in this hour of their bereavement and grief. 
 
 
 
 At the conclusion of the reading of the resolutions, Major Crane con 
 tinued : 
 
 " This duty, to roe, is peculiarly a sad one. I have known Mr. Hill ever 
 since I was a child. I have followed with pride his public life. I have re 
 joiced in his success. I have loved him much and have felt honored in being 
 numbered among his friends, and am gratified at having the privilege of 
 placing my simple wild flower among the chaplets which adorn his bier. 
 
 " Death striking down the strong man in the pride and strength of his 
 manhood is terrible. But when it takes from us, in the very meridian of his 
 glory and usefulness, the most brilliant intellect Georgia has ever produced 
 when it hushes forever the most eloquent lips which ever defended con 
 stitutional liberty in this State, if not in this Union, it is appalling. We 
 can only stand with bowed heads in submission to the will of Him who 
 doeth all things well, recollecting that God s ways are not as our ways. 
 
 "It is mete and proper that this meeting of his townsmen and friends 
 should assemble to express their sorrow at his death and their appreciation 
 of the virtues which characterized his life. 
 
 " It is hard to realize that Ben Hill is dead that we shall hear no more 
 from this brilliant statesman and matchless orator that in a few hours all 
 that is mortal of him will be under the sod. Thank God for the glorious 
 boon of immortality. Thank God that he has left a record which will be to 
 him a monument more enduring than that of brass or marble, a monument 
 which will stand in his own loved State of Georgia as long as the green 
 grass grows or the bright waters reflect back the silver stars of heaven. 
 
 " I now move you, sir, the adoption of the resolutions." 
 
 COLONEL HAMMOND S ADDRESS. 
 
 When Major Crane sat down, Hon. N. J. Hammond arose, and said : 
 "Having yesterday, as the organ of the bar of Atlanta, presented resolu 
 tions touching the death of Mr. Hill, I might well be silent to-day. Ex- 
 
 C_? f C2 */ 
 
 hausted by watching gvertjje corpse last nigbt, silence would be to me more 
 agreeable. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 129 
 
 " But since I have lived in Atlanta nearly thirty years, I have a right to 
 speak in a meeting of her citizens, and some about me think it my duty to 
 say something on this occasion. I saw the forests about our city cut away 
 and her highways of commerce laid out and opened up. I saw it built and 
 burned. I witnessed its rebuilding and long have rejoiced that the glory 
 of the latter house is greater than was the glory of the former. 
 
 " I have studied its conglomerate, composite population, gathered from 
 every county of this State and every State in the Union. Youth came 
 with high hopes and lusty vigor. Mature men came with well-stored minds, 
 fixed principles, and steady purposes. In the estimation of our neighbors 
 she passed from contempt to admiration, from envy to pride, from the rail 
 road station of 1846 to the capital of this grand commonwealth. 
 
 " Among all her treasures, rich and rare, gathered together, none came 
 better or more beautiful than Hill. He sat in life the Kohinoor of our 
 cluster, and in death we mourn him as our l Pleiad gone. Only once before 
 have I seen our city so draped in mourning. That was when Garfield died. 
 His death was tragic, and across the way, in the theater where tragedy was 
 so familiar, it was fit to speak of his taking off. Mr. Hill died from 
 disease, at his home, while he was the servant of the State, and it is well to 
 speak of his virtues in the hall of the representatives of her people. 
 
 " The last time I saw these two great men together was at Mr. Chitten- 
 den s reception of General Garfield, a few days before his inauguration as 
 President of the United States. They had served side by side in the 
 Federal House of Representatives. Though opposed politically, each knew 
 the other s strength and admired the other s greatness. On that evening I saw 
 them meet, and observed their greeting. Our senator, in courtliest style and 
 complimentary tone, addressed him by his new title, * Mr. President, when 
 he, laying his hand upon Mr. Hill s shoulder, called him by his given name 
 as familiarly as he would have been addressed by a life-time associate. I 
 recalled the great gulf which had been between Mr. Hill and the late Presi 
 dent, and felt that Georgia would become more potent in public affairs 
 since this senator and our Chief Magistrate occupied such close and confi 
 dential relations. But death has claimed them both. Did time allow, and 
 were I able to do so fittingly, we might profitably review their characters. 
 In strength and beauty they were alike ; in all else in marked contrast. 
 Garfield feared individual responsibility ; Hill courted it with the dash of 
 Sergeant Jasper and the cool courage of Troup. Garfield belonged to clubs 
 and was fond of society ; Hill belonged to no associations but the church, 
 and cared naught for company, except that of the few whom he saw in 
 timately at his home. Garfield was a man of varied information, and 
 familiar with all the best literature of his time ; Hill read nothing but law 
 and politics, and occasional recreations with Milton and Shakespeare. Each 
 combined the rare powers of speaking well and writing well. Garfield s 
 style was more polished ; Hill s stronger and, I think, grander. 
 
 Their opportunities were strangely in contrast. Aiding in a war where 
 victory was sure, Garfield was boomed into public life and sailed onward to 
 his proper place l upon the smooth surface of a summer sea. Hill, forced 
 into a contest against his judgment and his sentiment, struggled with the 
 storm of war, and at its end stood heartsick at the wreck of his country. 
 Garfield had the victorious, mighty West to urge him onward ; Hill was 
 weighted and clogged by the dead hopes and prostrate fortunes of the con 
 quered South. Yet he achieved and held without a question the highest 
 
130 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 niche in fame s proud temple which Southern brains and energy and South 
 ern courage and skill had any possible right to claim. 
 
 " Let the contrasts cease, and revert one moment to their like prepara 
 tions for death. Slow paced it came on both ; the people feared and prayed 
 for both. The faults of both were forgotten in fond admiration of their 
 virtues, and the country will long cherish their memories among its richest 
 jewels. 
 
 "I second the resolutions, so appropriate and just to our beloved and 
 brilliant fellow-citizen." 
 
 GOVERNOR COLCJUITT S ADDRESS. 
 
 "As the official representative of the State of Georgia, and as an hum 
 ble citizen of this commonwealth, proud of her greatness, proud of her 
 great men, I rise to unite my voice in the cry of general lamentations that 
 is heard over the State, and in seconding the resolutions that have been 
 read to-day. The State is in mourning. The countenances of the people 
 of this State are shadowed with grief. Amidst the activities of our people 
 there is a hush of stillness, and men look inquiringly into each other s faces, 
 and the response is Hill is dead. We are proud of our State, we glory in 
 her mountains, and in her midlands, and in the country that lies upon the 
 coast. But that of which Georgians are most proud, that which will give 
 her most character, that which will live the longest, that which will be the 
 example for future generations, is to be found in the lives and the charac 
 ters of her illustrious men ; and when the symbols of power, and progress, 
 and improvement have been forgotten and gone down with the ages, the 
 men that have illustrated your State in her councils and in her social walks, 
 these men are the men whose memories will be transmitted to the genera 
 tions to come, long after the monuments that are reared to give them fame 
 have perished from the earth. Look around these halls. You have no fan 
 tastic pictures to illustrate art, but you place upon these walls the portraits 
 of those whose example you would hand down to the youth of our country ; 
 and among the great men, among the men that have stood foremost in 
 the councils of the State, in the forum, on the hustings, everywhere where 
 men s views are heard in council, there is no man nor no name to 
 which the future will point with more pride than to the name of Benja 
 min H. Hill. 
 
 " For a quarter of a century he has been closely allied with me ; in all 
 our affairs, in every political campaign, in the midst of social revolutions, 
 at a time when there was despair everywhere, his voice was heard like a 
 trumpet to awaken life and hope, and in the day of triumph no siren ever 
 sung a hallelujah that was sweeter to hear for Georgians than his exultation 
 with our people, who were delivered and relieved of the weight that was 
 upon them. We shall miss him in our public assemblies ; we shall 
 miss him in our social circles ; we shall miss him in the accustomed walk, 
 where he used to go from his home to his place of business, now hung 1 
 with badges of mourning, black as the signia of our woe, white as the 
 signia of our hope of his resurrection. But my friends, while we, as citi 
 zens, as I said, may point to the public services and to the character of 
 Benjamin H. Hill, that which touches your heart and touches my heart 
 more than any other incident in his life, is his long and protracted suffering 
 and the grandness of the jwan as illustrated in his patience and Christian, 
 resignation, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 131 
 
 "It had been a long time since I had seen him; I called at the house and 
 we had some conversation in relation to general affairs, but that to which 
 lie turned his mind more than to any other thing to be considered was upon 
 his condition and the hopelessness of his life. I could see that he was 
 resigned to whatever might come, and yet plainly visible in his countenance 
 I could see a shadow as he thought of and looked upon the dear faces, the 
 dear countenances of his wife and children, which he was to see no more on 
 earth again forever. Yes, and I discovered still another shadow, and that 
 was the agony which would be brought upon these dear ones, who were 
 dearer to him than life ; and yet, sad as were these reflections, with hope 
 and with animation he said, * I am in the hand of God. His will be done. 
 It has been done, and my friends, when all of his life and character of a 
 public sort have been forgotten, the scenes around his sick bed and the last 
 davs of Benjamin Harvey Hili will be handed down as a token of the hopes 
 which inspired the Christian in his last hours. I bring this humble and 
 impromptu tribute here to-day, and among the fragrant flowers and bouquets 
 that shall be cast upon his bier I cast this. His memory will live when gar 
 lands have faded. He that believeth in me though he were dead, yet shall 
 he live. He does live. Ah, could we but have the ears of faith to-day, we 
 might hear the response of his last utterance upon this earth : Almost 
 home. 
 
 CHIEF JUSTICE JACKSOx s ADDRESS. 
 
 " Mr. Chairman : The wreath of immortelles, which encircle the brow of 
 the illustrious dead, was woven of flowers culled not more from the broad 
 fields of political adventure and civic glory than from the narrower gardens 
 of legal lore and forensic renown. It is meet, therefore, that in response 
 to the invitation of the committee of arrangements, as Georgia s head 
 
 ^J 7 ^j 
 
 of the administration of her laws, I add a few words to what has been 
 said in honor of his memory. 
 
 " Less than twelve months ago the State was draped in weeds of mourn 
 ing, and with the circle of entire sisterhood she bowed her head in sorrow 
 and wept over the fresh grave of the Chief Magistrate of the Union. The 
 rude and ruthless manner of his taking off, the protracted, weary, and sad 
 footsteps of the great sufferer through the * dark valley of the shadow of 
 death, the patient heroism with which he endured the anguish, and the 
 painful suspense with which the people breathlessly watched the event all 
 struck the great chords of the American heart with almost unutterable 
 sympathy, and its sobbing vibrations made a spontaneous and indignant 
 wail throughout the land. It was fit, sir, that Georgia officially take her 
 place in t that funeral, and she did so from her heart. In this chamber her 
 legislative, executive, and judicial departments of government the mayor 
 and council of this her capital city, and her citizens generally, assembled, 
 and Georgia s voii e was heard in the general lamentation. 
 
 But Garfield, Mr. Chairman, was not Georgia s child. He was the son 
 of one of her sisters, and as one of a great family she sorrowed then. To 
 day she grieves with a mother s love and a mother s anguish. She stands 
 now by the bier of her own boy the offspring of her womb, whose cradle, 
 she rocked, whose early footsteps she watched as only a mother can watch, 
 a son, in whose growth she expanded, too, in parental pride, and in the alti 
 tude of whose fame she gloried as her own. 
 
 <* Well may she weep, < Can a mother forget her sucking child ? is 
 
132 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 the question Jehovah put to manifest his unspeakable love for the children 
 of men. Mr. Hill sucked everything which made him great from the 
 breast of Georgia. He was all Georgian. Physically, intellectually, 
 morally he was Georgia s own son. In the midst of the great red belt 
 which encircles the body of the State from Savannah to the Chattahoochee 
 her rich red zone, near the geographical center the very core of her 
 heart his eves first saw the light, and the blood which fed his magnificent 
 
 x *~J *ir3 
 
 physique flowed from that heart which now throbs with anguish over his 
 remains. Intellectually, he was her own son. An alumnus of her university, 
 
 / 7 11 * 7 
 
 there he sucked intellectual nourishment, and Athens is in tears now while 
 Atlanta weeps. If honey hung upon his lips, Georgia bees gathered it 
 from her own flowers and hoarded it there. If the silver ring of his elo- 
 
 C5 
 
 quence fascinated attention and moved all hearts with the magic of its 
 music, that silver was dug from Georgia mines beneath her own red hills. If 
 the sword of his logic, wielded for her in the Senate chamber of the Union, 
 flashed and cut like a Damascus blade, the material was Georgia steel, manu 
 factured and tempered in her own workshops. If the broad shield which 
 he raised in her defense, and in that of all the South, averted every blow 
 
 / 
 
 and blunted the point of every javelin her traducers hurled at her honor 
 and her heart, the material of it was sturdy oak and the granite mountain 
 native to Georgia s soil. Oh, sir, this great Georgian was altogether Geor 
 gian, and while his patriotism did expand and compass the Union in its 
 wide embrace, his hearstrings clustered close to the mother who was all 
 in all to him. 
 
 " True patriotism always did, and always will burn brightest at the fire 
 side. Thence its rays will shine over all the land and warm all the homes 
 within the reach of its radiance to the remotest verge of the whole country. 
 If it burn not there at home, it will warm nothing. Morally, Mr. Hill was 
 Georgia s own son. In a Georgia church, under Georgia preaching, a spark 
 from heaven fell into his soul and kindled that humble faith in Christ which 
 adhered to him through life and made him grand in death. Well might he 
 
 ^j ^j *^ 
 
 say with the Psalmist, * Thy gentleness hath made me great. And that 
 gentle flow of God s spirit into his own made the greater grandeur of the 
 evening of a grand day. 
 
 "Sir, his career was not unlike the course of the sun in the heavens, its 
 morning, its noon, its setting in a cloudy west. "When it arose, the broad 
 beams of its light, as they brightened the morning sky, gave early promise 
 of a glorious zenith. Well do I remember how the prophetic eye of Judge 
 Charles Dougherty clarum et venerable nomen watched those beams and 
 delighted in their promise. Steadily it rose higher and higher. The bar, 
 the forum, the hustings, legislative and congressional halls, all were flooded 
 with the illumination, and, when full orbed, it culminated in the zenith. 
 When all eyes looked at Georgia s senator in the American Senate not 
 Crawford or Troup, not Forsyth or Berrien, illustrated Georgia with a 
 richer, I had almost said, sir, with so rich a radiance. 
 
 " There he shone, a sun with no spot upon its disk. But evening came, 
 and the sun set to rise no more on earthly scenes. It is not the clear, tranquil 
 sun that is most beautifully grand. It is when clouds encompass the king of 
 day that he draws the richest drapery around his couch, and more beautiful 
 than morning s beams, grander than noontide glory, is the light the sinking 
 sun sheds on the clouds which skirt the horizon he has left. 
 
 Hill sank among the clouds of deep affliction, and the twilight was 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 133 
 
 long, but oh, how surpassingly beautiful that lingering glory ! God seems 
 to have brought the clouds around that dying chamber that the glory of 
 Heaven might sweeten the sorrows of earth, and that the world might see, as 
 Addison wrote to his young friend, how a Christian could die. Mr. Chair 
 man, it was my fortune to be at Eureka Springs when Mr. Hill was there. 
 Though in feeble health myself, it was a pleasure as well as a duty to visit 
 him often. There he sat afflicted, yet patient and lamb-like. There was 
 the wife, whose widowed heart now is groaning in that residence on Peach- 
 tree Street, and there the noble son, who laid all he had time, property, 
 business, home, everything at his father s feet. Well might the great suf 
 ferer say, as he said to me, never had husband a better wife, never father a 
 better son. 
 
 " I looked from the outward to the inner man, and asked how was all 
 within. I should like to live for my family and my country, but I make no 
 prayer to God without saying to Him from my heart, " Thy will be done." I 
 know he is wiser and better than I am and Avill do best for me and mine. 
 
 " That was his reply, and every time I saw him, thus trustingly, humbly, 
 confidently, he talked. 
 
 / * 
 
 On my return I saw him again at his home and, when he could not talk, 
 he wrote again, in reply to a question as to the inner man, while his body 
 was wasting away and death before him : 
 
 " The growth of grace is constant, indubitable, unmistakable. 
 
 " To General Evans he said, laying his hand on his breast and pointing to 
 Heaven, All is right here, all is right there. And to him, when no longer 
 :ible to write or talk, when almost gone, with a supernatural effort, his dy 
 ing whisper muttered the words, Almost home, while a smile lighted up 
 the emaciated face. 
 
 "Mr. Chairman, a death like this is worth more to Georgia s youth than 
 all the triumphs of Mr. Hill s genius. May they prosper by the wondrous 
 example. 
 
 " Would that I could add a word of comfort to yonder withered and 
 widowed heart ; and I know you, sir, and all here, respond to that prayer. I 
 believe it is Washington Irving who compared the man to the strong, mas 
 sive oak, his wife to the sinuous and tender vine that clasps all the tendrils 
 of her love around him. The higher this great man grew, the higher, cling 
 ing to him, still grew this loving vine ; and when he fell, she fell, too. And 
 s f ill the tendrils clasp the dead trunk. Poor broken, bruised, bleeding vine. 
 Unclasp that embrace. The noble tree is not there. A divine hand has 
 transplanted him to a richer soil, a purer atmosphere. Lift those tendrils up 
 ward. Ere long the same divine, gentle, loving hand will move thee again 
 to his side, and he who pronounced you one here, will reunite you there, to 
 grow together forever in the hearts of holiness in the garden of the Lord. " 
 
Memorial Addresses on the Life and Character of Benjamin Harvey Hill (a Senator 
 from Georgia), delivered in the Senate and House of Representatives, Forty-seventh 
 Congress, Second Session, January 25, 1883. 
 
 rriHE greater part of Senator Brown s address was biographical and is 
 I not therefore published. The conclusion of his elaborate speech is as 
 follows : 
 
 Mr. President: In the demise of Senator Hill the whole Union has sus 
 tained a severe loss. But the affliction of the people of Georgia is greater 
 than any other can be ; they knew him ; they loved him ; they honored and 
 trusted him ; they almost idolized him. And when it was announced that 
 Benjamin H. Hill was no more, they bowed their heads in sorrow, and will 
 long mourn their irreparable loss. 
 
 But, Mr. President, Senator Hill possessed intellectual qualities of the 
 highest order. His genius was acknowledged by all. In debate he was 
 surpassingly grand and convincing. As a logician he had few equals ; as an 
 impassioned orator he had no superior ; as a lawyer he occupied the first 
 rank ; as an advocate at the bar he was absolutely overwhelming ; as an 
 American senator he was the peer of any one. 
 
 When I reflect upon the great oratorical powers of Senator Hill, the 
 splendor of his genius, the simplicity of his heart, and the patriotic impulses 
 of his nature, as I had learned in later life to know them, I conclude that 
 the day is not distant when some great American poet, burning with 
 patriotic zeal as well as poetic fire, will weave into verse a tribute to his 
 memory as glowing and as just as the immortal English bard paid the great 
 Irish orator when Byron sang : 
 
 Ever glorious Grattan ! the best of the good ! 
 
 So simple in heart, so sublime in the rest ; 
 With all which Demosthenes wanted endued, 
 
 And his rival or victor in all he possessed. 
 
 ADDRESS OF MR. INGALLS, OF KANSAS. 
 
 Ben Hill has gone to the undiscovered country. 
 
 Whether his journey thither was but one step across an imperceptible 
 frontier, or whether an interminable ocean, black, unfluctuating, and voice 
 less, stretches between these earthly coasts and those invisible shores we 
 do not know. 
 
 Whether on that August morning, after death, he saw a more glorious 
 sun rise with unimaginable splendor above a celestial horizon, or whether his 
 apathetic and unconscious ashes still sleep in cold obstruction and insensible 
 oblivion we do not know. 
 
 Whether his strong and subtle energies found instant exercise in another 
 forum, whether his dexterous and disciplined faculties are now contending in 
 a higher senate than ours for supremacy, or whether his powers were dissi 
 pated and dispersed with his parting breath we do not know. 
 
 134 
 
IIIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 135 
 
 Whether his passions, ambitions, and affections still sway, attract, and 
 impel, whether lie yet remembers us as we remember him we do not know. 
 
 These are the unsolved, the insoluble problems of mortal life and human 
 destiny, which prompted the troubled patriarch to ask that momentous ques 
 tion for which the centuries have given no answer " If a man die shall he 
 live again ? ! 
 
 Every man is the center of a circle whose fatal circumference he cannot 
 pass. Within its narrow confines he is potential, beyond it he perishes ; 
 and if immortality be a splendid but delusive dream, if the incompleteness 
 of every career, even the longest and most fortunate, be not supplemented 
 and perfected after its termination here, then he who dreads to die should 
 fear to live, for life is a tragedy more desolate and inexplicable than death. 
 
 Of all the dead whose obsequies we have paused to solemnize in this 
 chamber, I recall no one whose untimely fate seems so lamentable, and yet 
 so rich in prophecy of eternal life, as that of Senator Hill. He had reached 
 the meridian of his years. He stood upon the high plateau of middle life, in 
 that serene atmosphere where temptation no longer assails, where the clam 
 orous passions no more distract, and where the conditions are most favorable 
 for noble and enduring achievement. His upward path had been through 
 stormy adversity and contention, such as infrequently falls to the lot of men. 
 Though not without the tendency to meditation, reverie, and introspection 
 which accompanies genius, his temperament was palestric. He was competi 
 tive and unpeaceful. He was born a polemic and controversialist, intellect 
 ually pugnacious and combative, so that he was impelled to defend any 
 position that might be assailed or to attack any position that might be 
 intrenched, not because the defense or the assault were essential, but because 
 the positions were maintained and that those who held them became by that 
 fact alone his adversaries. This tendency of his nature made his orbit erratic. 
 He was meteoric rather than planetary, and flashed with irregular splendor 
 rather than shone with steady and penetrating rays. His advocacy of any 
 cause was fearless to the verge of temerity. He appeared to be indifferent 
 to applause or censure for their own sake. He accepted intrepidly any con 
 clusions that he reached, without inquiring whether they were politic or 
 expedient. 
 
 To such a spirit partisanship was unavoidable, but with Senator Hill it 
 did not degenerate into bigotry. He was capable of broad generosity, and 
 extended to his opponents the same unreserved candor which he demanded 
 for himself. His oratory was impetuous and devoid of artifice. He was 
 not a posturer nor phrasemonger. He was too intense, too earnest, to 
 employ the cheap and paltry decorations of discourse. He never reconnoit- 
 ered a hostile position nor approached it by stealthy parallels. He could 
 not lay siege to an enemy, nor beleaguer him, nor open trenches, and sap 
 and mine. His method was the charge and the onset. He was the Murat 
 of senatorial debate. Not many men of this generation have been better 
 equipped for parliamentary warfare than he, with his commanding presence, 
 his sinewy diction, his confident and imperturbable self-control. 
 
 But in the maturity of his powers and his fame, with unmeasured oppor 
 tunities for achievement apparently before him, with great designs unac 
 complished, surrounded by the proud and affectionate solicitude of a great 
 constituency, the pallid messenger with the inverted torch beckoned him to 
 depart. There are few scenes in histoiy more tragic than that protracted 
 combat with death. No man had greater inducements to live. But in the 
 
136 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 struorjrle against the inexorable advances of an insidious and mortal 
 
 v^ * T* 
 
 malady he did not falter nor repine. He retreated with the aspect of a vic 
 tor ; and though he succumbed, he seemed to conquer. His sun went down 
 at noon, but it sank amid the prophetic splendors of an eternal dawn. 
 
 With more than a hero s courage, with more than a martyr s fortitude, 
 he waited the approach of the inevitable hour and went to the undiscovered 
 country. 
 
 ADDRESS OF MR. VEST, OF MISSOURI. 
 
 Mr. President: In November, 1861, I first met Mr. Hill in the Pro 
 visional Congress of the Confederate States. 
 
 ^j 
 
 The Confederacy was just entering upon its brief and stormy existence. 
 Its capital had recently been removed from Montgomery to Richmond, and 
 Jefferson Davis, by a majority of only one vote in the Provisional Congress, 
 had been elected president over Robert Toombs. 
 
 Surrounded by unexampled difficulties, moral and physical, isolated and 
 alone, with the prejudices of the entire civilized world against them, and 
 confronted in battle with overwhelming odds, the Confederate Congress 
 was called upon to meet not only the ordinary questions and emergencies 
 attending the formation of a new government, but to grapple also with the 
 exigencies and demands of a great war, a war not for conquest or policy, 
 but for existence. 
 
 Mr. Hill had earnestly opposed secession up to the last moment, but, find 
 ing that the people of Georgia were determined to separate from the Union, 
 he surrendered his personal opinion, and pledged himself fully and unre 
 servedly to the cause of the Confederacy. 
 
 Opposed to secession, with habits of thought and education utterly averse 
 to revolution, the strange vicissitudes of this stormy period soon found him 
 the leader of the administration party in the Confederate Congress. 
 
 Within the limits of an address like this it would neither be possible nor 
 proper for me to attempt an analysis of the causes which placed Mr. Hill in 
 this position ; but chief among them was the fact that, having once pledged 
 himself to the Confederacy, he could see no hope of success except in sup 
 porting the President chosen by the people ; and having so declared himself, 
 his great ability naturally made him the exponent and defender of the policy 
 of the administration. 
 
 Although surrounded by difficulties and dangers almost without parallel, 
 and confronted by a common peril, it was very soon evident that personal 
 rivalry, the attrition of diverse opinion, and the fierce passions of a revolu 
 tionary era, had built up most determined opposition to Mr. Davis among 
 the leaders of the South. 
 
 That the President of the Confederate States was loyal to the people he 
 led, in every fiber of his nature, cannot be doubted save by the blindest 
 prejudice ; and this being granted, whether he was mistaken in the conduct 
 of the war or in the policy of his administration, should be a sealed book to 
 all those who sympathized and suffered with him. It is enough to say now 
 that never was any public man assailed by opponents so formidable as those 
 who attacked the President of the Confederate States. 
 
 Toombs, the Mirabeau of the revolution ; Yancey, whose lips were 
 touched with fire, now the honey of persuasion, and then the venom of in 
 vective ; Wigfall, brilliant, aggressive, and relentless this was the great 
 triumvirate which assailed Mr. Davis s administration. No power of de- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES. AND WRITINGS. 137 
 
 scription can do justice to the ability, eloquence, or bitterness >f the debates 
 in \vhich Mr. Hill, single-handed but undaunted, met his great opponents. 
 As the war progressed and the fortunes of the Confederacy became eacii 
 \ far more desperate, the bitterness and violence of this parliamentary con 
 flict increased, until scenes of actual personal collision occurred on the floor 
 of the Confederate Senate. 
 
 The participants have passed beyond this world s judgment, and the 
 issues which stirred those tierce passions are dead, with the government 
 they affected, but the few who heard these debates can never forget the 
 matchless eloquence and logic that mingled with the roar of hostile guns 
 around the beleaguered capital of the Confederacy. 
 
 Reluctant to embrace the Confederate cause, Mr. Hill was the last to leave 
 it, and I well remember that on my way from Richmond, after preparations 
 had been made to abandon the capital, and it was well known that the cause 
 was lost, I met him in Columbus, Georgia, engaged in the task of rallying 
 the people of his State in what was then a hopeless struggle. When I told 
 him of recent events, of which he had not heard, he said, "All then is over, 
 and it only remains for me to share the fate of the people of Georgia." 
 
 How well he redeemed this pledge the hearts of his people will answer. 
 Thrown into prison, stripped of all except life, his courage never failed; and 
 in the darkest hour, when the wolves were tearing the victims of the Avar as 
 the coyote the wounded deer, his eloquent voice was never for one instant 
 silent until Georgia, torn and bleeding but yet splendid and beautiful, once 
 more stood erect in the sisterhood of sovereign States. Nor did he ever under 
 any temptation so far forget his manhood and honor as to 
 
 Crook the pregnant hinges of the knee 
 Where thrift may follow fawning. 
 
 Accepting fully and without reservation all the legitimate consequences 
 of defeat, and resolutely turning to the future with its duties and obligations, 
 he still retained his self-respect, and never did he 
 
 Bend low, and in a bondsman s key, 
 
 With bated breath, and whispering humbleness, 
 
 Say this 
 
 Fair sir, you spit on me on Wednesday last; 
 
 You spurn d me such a day ; another time 
 
 You called me dog ; and for these courtesies 
 
 I ll lend you thus much moneys. 
 
 I knew Mr. Hill well, and under circumstances which enabled me to 
 judge accurately his attributes and qualities. Like all men of great intel 
 lect, he was often accused of inconsistency because he absolutely refused to 
 be governed by the routine thought of others, and had always the courage 
 to change an opinion if he believed it erroneous. His courage, indeed, both 
 of conviction and expression, was not excelled by that of any man, and his 
 fortitude under the greatest misfortunes extorted the admiration of even his 
 enemies. 
 
 In an age when calumny and slander are the ordinary weapons of politi 
 cal warfare, and personal scandal the most delicate morsel for the public 
 appetite, Mr Hill was not exempt from the attacks of the foul and loathsome 
 creatures who crawl about the footsteps of every public man, but he bore 
 himself always with a dignity which commanded the respect of all. 
 
138 SENATOR it. if. SILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 And what can be said of the heroism, the uncomplaining and unfaltering 
 courage, with which he met the irony of fate that brought him the torture 
 of a lingering: death in the destruction of that tongue and voice which had 
 
 J C7 C.7 
 
 so often awakened with their eloquence the echoes of this hall ! 
 
 In all public and private history there is no sadder page than this, and 
 from it we turn away in silent awe and reverence. 
 
 
 
 In his political opinions Mr. Hill was governed by the teaching of Madi 
 son, and no one who heard his speech in the Senate on May 10, 1879, the 
 greatest speech, in my judgment, delivered here within the last quarter of a 
 century, will ever forget his tribute to the statesman who can be justly 
 termed the father of the Constitution. Said Mr. Hill : 
 
 Sir, I want to say here now and I feel it a privilege that I can say it I believe all 
 the angry discussions, all the troubles that have come upon this country, have sprung 
 from the failure of the people to comprehend the one great fact that the government under 
 which we live has no model ; it is partly national and partly Federal ; an idea which was 
 to the Greeks a stumbling block, and to the Romans foolishness, and to the Republican 
 party an insurmountable paradox, but to the patriots of this country it is the power of 
 liberty unto the salvation of the people. And if the people of this country would realize 
 that fact, all these crazy wranglings as to whether we live under a Federal or a national 
 government would cease ; they would understand that we live under both ; that it is a 
 composite government ; that it was intended by the framers that the Union shall be faith 
 ful iu defense of the States, that the States shall be harmonious in support of the Union, 
 and that the Union and the States shall be faithful and harmonious in the support and the 
 maintenance of the rights and the liberty of the people. 
 
 Mr. Hill was not only an orator, but a lawyer in the front of his profes 
 sion. His mind was broad yet analytical ; and he was averse to all radical 
 and revolutionary methods. In my conception of his intellect and eloquence, 
 I always associate him with Virgniaud, the leader of the French Girondists. 
 While neither will stand in history with the greatest party leaders, yet as 
 orators and parliamentary debaters they are entitled to places in the first 
 rank. 
 
 Ended are his conflicts, his triumphs, and defeats. The strong, aggressive 
 intellect is at rest. The clarion voice, which could " wield at will the fierce 
 democracy " is hushed forever. 
 
 Out upon the shoreless ocean his bark has drifted ; but it has not carried 
 away all of the life that has- ended. Never to mortal hands was given a 
 legacy more precious than that left to the people of Georgia in the memory 
 of her great son who gave his life to her service and his latest prayer to her 
 honor and welfare. 
 
 Orator, statesman, patriot, farewell ! Let Georgia guard well thy grave; 
 for in her soil rest not the ashes of one whose life has done more to illustrate 
 her manhood, whose genius has added such glory to her name. 
 
 ADDRESS OF MR. MORGAN, OF ALABAMA. 
 
 Mr. President: Alabama, the eldest daughter of Georgia, approaches 
 this sad occasion with a proud but stricken spirit. I will utter no word in 
 praise of the late senator that all the people of that State and of the South 
 will not sanction with heartfelt responses. 
 
 This is an occasion when the pure serenity of truth need not be clouded 
 with undeserved eulogy of the dead. It would be an injustice to the sin 
 cerity of his character, which his own history and example would condemn, 
 to speak of the deceased senator in terms that would be misleading. 
 
 A strong and rugged character, such as belonged to Benjamin H. Hill, 
 
iffS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 139 
 
 cannot be correctly portrayed in the soft light of adulation, or by mere 
 smoothness of expression, or in speech tempered with hesitancy and caution. 
 He \vas a bold, daring, and powerful man in his intellectual and physical 
 organism; and his convictions, when they were settled after due considera 
 tion, were always the guide to his action and the measure of his duty. He 
 thought much, and examined with carefulness every important question that 
 engaged his attention. 
 
 When he was in error, he was dangerous because of the fertility of his 
 resources in argument, his zeal and firmness, his tact in debate, and the 
 aggressive energy of his mind. When he was right, he was almost in 
 vincible. 
 
 These qualities naturally fitted him for the highest range of achieve 
 ments as an advocate and leader ; but such was his independence of all con 
 trol by the thoughts of others, that he sometimes sacrificed the leadership of 
 men whom he could have controlled had he made concessions that were not 
 of vital consequence to him or to them. 
 
 The people often made concessions to him to avoid controversy with one 
 whom they in eatlv admired, and were attached to with affectionate regard. 
 
 / O / ^ D 
 
 The following of the people under his leadership did not always result from 
 their approval of his views, even on great questions. 
 
 He was, in the American sense, a great popular orator, whose powers 
 were best adapted to great questions and important occasions in which the 
 rights and liberties of the people were concerned or the honor of the coun 
 try was at stake. In such discussions, he sometimes rose to astonishing 
 heights of sublimity of thought and speech, which carried his audience with 
 him until they seemed to lose control of themselves. He had no faculty of 
 
 > 
 
 imitation, and his style of oratory was all his ow^n. He had no model in 
 rhetoric or logic that he was willing to copy. He seemed to have no 
 thoughts that were his merely by adoption ; they were the offspring of his 
 own mind. His eloquence was little more than a fervid statement of the facts 
 or reasoning which had brought his mind to the conclusions which he was sup 
 porting ; but it was so intense as to become almost irresistible. 
 
 When speaking to the people, in the period just preceding the war, when 
 the argument was closed and a resort to other methods of defense had be 
 come a necessity, as they viewed the situation, he turned their thoughts to 
 the duties and dangers of the people of the South and of their posterity. 
 He reviewed with pathetic fervor their fidelity to the Constitution and the 
 Union in all former times of danger and trial in the second war of Inde- 
 
 ^j 
 
 pendence with Great Britain ; in the wars with the Indians who were sup 
 ported by British and Spanish emissaries, and inspired by the savage elo 
 quence of Tecumseh ; and in the war with Mexico ; and feeling that they 
 were threatened with servile insurrection and ultimate degradation and the 
 loss of all protection under the Constitution, he urged them to their duty with 
 such power that 
 
 Each ravaged bosom felt the high alarms, 
 And all their burning pulses beat to arms. 
 
 Mr. Hill was a lawyer of great ability, but his self-reliant habits of 
 reasoning led him to seek for arguments rather than for precedents to sup 
 port the cause he was advocating. The special-jury system of Georgia was 
 productive of great alertness and skill in forensic discussion among the 
 lawyers of Georgia, and in these he excelled. Senators will remember how 
 
140 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 much lie relied on this faculty even in the discussion of questions of the 
 most intricate character. He always spoke extemporaneously, and seldom 
 made any use even of notes of reference to authorities. 
 
 V 
 
 Iii the strenuous controversy of high debate he was sometimes severe, 
 but never with willful injustice to those opposed to him. 
 
 The only soil of his fair virtue s gloss 
 
 Was a sharp wit, match d with too blunt a will ; 
 
 Whose edge none spurned that came within his power. 
 
 His political career was shaped by the events of the most difficult and 
 momentous period in American history. The success of the rebellion of 
 1776, by the strength of the Union it established, made the success of the 
 rebellion of 1860 impossible. But the questions that were left open, after 
 the first rebellion, to rankle in the bosoms of the people made the second 
 rebellion and the war that followed it unavoidable. 
 
 Mr. Hill, in common with other men of that period, understood that the 
 third generation of American citizens was forced to settle by arms the 
 questions that the first generation could not settle in the beginning without 
 giving up all hope of uniting the States in a Federal government, under the 
 new Constitution. He, like many others, was compelled by a sense of duty 
 to change his attitude on questions of policy to meet the dangers as they 
 arose and drifted with the current of events. His fated duty and purpose 
 forced him into resistance to the inevitable, but the least destructive 
 measure of resistance was what he always sought to adopt. Under such 
 circumstances he was then, and more recently, charged with reckless incon 
 sistency. 
 
 That was not a just criticism either of his character or his conduct. He 
 was so far free from that weakness which is dignified with the title of pride 
 of opinion that he did not hesitate to abandon his opinions and to disprove 
 their soundness when subsequent reflection satisfied him of the error. It 
 was this trait that gave color to the idea that he was vacillating in his politi 
 cal convictions. 
 
 If he were here, and I could render to him in person the justice which he 
 would most appreciate, as I render to his memory what I believe to be most 
 true, I would say of his course in the beginning of the civil war and during 
 the discussion of the events that led to it, that no man then living was more 
 sincerely devoted to the American Union than he was ; no man gave up the 
 hope of its perpetuity with more intense sorrow than he did ; no man more 
 firmly believed than he did that the Southern States had just grounds for 
 their secession ; no man deplored more sincerely than he did that secession 
 and war were made inevitable by the very provisions of the Constitution 
 that men were sworn to support, and that could not, in fact, be supported in 
 its provisions relating to slavery except by the power of the sword as 
 against the will of a great majority of the American people ; and when the 
 crisis came, no man was firmer than Mr. Hill in supporting with his vote in 
 the Convention of Georgia the ordinance of secession, against which he had 
 entered his protest, but to which he gave his assent when his brethren had 
 resolved that it was the only remedy left open to them. 
 
 This is the true history of his motives and feelings in that time of severe 
 trial, which so honorably explain his conduct. In the light of these facts 
 there is a moral heroism in his course which raises his fame even to a higher 
 eminence than that which is so freely accorded to him for his acknowledged 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 141 
 
 abilities. His fidelity to the Confederate States could not have been greater 
 if he had been the sole responsible author of the secession of each of the 
 States. His devotion to that cause after he had espoused it, and to the 
 people after they were involved in war, appeals to their hearts for a tribute, 
 which they freely render to his memory, far exceeding eulogy and praise, 
 the tribute of gratitude enriched by love. None but the truest of men 
 could have won this high distinction from the people of the South. He has 
 won it worthily, and it will continue to bloom amid the leaves of the chaplet, 
 with which they have crowned him for immortality. 
 
 The people of the South withdrew from the Union because they believed 
 that the government of the United States had no longer the will or the 
 power to protect their constitutional rights. They went out by the separate 
 and independent action of each of the eleven seceding States. Their union 
 into a Confederacy was itself a great task upon the statesmanship of the 
 leadinor men of the South. Along 1 with the task came this instant and 
 
 +Z3 3 
 
 inevitable work of preparing for a great war. 
 
 In all these high duties Mr. Hill was an active and leading participant, as 
 a representative of the State of Georgia. 
 
 The condition of these eleven States was perilous in the extreme, and re 
 quired the highest order of capacity for government to direct them through 
 these dangerous straits. The individual States had armies in the field engaged 
 in conflicts of arms before the Confederacy could be organized under a pro 
 visional government. 
 
 Then immediately came the great struggle, in which all the people of all 
 races, with only a few individual exceptions, were united for weal or for woe. 
 There was nothing on which the Confederacy could rely for success except 
 the devotion of the people to the cause which united them. Nothing was 
 organized, and the material of war consisted only of resolute men. With- 
 
 */ 
 
 out a military chest, or arms, munitions, equipments, transportation, or sup 
 plies, the military resources of the Confederacy consisted of ten millions of 
 people, of whom more than a third were slaves, whose release from bondage 
 depended on the success of the arms of the United States. 
 
 This population could not furnish and keep in the field more than a half 
 million of men, even for a short campaign. Its total arms-bearing strength 
 could not exceed a million of men, within the extreme limits of military lev- 
 
 
 
 les, during the whole period of a four years war. Their arms and ordnance 
 stores, munitions, provisions, and transportation were to be dug from the 
 mines and the fields, and hewn from the forests, and constructed from the 
 native material. They had to raise the cotton and wool for clothing their 
 armies, and to build factories to convert them into cloth. There was not 
 a thousand thoroughly educated soldiers in these eleven States. They 
 had little money and no credit abroad. They were shut in on land and sea 
 
 ** * 
 
 by great armies and navies. They had no fleet and no commerce.* They 
 had not the genuine sympathy of any nation in the world. 
 
 Their adversaries were men of their own blood; powerful, warlike, rich, 
 determined ; aroused with enthusiastic zeal for the Union and the suprem 
 acy of its laws ; supplied with every resource of warfare, and supported by 
 the sympathy and assistance of many other great nations, whose people re 
 cruited their armies. They could put in the field as many soldiers as the 
 Confederacy could possibly muster, and still have a reserve of population of 
 20,000,000 from which to draw other armies. 
 
 This brief view of the situation will sufficiently show the general outline 
 
142 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 of the labors that Mr. Hill and his colleagues in the Confederate Congress 
 were called to perform. They courageously took up the task, which seemed 
 too great for human endeavor. 
 
 Their debates are not published, but the tradition that has reached us is 
 that they were never excelled in ability and majestic eloquence. It may be 
 better that they have faded from human recollection. 
 
 There was little of personal rivalry in the Confederate Congress. The 
 weight of responsibility, resting upon all alike, kept each individual equal 
 upon the common plane of duty. It was the performance of duty, and not 
 daring enterprise or moving eloquence, that was the test of a man s devotion 
 to the common cause and of his ability to serve it in that Congress. 
 
 According to this standard, Mr. Hill was honorably distinguished among 
 his colleagues, and was applauded by the people. The regard of the people 
 for him far exceeded mere admiration. There was a strong bond of affec 
 tion between them. All the sympathies of his high nature were aroused by 
 their sufferings, and grew into homage for their virtues as he witnessed 
 their fortitude and patience in the terrible trials of the war. He saw that 
 their wealth was freely given to the Confederacy; that they fed and clothed 
 the army without the hope of compensation ; that the poor, the widowed, 
 and the orphaned took refuge and found comfort in their cheerful benevo 
 lence ; that they gave up their houses for hospitals, and gathered from the 
 fields and forests the simple remedies for the wounded and sick which took 
 the place of the ordinary hospital supplies and medicines which were denied 
 to them. He saw that the women raised bread in the sun-beaten fields, with 
 plow and hoe, and divided it between their children at home and their hus 
 bands and children in the army. He saw the mothers sending their sons 
 forth to recruit the armies as soon as they were able to bear arms, and often 
 times to take the places of fathers and elder brothers who had fallen in bat 
 tle. He rejoiced in the heroic spirit of the people, and they felt that he was 
 true to them. 
 
 The end came ; and with it came the dawn of a new hope, only to spread 
 its wings of light for a moment, and then to fold them again in darkness. 
 
 With peace came the promise of restoration to civil liberty, as it is 
 proudly impersonated in the character of the American citizen. That prom 
 ise contained the essential part of all for which the Southern people had 
 fought for four weary and sorrow-burdened years. They gave up the insti 
 tution which was the provoking cause of the great conflict of arms, and felt 
 assured that there would no longer be occasion or excuse for a denial to 
 them of the equal rights enjoyed by other American citizens. They laid 
 down their arms and gave their paroles upon these express conditions. But 
 they were grievously disappointed, and, having disarmed, they had no 
 longer the privilege of making honorable sacrifices to vindicate their rights. 
 They brooded in the darkness of a hopeless doom over a loss that was seem 
 ingly irreparable. 
 
 On such occasions men have often come forward who seem to have been 
 fitted and prepared beforehand for the work. They ask the confidence of 
 the people, and if they have the faith to give it and the courage to follow, 
 they are led by them into a happy deliverance. 
 
 Among this class of leaders in the South, Mr. Hill was conspicuous. In 
 the events which followed the surrender of 1865, his courage and eloquence 
 were displayed in their grandest power as a leader of the people. He was 
 maddened with the thought that the surrender of a people, who had struggled 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. H3 
 
 so gallantly and suffered so much, but were yet able to have protracted the 
 war indefinitely, did not brin<r to them, the rights which were expressly in 
 cluded in the capitulation. With anguish of soul he witnessed the wrongs 
 and humiliation inflicted on them under the policy of the reconstruction of 
 the seceding States, by which they were held subject as vassals under the 
 laws of war when they had been promised restoration under the laws of 
 peace. 
 
 When the military power was thus made to supplant the civil power in 
 Georgia, and the disarmed people were incapable of resistance, he did not 
 despair. He felt that there was in the American heart a forum where the 
 plea for justice could still be heard, and he boldly demanded an audience 
 there. Through such assistance he determined that Georgia should be set 
 
 CJ d? 
 
 free from military despotism and foreign rule. He united the people of 
 Georgia in a crusade against tyranny. They broke their chains, and he led 
 them in a triumphant march to victory. With no other weapon but the 
 freeman s ballot they drove out their oppressors. 
 
 His strength, when thus called into action, was a sublime expression of 
 the depth of feeling and suffering of a great spirit maddened by a sense of 
 cruel wrong. 
 
 As when Alcides .... felt the envenom d robe, and tore 
 Through pain up by the roots Thessalian pines ; 
 And Lichas from the top of (Eta threw 
 Into the Euboic sea 
 
 It is not appropriate to utter all the praises our hearts would fain bestow 
 upon him. We prefer to leave something unsaid and undone for the pres 
 ent time to signify a tenderness of feeling for our dead, who were great and 
 good, that does not now admit of complete expression. 
 
 I witnessed the burial of Benjamin H. Hill in the bosom of his native 
 State. The people were there in observant masses, looking sadly on at the 
 simple cortege that escorted his remains to the cemetery. They seemed to 
 feel that he had died much too soon to gather the full wealth of his own 
 fame or to confer on them the full riches of his counsels. They seem to 
 think of him. as of a warrior slain by chance when he had put on his armor 
 to win his greatest victories ; as an easfle stricken in its boldest flight : as an 
 
 tJ 9 ^j ^j J 
 
 oak riven with lightning in the fullness of its beauty and strength, while 
 spreading its leaves to welcome the summer showers. They were proud 
 that their sorrow was honoring alike to the living and the dead ; but they 
 were grieved that the sad occasion had so soon arrived. They believed, and 
 I do, that he had not attained to the fullness of his growth in intellectual 
 power, and that he left unfinished many noble plans for the good of the 
 country. 
 
 Mr. Hill was not always wise, yet few were wiser than he. It cannot 
 be said of him that he was always right, but it can be truly said that he was 
 never wrong from willfulness, for lack of courage, or from inattention to 
 the requirements of duty. 
 
 Discarding all blind confidence in fate, and deeply sensible of responsi 
 bility to God, his noble and just spirit left this brief existence for one that 
 is eternal, satisfied with the past and confident of the future. 
 
 Though his work here was not finished, as we view such matters, he was 
 not reluctant to lay down the great charge intrusted to him by a fond con 
 stituency ; for he believed that the Master had called him to Other duties, 
 which, as compared with his duties in the Senate, would confer on him "a 
 
144 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory," and so assured, he departed 
 hence with rejoicing. 
 
 ADDRESS OF MR. SHERMAN, OF OHIO. 
 
 Mr. President : We are often called upon in the midst of our public 
 duties to commemorate the death of an associate who has shared with us in 
 the labor and responsibility of official trust. But it rarely happens that the 
 fatal shaft falls upon a senator of such physical strength and mental vigor 
 as Senator Hill. He had scarcely yet attained the full measure of national 
 reputation to which his admitted abilities would have raised him. The 
 insidious disease which sapped his life not only filled his home, his family, 
 and his State with pain and sorrow, but caused a sigh of sadness and 
 respectful sympathy in every household where his patient suffering and 
 premature death were known. 
 
 I am not able to speak of Senator Hill with the fullness of information 
 that his colleagues and personal associates have done. They tell us how he 
 won and held in the highest degree the respect and esteem of his associates, 
 that he has been honored with the confidence of the people of his native 
 State, and by their suffrages for years has filled with credit many positions 
 of public trust. We knew him as he appeared among us, a ready debater, 
 an ardent but courteous antagonist ; strong, earnest, and convincing. 
 
 He came into the House of Representatives with a high reputation, and 
 both there and in the Senate maintained and advanced it so that, when the 
 premonition of death came upon him, he stood as high in the respect and 
 confidence of his associates as any member of this body. 
 
 He was a native of Georgia, educated in one of her universities, and 
 learned in the practice of law in her courts. He was distinctly a type of 
 the Southern mind in its best relations to the affairs of life. 
 
 Though his early life was spent under the influences of the institutions 
 of his native State, and though its industries were then confined mainly to 
 the pursuits of agriculture, yet in his early manhood he appreciated the im 
 portant position which Georgia holds, as containing within her bounds the 
 chief elements for manufacturing industries as well as a fruitful soil for 
 agricultural products. 
 
 He was, as I understood him, in early life attached to the Whig party, 
 and mainly, on account of the well-known position of that party, in favor of 
 the protective policy. He sympathized heartily with the present prospects 
 that in Georgia there will be a rapid development of her natural mineral re 
 sources, and that the cotton grown on her genial soil and that of the " Sunny 
 South" will be made ready for her Southern looms and spindles. 
 
 He had no regrets for the past in the brightening prospects of the 
 future, but looked to his State, often called the " Empire State of the 
 South," as likely to be improved and advanced by the results of the war to a 
 higher plane of wealth, strength, and population. 
 
 His hope was that his State would rise with fresh vigor from the mis 
 fortune and devastation of war by the building of railroads, the opening of 
 mines of coal and iron, and by the tide of immigration and labor from other 
 States as well as from foreign lands. 
 
 Senator Hill was consistently a Union man before the war. He resisted 
 the secession of his State until after the ordinance of secession was passed. 
 While his views of the construction of the Constitution in later years dif 
 fered widely from my own, yet I never doubted the sincerity of his opin- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 145 
 
 ions. To the questions that grew out of the war I do not feel at liberty even 
 to allude, because on these questions we were widely apart in opinion. 
 
 Whatever his views on any subject, he always put them forth with the 
 utmost vigor and clearness of expression. Endowed by nature with an 
 ardent temperament, and cultivated by education in the use of all the gifts 
 of speech, he defended his opinions with consummate ability. Whether in 
 attack or in defense, he was an adversary to command respect in any form 
 of debate. He represented in a marked degree that first quality of an 
 orator earnestness. His training in the practice of the law made him 
 ifamiliar, to a wide extent, with precedents and decisions, upon which he 
 drew copiously in his arguments upon questions involving constitutional 
 law and legislative and judicial power. His speeches were more remark 
 able for their clear reason than for their rhetorical felicity, and it may be 
 said that the bent of his mind was in the direction of dialectics rather than 
 of literary effort. 
 
 As a man of fine natural gifts and high accomplishments, his loss will be 
 felt not only in his own State and neighborhood, but in the councils of the 
 nation ; and after more than half a century of a well-spent life, his country 
 men will recognize, even in its close, the elements of a welJ.-roiinded career. 
 
 ADDRESS OF MR. VOORHEES, OF IXDIAXA. 
 
 Mr. President: We halt to-day for a few moments in the great journey 
 to say the last farewell words over a new-made grave. A comrade in the 
 battle of life has fallen in this high forum. The skeleton foot of death 
 enters with familiar step the loftiest as well as the humblest stations of 
 human life, and again it has invaded the floor of the Senate. But vesterdav 
 
 / 
 
 a commanding presence moved in our midst which we shall see no more ; a 
 voice of powerful eloquence was heard, which is now hushed forever ; a 
 towering intellect shed its light on human affairs, which now has joined 
 other councils than those of earth. A great and living force has gone out 
 from this body and from every scene of mortal concern. 
 
 Others have more fully spoken of Senator Hill s life and public career 
 than will be expected from me, but of his intellectual strength, his will, and 
 his courage, I have deep and lasting impressions. I first met him during the 
 reconstruction of the Southern States which followed the war. As a mem 
 ber of an investigating committee appointed by Congress I visited Atlanta, 
 and there met Mr. Hill for the first time. His appearance and bearing 
 strongly attracted my attention. The still intensity of his pale, strong face ; 
 his firm, determined features, and the clear light of his steady, inquiring, 
 and, as it seemed to me then, somewhat distrustful blue eyes, combined to 
 niake on my mind the vivid and striking portrait of a remarkable man. I 
 recall vividly now the self-poise, the reserve, the circumspection, with which 
 he spoke of public questions, and sought to shelter from hurtful legislation 
 all the interests of his people. He was not then taking part in national 
 politics, and I doubt if such was his intention ; but when he was, some time 
 afterward, elected to the House of Representatives, my opinion of his abili 
 ties and force was only confirmed when he immediately took a conspicu 
 ous leadership in that body. 
 
 Of the merits of the heated controversies in which he eno-a^ed. of course, 
 
 II i ^^ 
 
 do not speak in this presence, but that he was the peer of the ablest whom 
 
 he met no one will deny. His fame was at once national, and his State only 
 waited for the first opportunity to bestow upon him its highest honor. 
 
146 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 After Mr. Hill became a member of this body, his daily movements and 
 every word he uttered were marked and scrutinized as those of a leading and 
 important actor in public affairs. He had been a representative man under 
 an order of things and an attempted government which had crumbled to the 
 dust, and he could not be less than a representative character here. To me 
 it was always a curious and most interesting study to watch the workings of 
 his brilliant and fertile mind, while he grasped the duties and the ideas of 
 the living present, and at the same time, with reverent care and devotion, 
 protected the motives and the memory of a cause into which he had poured 
 the whole ardor of his earlier manhood. His mind w r as essentially daring 
 and progressive, and he did not seek to cling to principles and methods 
 which had been tried and failed ; he simply guarded well the honor of that 
 vast cemetery in which the dead past lies buried. 
 
 Standing, as I once heard him say, in the ashes of desolation, he still 
 looked forward with an unfaltering trust to the dawn of a new day of glory 
 for his section, and of union and progress for the entire country. He was a 
 ready mounted knight, not looking back to past fields of encounter, but 
 prompt to enter the lists whenever or wherever opened. He believed with 
 Edmund Burke that statesmanship was the science of circumstances, and he 
 addressed himself with wisdom and courage to the situation in which he 
 found himself placed. This sometimes caused him to be accused of incon 
 sistency by those who forget that the circumstances which govern the con 
 duct of the statesman are themselves inconsistent from day to day. The 
 law of the world is mutation. 
 
 History is a never ending panorama, in which the pictures are never the 
 same. The same grand purposes and facts of progression are there, but the 
 methods of public policy, the ways and means whereby governments are 
 created and sustained, the measures which from time to time best promote, 
 foster, and encourage the welfare of the people, are as various as the differ 
 ent conditions of mankind which have called them forth. The principles 
 which have governed one generation may have to be discarded for the 
 safety and prosperity of the next. The wisdom of to-day may be the folly 
 of to-morrow in the administrative measures of peace as well as in the tac 
 tics and strategy of war. 
 
 Senator Hill always appeared as much alive to this great fact as any man 
 I ever met in public life. He was always found on the skirmish line of ad 
 vanced and advancing ideas, and in the constant encounters which neces 
 sarily take place on that line in the field of thought, the lightning as it leaps 
 from the sky, is hardly more brilliant or rapid than were the operations of 
 his mind. Indeed, so prolific was his genius, when heated by the combat of 
 discussion, that it seemed at times to partake of the eccentricity of the 
 lightning as well as of its brilliancy and power. But he w r as never allured, 
 in his most daring flights, so far that he could not upon the instant return to 
 meet his adversary at the precise point in issue. It was this quality, in great 
 measure, and the intensity with which he could identify himself with the 
 actual matter in hand, regardless of what the past had demanded of him, 
 which made him the formidable antagonist and the resistless orator at the 
 bar, on the hustings, and in the halls of legislation. 
 
 Sir, a character such as I speak of, has never in any age failed to encoun 
 ter determined opposition and deep-seated hostility. The overthrown an 
 tagonist, the routed adversary, never forget and are often slow to forgive. 
 The impetuous assault in debate, the fierce invective, the merciless sarcasm. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECH KS, AXD WRITINGS. 147 
 
 leave wounds which seldom altogether heal. This was doubtless true of the 
 public career of the bold, aggressive senator, whose loss we deplore; and 
 yet to those who knew him well in private life, how gentle, considerate, and 
 kind were his words and his ways! A simple circumstance, of an accidental 
 character, brought about relations between us which revealed him to me in 
 a light I did not expect, although I had been acquainted with him for years. 
 
 I saw the self-absorbed, distant manner, melt away into the gentlest sun 
 shine. I realized that when he gave his confidence at all, he gave it entire ; 
 that when he trusted, he did so without reservation, and with an unlimited 
 faith. While perhaps " he was lofty and sour to those who loved him not," 
 yet he had, in a bountiful degree, those elements of nature toward friends 
 which make man " sweet as summer " to his fellow-man. As the world saw 
 him during his active career, he was a warrior with his armor on, his lance 
 in rest, and his visor down ; but away from the scenes of conflict, and in the 
 midst of those who came close to him, he was the unassuming, generous, 
 confiding friend. At such times he always spoke with singular gentleness 
 and charity of those from whom he differed and with whom his debates had 
 been most heated and determined ; nor do I think I ever heard him speak 
 with a show of personal resentment of such even as had dealt most harshly 
 and unjustly with his name and fame. 
 
 Sir, the combination of rare and high qualities of mind and heart pos 
 sessed by Senator Hill, not only account for the mourning of Georgia over 
 his loss, but also for the fact that his death is regarded in every section as a 
 national calamity. His power for great public usefulness was recognized in 
 every quarter of our vast, expanded country. He had a glorious cause at 
 heart, the construction and development of a grand, harmonious future for 
 the whole country, adjusting his own and the kindred States and people of 
 the South to the existing conditions of the present day, and insuring them 
 their full proportion of the honor and the wealth of the nation. What 
 nobler purpose ever animated the human breast? But in the full meridian 
 splendor of his mental vigor and his ripe experience the unfinished task fell 
 from his hands. That summons to which every ear shall hearken and all 
 mortality obey, reached him at the zenith of his powers, and with his plans 
 of future work all spread out before him. 
 
 When the light of the sun fades away at nightfall, we behold the har 
 monious fulfillment of nature s law ; but when darkness comes at noonday, 
 we are struck with awe at the mysteries of the universe. When eternity 
 beckons to one whose labors are ended here, and who walks wearily under 
 the burden of years, we see him sink down to his rest with resignation to 
 the decrees as they are written ; but when death claims the great and 
 strong, in all their pride of power and place, we break forth in grief, and 
 question the ways of heaven and earth, which are past finding out. 
 
 The hand of the reaper 
 
 Takes the ears that are hoary ; 
 But the voice of the weeper 
 
 Wails manhood in glory. 
 
 How capricious and various are the ways of death ! On the first day of 
 the new year there had gathered at the White House a vast assemblage to 
 pay honor to the President of the Republic. Talent, beauty, official distinc 
 tion, all were there. Heroes of the army and the navy, in the brilliant 
 decorations of their rank, made their official obeisance to their Commander- 
 
148 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 in-Chief ; the ambassadors of distant courts, blazing in scarlet and gold, 
 paid friendly congratulations to the Chief Magistrate of the foremost com 
 monwealth on the globe ; thoughtful legislators and ermined judges, men of 
 letters and professors of science, stood in the same presence ; female loveli 
 ness lent its enchantment to the scene ; soft music charmed all the air ; the 
 rich odor of flowers came with every breath, and the lofty old halls and 
 promenades were vocal with exclamations of happy enjoyment. Immedi 
 ately at my side, in the midst of this radiant throng, stood one who was full 
 of years and of honors. But the spirit of the glass and scythe was hover 
 ing even there, and at the touch of its icy hand I saw the venerable man of 
 
 9 m/ 
 
 four score sink down like an infant to gentle sleep. Without moan or sigh 
 or pain he passed in an instant from the light, the music, and the perfumes 
 of earth to the world of eternal beauty beyond the sun. 
 
 Fortunate man ; fortunate in life, and still more fortunate in death ! 
 Not a moment in the dark valley or the shadow between the two worlds, he 
 closed his aged eyes upon the joys of time to open them upon the brighter 
 visions of eternity. But how shall the dreadful contrast, which flashes on 
 every mind, be spoken ? To the dead senator whom we mourn to-day, death 
 came in its most appalling form, wearing its most cruel and ghastly mien. 
 No circumstance of torture or of horror was omitted from the awful ordeal 
 through which he slowly passed. He sought the aid of science, for life w^as 
 sweet to him; but after he turned his face homeward, to abide the will of 
 God, as he said, among his own people, the pages of human history, in all 
 their wide range, present no more striking instance than he did of un- 
 quailing, lofty heroism and of sublime submission to the decrees of Provi 
 dence. 
 
 The stoic philosopher of antiquity would have taken refuge in self-murder 
 from the frightful aspect worn by the King of Terrors, on which the dying 
 American statesman looked from hour to hour, from day to day, and from 
 month to month, with unbroken composure. A little more than a year ago, 
 the world watched around the death-bed of the slowly dying President of 
 the United States, and wondered at his calmness and courage ; but to him 
 there was administered daily hope. Not a whisper of earthly hope sustained 
 Senator Hill, as he looked long and steadily at his inevitable doom. And yet 
 no murmur, wail, or lament ever escaped his lips; he uttered no word of grief 
 or disappointment that the end of his pilgrimage was so near; no agony of 
 suffering was ever so terrible as to extort a single cry of pain ; he never ap 
 peared so great, so calm and strong, as face to face with the mighty mon 
 arch, before whom all must bow. And why was this? Able, self-reliant, 
 and intrepid as he was, could he, unaided and alone, sustain with unclouded 
 serenity of mind such a conflict with approaching and painful dissolution ? 
 Was there no one with him to soothe and to comfort as he passed through the 
 furnace seven times heated ? 
 
 Sir, we learn that Mr. Hill s father was a minister of the Christian religion, 
 and that he educated his son in the principles and the practices of his own 
 faith. It is a fact, also, that when the son grew to manhood, and at every 
 period of his brilliant and at times stormy career, this faith abided with him. 
 The good seed sown in the morning may have seemed scorched by the sun, 
 or choked by the thorns and cares of the day, but it never lost root in his 
 mind; and in his hour of trial it brought forth fruit more than a hundred 
 fold. It enabled him to realize a home of peace and jo} beyond the reach 
 of disease or death; it enabled him to smile amid his sufferings, as martyrs 
 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 149 
 
 liave smiled in flames at the stake. Though of approaching death it might 
 be said : 
 
 Black as night. 
 
 Fierce as ten furies, terrible as hell, 
 
 He shook a dreadful dart ; 
 
 yet the pale and wasted orator could for himself truthfully exclaim, "Death 
 is swallowed up in victory." His heart could utter, if his tongue could not, 
 that loftiest paean of human triumph ever chanted on the shores of time : 
 
 O Death ! where is thy sting ? 
 O Grave ! where is thy victory ? 
 
 Sir, it is a deep and never-ending pleasure to know that in the midst of 
 physical wreck, decay, and pain there came to our lost comrade in full abund 
 ance, and in compensation for all he endured, those rich and precious conso 
 lations which this world can neither give nor take away. 
 
 *j \> 
 
 lie sleeps well in the soil of his native State. His memory will remain 
 fresh and green in the hearts of his people. Distant and rising generations 
 will point out his name in the books which record these times as they would 
 point out one of the brightest stars in the sky. And this is all of earth that 
 remains for him. No more will this great pulsating world, with its high, stern 
 battle-cries of conflict, arouse his eager spirit to action. The world moves 
 on without him, as the ocean rolls in unbroken and heedless majesty over the 
 wreck which has gone down in her bosom. Great lives have perished at 
 every step in the eternity of time, but the giant march of events has not 
 faltered nor the progress of the world been defeated. 
 
 The duties of the dead senator are all finished. Even this solemn occa 
 sion, with his name on every lip, is nothing to him. His silent dust is alike 
 indifferent to praise or blame, and his immortal presence has passed far 
 beyond the call of human voices. But to us, the living, who stand where 
 he so lately stood, this hour is freighted with interest and admonition. We 
 are walking with unerring steps to the grave, and each setting sun finds us 
 nearer to the realms of rest. The fleetness of time, our brief and feeble 
 grasp upon the affairs of earth, the certainty of death, and the magnitude 
 of eternity all crowd upon the mind at such a moment as this. They warn 
 us to be in readiness, for no one knows, in the great lottery of life and death, 
 on whose cold, dead, pathetic face we may next look in this narrow circle. 
 They call upon us to think and speak and live in charity with each other, 
 for the last hours, that must come to all, will be sweetened bv recollections 
 
 / 
 
 of such forbearance and grace in our own lives as we invoke for ourselves 
 from that merciful Father into whose presence we hasten. 
 
 ADDRESS OF MR. EDMUNDS, OF VERMONT. 
 
 Mr. President : Others more nearly connected with the late senator by 
 ties of location, political sympathy, and personal intimacy have spoken of 
 him as only those so situated can well do. 
 
 I will speak of him chiefly as he appeared to me in his public career. 
 He was, I think, of the very highest order of intellectual strength, both in 
 his perceptive and reflective faculties. He was able to perceive with clear 
 ness the relations of public questions, and the remote, but not less certain 
 effects of occurring events, when to many others the horizon was entirely 
 clouded and indefinite, or clothed with a distorted and illusory promise. A 
 W big and American down to the time of the attempted secession of the 
 
150 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Southern States in 1861, he foresaw something of the future ; and opposed 
 with earnestness and power, in the conventions of his native State, the move 
 ment for secession. But when it was resolved upon and undertaken, he 
 gave himself up to what he considered his duty to his State, and was thence 
 forth among the foremost in sustaining the Southern cause. 
 
 The notion of fidelity to one s own State, whether her course be thought 
 wise and right or not, is almost a natural instinct ; and whether it be 
 defensible on broad grounds or not, who does not sympathize with it 1 
 Even in this body, whose members are senators of the United States, and 
 are not, in a constitutional sense, any more representatives of the particular 
 States that elected them than of all the other States and the people, it is 
 extremely difficult to free ourselves from the feeling that we are the repre 
 sentatives of particular States merely, and that we are bound to defend and 
 promote the interests of their inhabitants without responsibility for the 
 effect of what we do upon the people of other States. Is it not clear that 
 the fundamental unity of all the States, as well as the security of the rights 
 of each, will be much more secure, and the national government much 
 better administered, if we remember that our obligations and our solicitudes 
 should be bounded by no arrangements of political geography ? So think 
 ing, I look with large interest and sympathy upon the scenes and events in 
 which the late senator from Georgia bore so conspicuous a part, and upon 
 the affection and confidence that the great mass of the people of that State 
 felt toward him. And, differing widely from him in respect of very many 
 of his acts and opinions, I felt deeply for him, for his family, and for his 
 people in the calamity that came upon him. And how much more tender 
 our sympathy and admiration grew when we saw him bearing the greatest 
 of human suffering with the calmness of manly fortitude and the supreme 
 happiness of Christian faith, and when we saw that all the evils of this 
 weary life were powerless to affect his soul, that rose " over pain to 
 victory." 
 
 Such events as we now commemorate, interesting and solemn as they are 
 and must be to each one of us, are the most common and the most certain of 
 all. The life of man, did it end with this earthly career, would be the most 
 
 / 
 
 miserable of phantasms ; but to those who see with the eye of faith beyond 
 the narrow border of our mortal life " the yoke is easy and the burden light." 
 On this great stage of government the actors appear and act their parts, 
 and disappear to come again no more ; but the grand drama goes on without 
 interruption. When the greatest, and apparently the most important, ad 
 ministrators of government suddenly depart, there always comes forward 
 from the body of an intelligent people some one to fill the vacant place, and 
 who is equal to the emergency of the time. While, then, we are touched 
 with the suddenness of these separations, let us take comfort in the knowl 
 edge that our country s institutions flourish in larger and larger security, 
 and that all our people feel more and more the depth and strength of 
 mutual interest, sympathy, and good-will. 
 
 ADDRESS OF MR. JONES, OF FLORIDA. 
 
 Mr. President : It is not my intention to weary the Senate at this hour 
 by rehearsing the story of Mr. Hill s fame. Everything interesting in his 
 public life has been graphically set forth by his able colleague and the 
 senators who followed him, so that there is nothing left for me to do except 
 to put on record my humble testimony of the value of a man like Mr. Hill to 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 15 1 
 
 / 
 
 this country, and my sense of the loss which tins Senate and the nation have 
 sustained in our deceased brother s sad and untimely death. In surveying 
 the Great field of life, and noting the progress which has been made in everv 
 
 Zj *j 1 / 
 
 science and almost every department of knowledge, it would seem from tho 
 little advance or change that has taken place in. the affairs of government 
 that we have reached a point of perfection in the art of ruling States and 
 peoples ; that it is beyond the power of human genius to do more than main 
 tain the spirit and integrity of our existing establishments. 
 
 The best labors of the great minds of this country have been devoted to 
 the work of settling in the public mind the great principles of our admirable 
 systems of government, so that at all times the great body of the people 
 could comprehend the line of separation which divides authority from popu 
 lar rights, and thus secure a loyal support of government on the one hand and 
 a steady and intelligent devotion to liberty on the other. In those unhallowed 
 despotisms of the earth, where man is crushed and oppressed by excessive 
 public power, it is the mystery which surrounds the segis and exercise of 
 governmental authority that sustains the unfortunate relations of tyrant and 
 stave. There nothing is defined, limited, or comprehensible, but all is dark, 
 complicated, and forbidding. The popular mind, long enslaved by super 
 stitious devotion to slavish names and maxims, never sees anything of the 
 light of truth ; and power and authority, united with ignorance and submis 
 sion, keep millions in bondage and chains. 
 
 You mav ask, what has all this to do with the character or merits of 
 
 ff 
 
 the deceased? I answer that in making up my estimate of the loss of 
 our distinguished brother, I cannot overlook the quality which, above all 
 others, made him both eminent and useful. If, as I said awhile ago, we 
 have made no progress in government of late, and have added nothing to 
 the discovery of the fathers for the security or happiness of the people, it is 
 of the highest importance that the work which has been accomplished shall 
 be maintained. The gifted man whom we mourn to-day was especially 
 fitted for the great duty of keeping before the people the beacon-light of 
 political truth to teach them their obligations to themselves and their gov 
 ernment ; to impress upon their minds true conceptions of political liberty, 
 allegiance, and loyalty to the demands of just authority, and the preserva 
 tion of every power and authority which belong to the people and the States. 
 His capacity for this great duty made him a leader of public opinion. In 
 little matters he was not as great as little men. But where the magnitude of 
 the question rose to the level of his great ability, his power of argument was 
 felt here and in the country. 
 
 The ordinary routine worker had then to stand aside, and every one ad 
 mired the workings of his original, incisive mind as it put forth its powerful 
 .arguments in terse and pointed speech. This, after all, is the highest posi 
 tion a public man can occupy in a country like this. Men of detail and 
 method and labor can be found anywhere, and at all times ; but even at a 
 time when everything is in a state of improvement, these grand qualities of 
 mind which immortalized Fox, Pitt, Canning, Grattan, Webster, Clav, 
 and Calhoun are as rare, and far more important, than they ever were. It 
 was Mr. Hill s great ability as an argumentative speaker and writer which 
 gave him his fame. 
 
 He was often called a great orator, but he was more than an orator in 
 fhe popular sense. He always addressed himself to the minds of his 
 bearers. I rrever knew a speaker of the same reputation who drew less 
 
152 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 upon his imagination than Senator Hill. In his over-anxiety to fasten con 
 viction on the mind, he would often labor for the accuracy and precision of 
 the mathematician. While his vocabulary was always strong and simple, 
 in my judgment, it often fell short of the vigor and the depth of his thoughts. 
 Like all truly .great men, he attached more consequence to his ideas than to 
 his language. He was in no sense a wordy, but always a thoughtful 
 speaker. His views of the Constitution were broad and liberal. In his 
 expositions of our great organic law he did not run into the extreme maxims 
 of unlimited power on the one hand, nor seek to abridge, by too narrow 
 bounds, the authority of the Union on the other. While he always admitted 
 that the Constitution of the Union was created by the people of the United 
 States, he ever contended that this was accomplished through separate 
 State agencies the people of each State acting for themselves in the 
 matter of ratification, independent of the people of every other State. 
 
 But this view did not affect in the least his opinion of the supremacy of 
 tl:e Federal Constitution. He always contended that the powers granted 
 by the people of the several States, acting as organized political factions, to 
 the general government, were as irrevocable and as binding upon the people 
 and the States, as though they emanated from the people of the Union with 
 out regard to State organizations. The great argument which he drew from 
 the mode of ratification was that the States and the government of the 
 Union were parts of one system ; that there could be no question of divided 
 allegiance between them ; that the Union could not exist without the States, 
 although the States did exist before the Union. He always advocated a 
 free and liberal exercise of the powers granted this government, but his 
 nature was hostile to everything that had the appearance of usurpation. 
 He was one of the few men in public life who combined high abilities as a 
 political leader with pre-eminent legal talents. Lord Chatham at one time 
 deprecated the presence of the mere lawyer in Parliament, and he said that 
 you might shake the constitution of the land to its center and the lawyer 
 would sit tranquil in his cabinet, but just touch a cobweb in the corner of 
 Westminster Hall and the exasperated spider would crawl out in its 
 defense. 
 
 But this was not the case with Senator Hill. He did not sacrifice the 
 Constitution to the profession. He brought to the one all the support of an 
 enlightened statesman and patriot, full of devotion for the whole country 
 and its institutions, and the other he adorned with legal learning and pro 
 fessional abilities that will long be remembered by the bar. Like all men 
 of strong convictions and great prominence, he was supported by devoted 
 friends, and was not without some enemies. Although he was fondly at 
 tached to his high position, where his talents had full play, and tenderly 
 bound by the ties of affection to his devoted family, the world does not. 
 furnish an example more sublime than that which he has left us in all the 
 qualities of moral and physical courage, true Christian and manly resig 
 nation, patient and uncomplaining submission to the will of God during the 
 long, tedious months that he awaited in agony and suffering the period of 
 his mortal dissolution. All the glory of the Senate and the fame of the 
 hustings fade into insignificance before the grand spectacle presented by 
 this Christian man when the time arrived which tested the weakness of 
 human nature. Whether bleeding under the operations of the surgeon s 
 knife, or silently feeling the gradual but sure inroads of the monster that 
 \vas preying upon him, he never murmured or complained, but accepted 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WHITINGS. 153 
 
 the terrible situation as evidence only of Divine pleasure, and with the 
 firm conviction that his sufferings would be rewarded by a happier life be 
 yond the grave. 
 
 Who can deny the value and efficiency of strong Christian faith with 
 such an example of its power and influence before him? With all the glory 
 and renown of the world fading away before the shadow of eternity, this 
 
 ** * 
 
 strong man, accustomed to all the processes of reason, under the inspiration 
 of Christian hope was able to leave an example of true heroism, more valu 
 able and sublime than any left by the unbelieving philosophers of antiquity. 
 
 ADDRESS OF MR. TUCKER, OF VIRGINIA. 
 
 Mr. Speaker : In the natural grief which Georgia feels for the loss of 
 her great son, it is not fitting that Virginia should manifest her sympathy 
 in silence at the tomb of one who often said he felt like standing in her 
 presence ever with uncovered brow. In this public calamity, which touches 
 the whole country, Virginia begs to lay the tribute of her respect on his 
 
 grave. 
 
 My acquaintance with the late Senator Hill began with our entrance into 
 this hall as members of the Forty-fourth Congress. It ripened into inti 
 macy from an association as members of the Committee on Ways and 
 .Means. That relation has no doubt made it seem appropriate that I should 
 have been invited to say something on this occasion 
 
 In January, 1876, the debate on the amnesty bill was opened with such 
 a display of political excitement and sectional bitterness as I have never 
 seen since that time, and which I am glad to hope will never be seen again 
 in this hall. 
 
 In that debate no one who heard it can ever forget the parliamentary elo 
 quence and ability of Mr. Blaine and of General Garfield, and the no less 
 skillful and powerful speech of Mr. Hill. It was the battle of giants, and 
 Mr. Hill was the equal of any man who took part in it. It placed him at 
 once in the front rank of debaters in the American Congress. 
 
 ^j 
 
 Whether in the labors of the Committee on Ways and Means, on the 
 questions of tariff and finance, or in the discussions in the House, Mr. Hill 
 continued, while a member of this body, to rise higher and higher in public 
 estimation until his election to the Senate in the winter of 1877. 
 
 It is not too much to say that as a senator he fully maintained his high 
 reputation, and measured swords in debate on few occasions in which he 
 was not victor, and in none in which he was vanquished. 
 
 A mortal disease, insidious in its progress and painful in its nature, 
 ended his life in the summer of last year, and the grave has closed upon a 
 career which, though not prolonged to old age, was one of the most brilliant 
 and memorable in our parliamentary history. 
 
 The elements which make up the character of a remarkable man it is 
 interesting to analyze and portray. I feel incompetent to do so satisfactorily 
 in this case; for, while our intercourse was always familiar and cordial, our 
 
 i ** 
 
 relations were not so close and confidential as to have enabled me to judge 
 and measure him with critical accuracy. 
 
 His tall and striking person, his in ave and thoughtful face, his clear but 
 
 _ \J 1 C7 d? 
 
 dreamy eye, and the gleam of sunshine which lit up his countenance when 
 friendly intercourse detached his thoughts from the subject in which his 
 mind was absorbed, all combined to interest, attract, and impress every per- 
 
154 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 son who came in contact with him. His ringing voice ; his earnest, some 
 times vehement, manner ; his bold and aggressive style ; his strong, clear, 
 and logical reasoning ; his exalted and eloquent declamation, and withal his 
 self-reliant and confident assertion of his views, made him one of the most 
 powerful and impressive speakers of his time. 
 
 He worked with intense and concentrated energy. His mind was capable 
 of great abstraction. In the companionship of his own thoughts he became 
 often unconscious of all around him, and his intellectual powers then glowed 
 with the fires of his own enthusiasm. 
 
 He was an intellectual athlete. His strength was not mere dead force, 
 but his sinewy frame enabled him to turn an adversary in the decisive wres 
 tle, w^hen he himself seemed to be overthrown. He was not technical in his 
 reasoning, but cut down to the root of the matter of debate. His nature 
 was bold and aggressive. If his foe was in ambush, he uncovered him and 
 forced him into the open field. His tactical method was assault. He struck 
 for his enemy s center and rarely attacked his flank. But when assailed and 
 in retreat, he would suddenly turn upon his foe, retrieve his loss, attack on 
 flank or center as best he might, and snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. 
 He was formidable in the opening of battle, chiefly for attack, but he was as 
 dangerous in retreat at its close, when pressed by a too confident oppo 
 nent. Disaster did not dismay mishap did not demoralize him. His 
 ample resources were adequate to any emergency, and he would convert 
 what seemed a fatal mistake into the source of a final triumph by his quick 
 and bold repulse of his assailant, which he often pushed to a complete rout of 
 his forces. He argued from the workshop of his own brain. He intensified 
 thought upon the issue, and discarding authority and extrinsic aids, drew 
 from the well -furnished armory of his own mind the weapons and munitions 
 for the conduct of his warfare. 
 
 These qualities made him a great advocate at the bar, whether before 
 juries or courts, and a great debater in the halls of legislation ; indeed as for 
 midable in these respects as any man of his day. 
 
 I believe he thought best on his feet. The fervor of his intellect made his 
 arguments present convictions which might pass away and give place to 
 others as strong under mental action at another time. To this peculiarity in 
 his mental operations was due what seemed a lack of consistency sometimes 
 in the conclusions he reached. His intellectual activity was so powerful as 
 to make him seem intolerant to his opponents ; but I do not believe it 
 touched his heart. He struck the shield of his foe as a knight in the tourna 
 ment, vigorously, but without animosity ; and when the strife was ended he 
 could lift up the adversary he had struck down and clasp him in friendly re 
 gard with the hand which dealt the blow. 
 
 In his social life, while often abstracted by the thoughts which absorbed 
 him, he was genial, kind, and loving. Generous and brave, lie grappled to 
 him friends with hooks of steel. Honest in his dealing, sincere and truthful 
 in his intercourse, and cordial in his friendships, he died mourned by hosts of 
 warm admirers and followers. 
 
 He was not, I think, a great reader of books. For works of fiction lie 
 had no taste. He told me once he had never read one of Scott s novels, 
 after I had playfully called him in debate a Dalgetty, of whose name and 
 character he was ignorant. But his reading was such as strengthened his 
 powerful mind, and furnished his style with the materials which gave grace 
 and beauty to the solid and simple Doric of his severe and classic oratory. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 155 
 
 It was natural for such a man to have ambition. The eaglet in his home 
 nest on the mountain cliff feels in his unfledged wing the power to soar 
 toward the object on which he ever looks with unblenched eye. So genius, 
 with prophetic instinct, aspires to achieve its conscious destiny. It seeks, or 
 at least may not, without fault, put aside the opportunity which will enable 
 it to do so. When Lord Selborne reached the woolsack, some friend con 
 gratulated him on attaining the summit of his ambition. In substance he 
 replied, " Not so ; I have gained the opportunity to serve my country ; the 
 summit of my ambition is to serve her well, and to do good." 
 
 Such ambition is a noble virtue. The aspiration to uphold the right, to 
 destroy the wrong, and to do good, is all of human glory which it is tit for 
 human life to aspire to win. That passion for place and office, without con 
 sciousness of ability to fill it well and for the public good, is base and mean ; 
 it is a vice, the vice of our day, and leads to crime. 
 
 Mr. Hill aspired for public positions from the self-consciousness of his 
 fitness to serve his country in and through them. In him it was a noble 
 virtue. 
 
 He bore his prolonged and painful illness with patience, fortitude, and 
 resignation. As the hopes of continued life faded away, the light of immor 
 tality gleamed upon his latter days with the assurance of peace and eternal 
 joy. The tongue which had thrilled the multitude and electrified the forum 
 and the Senate, palsied by his mortal disease, faltered and was almost still. 
 Yet it cheers us to know that in the death valley through which his great 
 soul was called to pass, God gave that tongue the power to whisper in tones 
 of touching tenderness and faith, as his eagle eye gazed upon the opening 
 glories of the immortal life, * Almost home ! 
 
 The paths of glory lead but to the grave. 
 
 No farther ? Ay ! through the grave, where human glory ends, the 
 Christian hope plants our feet upon that path which leads to celestial glory 
 in the bosom of our Father and our God ! 
 
 ADDRESS OF MR. HOUSE, OF TENNESSEE. 
 
 Mr. Speaker : When the hand of death struck the name of Benjamin H. 
 Hill, of Georgia, from the roll of senators, the sad event was deplored not 
 only by the State that had honored him, but by the whole country. All 
 realized the fact that a man of great intellectual power had fallen, and that 
 a vacancy had been made in the national councils which could not be readily 
 supplied. 
 
 I well remember the first time I ever met him. It was at a mass-meeting 
 during the presidential campaign of 1860, at Knoxville, Tennessee. His 
 fame even at that time, when he was comparatively a young man, had 
 traveled beyond the limits of his own State. I recall most vividly the 
 impression he made on me on that occasion, as one of the most eloquent and 
 powerful popular orators to whom I had ever listened. The crowd was 
 numbered by the thousand, and the speaking took place in the open air in a 
 beautiful grove near the town. Without much seeming effort on his 
 part, he held the undivided attention of the vast assembly during an address 
 of some two or three hours. I can never forget the trepidation and mis 
 givings with which I arose, according to the program of the day, to address 
 the audience on the same side of the question, through fear that it would be 
 
156 SENATOR R II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 impossible for me to say anything that would interest a crowd that had 
 listened to his magnificent effort. 
 
 I saw him no more until I met him at Richmond, in the fall of 1861, as a 
 member of the Provisional Congress of the Confederate States. At the end 
 of the Provisional Congress our paths diverged. He entered the Confederate 
 Senate, where he served during the remainder of the war. 
 
 The next time I met him was in this hall as a member of the Forty-fourth 
 Congress. That Congress was the first one after the war to which full dele 
 gations of representative men were admitted from the Southern States. 
 They came to Washington fully impressed with the difficulties and complica 
 tions that surrounded them. They felt that the people whom they represented, 
 greatly impoverished by the war and struggling to repair their ruined fortunes, 
 would be held to a strict accountability for the actions and utterances of 
 their representatives. Thus impressed and thus appreciating the dangerous 
 ground on which they stood, and the delicate relations which they sustained 
 to the government, they determined to tread the path of patriotic duty so 
 plainly and firmly that none could fail to see that they fully and honestly 
 acquiesced in the results of the war, and were prepared to discharge in good 
 faith every demand imposed by the conditions of a restored Union and the 
 common welfare of a reunited people. I think I know the animus of the 
 Southern men who took their seats in this hall as representatives in the 
 Forty-fourth Congress. Whether I have stated it truly and fairly I con 
 fidently leave the records they have made here to determine. 
 
 Soon after the assembling of that Congress a general amnesty bill was 
 introduced in the House by Hon. Samuel J. Randall, of Pennsylvania, being 
 similar in all respects to a bill which had on two previous occasions passed 
 the House of Representatives but failed in the Senate. The question arose 
 of admitting Jefferson Davis to the benefits of the act. A distinguished 
 representative from Maine, in the course of his remarks, used this strong and 
 emphatic language : 
 
 And I, here before God, measuring my words, knowing their full extent and import, 
 declare that neither the deeds of the Duke of Alva in the Low Countries, nor the massacre 
 of St. Bartholomew, nor the thumb-screws and engines of torture of the Spanish In 
 quisition, begin to compare in atrocity with the hideous crime of Andersonville. 
 
 Up to this time no Southern man had taken any part in the proceedings. 
 The discussion had not proceeded far before it became evident that it was 
 destined to provoke more or less of sectional bitterness. The representatives 
 from the South deprecated and deplored the agitation of questions growing 
 out of the war. They felt that all such agitation was mischievous in its 
 tendency and could be productive of no good to their section of the country, 
 and they were anxious that all such questions should be relegated to the 
 tribunal of histoiy. But as the discussion progressed it assumed a character 
 which in their opinion demanded that a reply should be made from a South 
 ern standpoint. Mr. Hill, from his known intimate relations with Jefferson 
 Davis during the war, as well as from his acknowledged ability, was gener 
 ally recognized as the most appropriate Southern man to speak for his 
 section in a debate which all felt was destined to become historic. But little 
 time for preparation was allowed him, as the discussion arose rather unex 
 pectedly. I know he felt deeply the responsibility and delicacy of his 
 position. To defend the Confederate government against the charges brought 
 against it, and maintain the honor of the Southern name, without saying any- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 15" 
 
 thing that would militate against the interests of the Southern people in tlm 
 prevailing temper of the public mind of the North, required the exercise oi 
 the coolest judgment and the nicest discrimination. Thus restrained and 
 shackled by the grave considerations which surrounded the situation, he felt 
 that he could not indulge the usual freedom of debate, and was therefore 
 forced to meet his adversaries upon unequal terms. When he arose to address 
 the House, he faced a most attentive audience upon the floor and in the 
 crowded galleries. It was an occasion of deep solicitude and dramatic interest. 
 I will not risk the imputation of intruding improper and unwelcome sugges 
 tions upon this occasion by even a reference to the points or details of the 
 discussion. It was watched with the keenest interest by both sides of this 
 Chamber, and in fact by the whole country. It aroused feelings which, I am 
 happy to say, time has softened and tempered, and which I would be the last 
 to recall from the shades of the unhappy past. But justice to the dead re 
 quires that I should not omit to say that, difficult as were the requirements 
 of the occasion, Southern representatives and the Southern people felt that 
 their good name suffered no detriment from want of ability in its defender. 
 
 Mr. Speaker, I recall another prominent figure in that memorable debate. 
 James A. Garfield, of Ohio, replied to Mr. Hill. If any one had been called 
 on at that time to point out two men on this floor whose robust health and 
 vigorous manhood gave the greatest promise of a long life, the selection 
 could not have fallen upon any two members more appropriately than upon 
 James A. Garfield and Benjamin H. Hill. How little we know or can know 
 of what the future has in store for us. How soon were these two distin 
 guished men, who encountered each other in that debate, doomed to leave 
 this world under circumstances of lingering and protracted suffering that 
 stirred the sympathies of all. 
 
 The former, in a short while, was transferred by the voice of his State from 
 this House to the Senate, and before he could assume the duties of a Senator 
 the voice of the American people called him to the Presidency. Honors were 
 showered upon him with a profusion that left ambition but little to desire, 
 lie was inaugurated amid the well-wishes of the whole country. But 
 while the thickly clustered laurels upon his brow were yet wet with morning 
 dew at a moment least expected, in the heart of a populous city, in sight of 
 the Capitol the bullet of a beastly and vulgar assassin laid him low. The 
 national heart stood still with horror when the first shock of the great crime 
 was felt. As the distinguished sufferer lay upon his bed of pain, the hearts 
 of his countrymen, of all parties and all sections, visited the chamber where he 
 struggled with death, breathing sympathy for his condition and hope for 
 his recovery. This painful solicitude was merged into universal sorrow 
 when the telegraph bore the news to every part of the country that the 
 struggle was over. The Democrat forgot that he was a Republican Presi 
 dent, and the Southern man that he belonged to the North. All party, all 
 sectional feeling was lost in the profound gloom that pervaded the whole 
 country. He had met his fate and borne his great sufferings with a patient 
 fortitude and lofty courage which silenced all criticism and melted all hearts, 
 while it intensified the universal horror with which the assassin s crime was 
 regarded. For, Mr. Speaker, whatever maybe true of other peoples and other 
 lands, the crime of assassination can never be looked upon by the American 
 people with other feelings than those of execration and abhorrence. It is a 
 noxious plant that can never flourish in our soil. General Garfield reached 
 the highest position to which human ambition can aspire ; but the grandest 
 
158 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 proportions which his character ever assumed were displayed in the heroism 
 of his death-bed. 
 
 Mr. Hill was likewise called by the voice of his State to a seat in the 
 Senate. This was a field much better suited for the exercise of his great 
 gifts than the House of Representatives, and he soon gained in that body 
 the front rank as a debater and a statesman of great and varied attainments. 
 His speech in the Senate in the debate on the bill prohibiting the use of 
 troops at the polls was recognized by all who heard it or read it as an effort 
 of transcendent ability. His analysis and exposition of our dual system of 
 government, defining the powers that belonged to the States and those that 
 belonged to the Federal government under the Constitution, were thorough 
 and profound. That speech alone was sufficient to rank him in the first 
 class of American statesmen, and to that class he undoubtedly belonged. 
 As a debater he had few equals, even among the distinguished men whose 
 learning and ability dignify and adorn the American Senate. Whether on 
 the hustings, addressing the masses of the people ; in the forum before judges 
 and juries, or in the halls of Congress discussing great questions of national 
 importance, he never failed to impress himself upon those who heard him as 
 a man of great power and ability. No antagonist, whatever his fame or 
 prowess, ever encountered him upon any of those fields of intellectual gladia- 
 ture without feeling that he stood in the presence of a foeman worthy of 
 his steel. But in the prime and plenitude of his great powers, when he felt 
 the solid ground of a well-earned national reputation beneath his feet and a 
 long and a brilliant career of honor and usefulness opening up before him, 
 the admonition of death came, not it is true, in the guise of an assassin s 
 bullet, but in a form almost as tragic and no less certain. 
 
 Soon after the meeting of the present Congress, I visited the court-room 
 where President Garfield s assassin was being tried for his life. On leaving, 
 I met Senator Hill, and we walked some distance together. On the way I 
 inquired as to the condition of the malady that had excited his fears and 
 the apprehension of his friends. I found him hopeful and cheerful, and even 
 buoyant, under the conviction that he had experienced the worst and that 
 he was now in a sure way to permanent and final recovery. But not a great 
 while afterward I heard that he had been compelled to again seek the offices 
 of his surgeon. I felt then that he was a doomed man doomed to excru- 
 tiating suffering and certain death. 
 
 With his robust constitution and great strength of will he made a brave 
 fight for his life, and sought all the means within his power to preserve and 
 prolong it. But all efforts proved unavailing, and at last he went home to 
 die. Within its peaceful bosom, surrounded by his family and friends, and 
 by the people who admired and loved and honored him, he looked death 
 calmly in the face as he watched its approaches day by day, and knew that 
 nothing could avert the inevitable hour. How less than nothingness must 
 have appeared to him all the glories of this world as he passed through his 
 terrible ordeal of suffering to the grave that he saw opening to receive him. 
 Distinguished as wa s his life, all the honors that clustered around it fade 
 
 C-7 9 i 
 
 into insignificance in the presence of the sublime courage and Christian 
 patience and resignation that crowned his death. 
 
 Men in the whirl of busy life and the carnival of earthly ambition may 
 treat with a sneer or a jest the power of the Christian religion to sustain the 
 struggling soul amid the agonies of dissolving nature and the gloorn of ap 
 proaching death ; but that sneer is robbed, of its sting, and that jest loses 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 159 
 
 its point, beside the beds of protracted suffering and lingering death from 
 which the victorious spirits of James A. Garfield and Benjamin II. Hill left 
 their wasted tenements of clay. 
 
 Mr. Speaker, sooner or later our struggle with the last enemy must 
 come ; for whatever may be our hopes, our ambition, our schemes for the 
 future, or may have been our achievements in the past, we may be assured 
 of one fact time will overlook and death forget none of us. And in that 
 solemn hour which witnesses the exchange of worlds, the obscurest Christian 
 that has honestly endeavored, during an unobtrusive life, to do his duty 
 toward God and man is more to be envied than the tallest son of intel 
 lectual pride, though he may have walked the mountain ranges of human 
 thought, without God and without hope in the world. 
 
 ADDRESS OF MR. WELLBORN, OF TEXAS. 
 
 Mr. Speaker : "How peaceful and how powerful is the grave ! r 
 
 The qualities here ascribed to humanity s final resting-place are none the 
 less true because poetically asserted. The grave is an abode of peace and 
 an instrumentality of power. In both essentials it is above the vicissitudes 
 of time, " Bulwarked around and armed with rising towers," earthly forces 
 cannot break through nor raze. 
 
 Whether the sun shines in brightness, or the clouds droop murkily ; 
 whether gentle breezes touch lightly, or the storm king rides upon the 
 whirlwind, the condition of the grave is always that of repose. Enraged 
 elements may beat down the monument, remorseless earthquakes swallow 
 up the vault, but in the ideal grave, of which the monument and vault are 
 but unsubstantial types, peace abideth ever. 
 
 Tranquil is the sleep of him upon whose honored grave the representa 
 tives of millions of people, arrested for awhile in their ordinary labors, are 
 now laying the merited tributes of a nation s esteem ; tranquil will it 
 remain until after the latter days, when the promised summons, spoke by 
 angel tongue, shall awake from the embrace of death and call forth the 
 released captive to those awards of brightness and joy, which, on the testi 
 monies of time, have already been entered up in the record-book of 
 eternity. 
 
 It is not the peace, however, but the power of the grave which the 
 memorial services of this hour most strongty proclaim. Opportunities 
 neglected and opportunities abused have caused thousands, in dying, to 
 leave behind them but few evidences of their having been ; or if manv, 
 
 ij u 
 
 only sad proofs of misspent and mischievous lives. Hence, " Lived to little 
 purpose," or " Lived to a bad purpose," would be inscribed on many tomb 
 stones if they were truly epitaphed. 
 
 Not so of the marble column which will point coming generations to the 
 consecrated spot where lie entombed the ashes of Georgia s great senator. 
 The matchless talents nature gave him were early dedicated to high aims, 
 and the fruitful opportunities the wise improvement of those talents afforded 
 shaped to their best uses. From the peace of his grave, therefore, rises in 
 power an example worthy of all imitation, grandly illustrating how native 
 talents, usefully employed and properly directed, can achieve wide and lasting 
 renown in different and difficult walks of life, and how, in the supreme 
 solemnity of the last hour, when earth and time are fast fading from view, 
 they can nerve the soul of a feeble, wasted frame to bravely and trium- 
 
160 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 phantly cross over the dark borders of that mysterious land before whose 
 veiled terrors strong manhood is wont to tremble. 
 
 The example thus presented for our contemplation is made up from the 
 experiences of Mr. Hill in private, professional, and public life. Of the last 
 two only will I speak, leaving to others more familiar with it the portrayal 
 of the first. It is not my purpose to undertake a narrative of events, but 
 simply a hurried statement of traits of character which distinguished him in 
 the public walks to which fortune or inclination called him. And in this \ 
 shall not aim at completeness, but only give a few of the impressions made 
 on my mind by a general observation of him as a lawyer, an orator, a states 
 man, and a patriot ; nor shall I communicate these impressions in words of 
 studied panegyric. Too well do I recognize, as applied to Mr. Hill, the 
 truth of the apostrophe : 
 
 Nature doth mourn for thee. There is no need 
 For man to strike his plaintive lyre and fail, 
 As fail he must, if he attempt thy praise. 
 
 The splendid triumphs of Mr. Hill s maturer years at the bar show that 
 he must have mastered the law as a science during the period of his pro 
 fessional pupilage. His attainments were not limited to a few scattering 
 rules and forms picked up from particular decisions used in cases with 
 which he was connected, but were opinions and convictions formed from a 
 searching and comprehensive study of jurisprudence as a grand system of 
 principles resting on immutable foundations of right and justice. For the 
 discovery of these principles he looked to the exercise of his own reason, 
 and in forensic contests relied mainly on a conscious knowledge of the prin 
 ciples thus discovered. Adjudicated cases he regarded as but instances 
 illustrating and applying principles. In other words, his own reason, 
 strengthened and equipped by the pupilage before mentioned, discovered 
 and applied general principles ; precedents were invoked largely, if not 
 only to support and confirm the conclusions of his own mind. This view 
 accounts for the singular readiness and accuracy with which he could meet 
 the various and often unexpected exigencies which complicated suits are 
 liable to develop during the processes of trial. 
 
 Mr. Hill combined within himself the jurist and the advocate. He was 
 gifted with perception to discern and judgment to apply appropriate princi 
 ples to given states of facts. Pie had also a logical and perspicuous style. 
 The union of these qualities made him clear and forcible in the statement 
 and proof of his premises, and powerful if not resistless in the conclusions 
 he sought to establish. In law, as in politics, he was distinguished for orig 
 inality of thought rather than scholarship. His was the grander power to 
 originate, not the lesser faculty of appropriating the creations of others. He 
 was a model, not a type. However so great the excellency he may have 
 attained unto in other pursuits, the judicial history of Georgia, as well as 
 the traditions of her people, will always claim his legal attainments and fo 
 rensic triumphs as among the most brilliant experiences of his brilliant life. 
 
 To intellectuality Mr. Hill added the power to feel and to will. These 
 mental endowments, with his fluency of language and at times impassioned 
 delivery, formed for him what he became one of the great orators of his 
 day. 
 
 Eloquence is defined to be "the utterance of strong emotion in a man 
 ner adapted to excite correspondent emotion in others. It ordinarily implies 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 161 
 
 elevated and forcible thought, well-chosen language, an easy and effective 
 utterance, and an impassioned manner." Those who ever heard Mr. Hill at 
 the bar, in legislative halls, or on the stump, when the energies of his nature 
 were thoroughly aroused, could not have failed to recognize in his effort 
 marvelous and unmistakable manifestations of all these qualities. I remem 
 ber to have heard a speech he once made on a noted occasion, characterized 
 by a critical auditor as " logic on fire." And it was logic, burning logic ; 
 not the formal disputation of a schoolman, but the power of passionately 
 expressed thought, unto the conviction and moving of his hearers : 
 
 And each man would turn 
 And gaze on his neighbor s face, 
 That with the like dumb wonder answered him. 
 
 You could have heard 
 
 The beating of your pulses while he spoke. 
 
 The traits and acquirements which made Mr. Hill renowned as a lawyer 
 and an orator fitted him for greatness in the arts of government. In these, 
 after political engagements and official station brought his mind to bear upon 
 them, he soon became deeply versed, and took rank with the foremost states 
 men of his day. The question " How can men be best governed ? " was with 
 him a subject of profound thought and philosophic research. He rightly looked 
 upon it as a problem whose perfect solution the great minds of the w r orld on 
 memorable trials had failed to work out. The records of history, which he 
 widely and usefully explored, instructed him that philosophy, with all its 
 achievements in the realms of political science, had not been able to impart 
 perfection or permanency to any civil fabric yet built, and that even the 
 testimonies to its mightiest triumphs were chiefly chronicled in the disman 
 tled wrecks of the institutions it founded. He had fully learned the great 
 lesson taught by ages of experience, that human infirmities will always im 
 press their images on political as well as other human establishments, and 
 that the Utopia of fiction could never exist in fact. 
 
 The Constitution of the American Union, to which his best thought was 
 long and profitably given, he considered the nearest approach to perfection 
 in governmental structure human effort had yet attained. Under the meth 
 ods, however, which even this instrument provided, he was prepared to 
 see measures consummated which his judgment condemned as errors and 
 told him were fraught with disaster and woe. Emergencies of this kind, 
 the crucial tests of character, did not confound his faculties, but rather 
 stimulated them to the most reliable, if not highest exertions of statesman 
 ship, namely, to see when a thing was inevitable, and, accepting it as such, 
 to make the best of the situation, however bad it might be. He lost no 
 time, therefore, in bewailing accomplished facts, but when proposed meas 
 ures against which he warred became irreversible policies, his quick, com 
 prehensive perception took in the whole situation, and he at once applied 
 himself not to a continuance of vain resistance but the more sensible work 
 of so controlling these policies as to avert, as far as possible, the ruin they 
 threatened, and bring out of them the best attainable results. This quality 
 of statesmanship, which, on close analysis, will be found to be nothing more 
 nor less than the power of judicious selection between evils, Mr. Hill notably 
 exhibited in his political course prior to and during the late war. 
 
 From 1855 up to the passage of the declaratory resolution by the Con 
 vention of Georgia, January 18, 1861, he combated the disunion sentiment 
 
162 SENATOR R II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 with all the force and earnestness of his nature. The motives which in 
 fluenced him were his attachment to the Union under the Constitution, and 
 his desire to avert the calamities he profoundly believed war would bring 
 upon the South. 
 
 For years he did all man could do to stay the swelling tide of popular 
 sentiment, drifting his State and section, as he firmly believed, into a night 
 of storm and tempest whose starless gloom would prove intenser than Mem- 
 phian darkness. His efforts were ineffectual. The declaratory resolution 
 before referred to, against which he voted, fixed and determined Georgia s 
 policy. 
 
 The die was cast. Then it was, under a high sense of duty to his State, 
 he accepted as inevitable what he had struggled to prevent, and recorded his 
 vote in favor of the ordinance, believing this to be the initial and an impor 
 tant step to the unification of his people in the course they had determined, 
 against his judgment, to adopt. Of the conspicuous part he bore during the 
 convulsive throes that ensued I shall not speak further than to say that all 
 investigations and researches thus far made into that period of storm and 
 gloom have but served to confirm and draw out in bolder lines, as his shining 
 characteristics, an intellect equal to every emergency in which he was placed, 
 a fidelity to conviction nothing could swerve, a resolution difficulties could 
 not unsettle, a courage dangers could not appall, and a fortitude whose en 
 durance no adversities could exhaust. This chapter of manly virtues will 
 ever be held in warm remembrance by his associates in misfortune and de 
 feat, and can but be read with respectful attention even by those who con 
 demn the cause in which these virtues were displayed. 
 
 Mr. Hill s abilities as a lawyer, an orator, and statesman were subjected, 
 while he was in public life, to the guidance of one grand sentiment : " The 
 noblest motive is the public good." 
 
 He loved his country with an intensity and ardor only lofty and generous 
 natures can know. Good government he considered the highest boon that 
 could be bestowed on a people. For this he sought and studied long and 
 diligently. The result of this search and study was one of the profoundest 
 and most valued convictions of his life, namely, that there was no other form 
 of government, nor had there ever been one, comparable to the Union under 
 the Constitution. Hear him as he tells to a listening Senate, in stately 
 phrase, the excellency of this government: 
 
 It is the noblest government, the greatest government that human wisdom ever de 
 vised, and it could not have been framed by human wisdom alone. The human intellect 
 never existed in this world that could from its own evolutions have wrought out such a 
 
 thing as this Constitution of the United States It is a government such as Roman 
 
 never dreamed of, such as Grecian never conceived, and such as European never had the 
 power to evolve. When the American people, either for the purpose of dismembering 
 r the States or of destroying them, shall destroy this unparalleled government, this govern 
 ment without a model, this government without a prototype, they will have destroyed a 
 government which seems to have been wisely adapted to the peculiar condition of the time 
 and to all their future wants, and they will launch out on a sea of uncertainty, the result 
 of which no man can forecast. 
 
 Hear him again, as he declares to a vast multitude at his own home, in 
 rapid, beautiful utterance, his admiration for the American system of gov 
 ernment : 
 
 My countrymen, have you ever studied this wonderful American system of free gov 
 ernment ? Have you compared it with former systems and noted how our fathers sought 
 to avoid their defects ? Let me commend this study to every American citizen to-day. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 163 
 
 To him who loves liberty it is more enchanting than romance, more bewitching than 
 love, and more elevating than any other science. Our fathers adopted this plan with 
 improvements in the details which cannot be found in any other system. With what a 
 noble impulse of patriotism they came together from different States and joined their 
 counsels to perfect this system, thenceforward to be known as the " American system of 
 free constitutional government." The snows that fall on Mount Washington are not 
 purer than the motives which begot it. The fresh dew-laden zephyrs from the orange 
 groves of the South are not sweeter than the hopes its advent inspired. The flight of our 
 own symbolic eagle, though he blow his breath on the sun, cannot be higher than its 
 expected destiny. 
 
 Mr. Speaker, the voice of patriotism calls to us to-day from the grave of 
 the great Georgian. In silence more eloquent than stirring language it 
 points us to the "American system of free constitutional government" as 
 the " noblest government, the greatest government, that human wisdom 
 ever devised." It impresses upon us that this system is the one founded by 
 \Yaslrington and other patriots of the Revolution ; that it is hallowed by 
 sacred memories and freighted with precious hopes ; that, though the right 
 ful inheritance of one people, humanity everywhere has an interest in its 
 preservation ; that, if in an evil hour it should perish, its ruins would en 
 tomb forever the institutions of freedom and give a new birth to the estab 
 lishments of despotism. 
 
 By all these high considerations it pleads for the perpetuation of this in 
 comparable system of government, "this government without a model, this 
 government without a prototype," and points out the path of public duty, 
 by urging as the measure of public worth, " that he shall be the greatest 
 patriot, the truest patriot, the noblest patriot, who shall do most to repair 
 the wrongs of the past and promote the glories of the future." 
 
 Mr. Speaker, the touching scenes and incidents of Mr. Hill s last sick 
 ness were a fitting close to the illustrious labors of his active life. The 
 intellect, the resolution, the courage, the fortitude which had sustained him 
 in the latter did not desert him in the former. But, added to these, was a 
 fuller reliance than ever on that unseen arm which alone can guide through 
 the dark valley and shadow of death. So composedly did he contemplate 
 his near dissolution that he was able to say, " But for the good I had hoped 
 to do my family and country, I should regard the announcement, I must 
 die/ as joyful tidings." 
 
 Above all, how entrancing the vision it was granted him to see just be 
 fore death took him away, and which he pictured so aptly in the last two 
 words he ever spoke, "Almost home! 1 Home! A magic word. The 
 English language has no brighter, the English tongue can speak no sweeter. 
 It names the best spot on earth, the radiant center of pure sentiments and 
 heaven-approved attachments. Thitherward the wanderer in distant lands 
 ever turns his eye in bright expectancy ; and when he has been long and 
 tar away, and at last nears the loved place, and familiar objects begin to 
 gladden his eye, the tired limbs may almost give out, but the hope-buoyed 
 spirit exclaims, " Almost home ! " 
 
 The end was at hand. The wanderings of time were over. Eternitv s 
 glories were breaking around. The dying senator "spoke out in full and 
 even triumphant accent, Almost home ! " The pulse throbbed its last 
 beat, and the spirit flew to its God and immortal destiny. 
 
164 SENATOR R II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 ADDRESS OF MR. KASSON, OF IOWA. 
 
 Mr. Speaker : I deeply regret that, contrary to well-ordered custom, I 
 am obliged to speak to-day touching the honored dead without the prepara 
 tion which properly characterizes such an occasion. I learn to-day that 
 those of my colleagues on this side of the House who, from old association 
 with Mr. Hill, late senator, were best fitted to speak of his character and to 
 make just appreciation of those qualities which attracted the attention of 
 the whole country, were by illness and other special causes prevented from 
 taking part in the ceremonies of this day. 
 
 Unwilling that this side of the House, which had also been a witness of 
 the distinguished ability of Senator Hill while he was a member of this 
 body, should be unheard on this occasion, I venture to trespass on the kind 
 ness of my colleagues while I say, extemporaneously, a few words upon his 
 character and his services. 
 
 We from the States of the North had only that opportunity to become 
 acquainted with Mr. Hill, which was offered by his comparatively brief 
 public career upon this floor. Some of us, including myself, were on the 
 floor at the time of that great debate to which so frequent reference has 
 been made by my colleagues upon the other side. Few men had a higher 
 appreciation of the intellectual qualities developed by Mr. Hill in that dis 
 cussion than myself. My sympathy with the views which he combated 
 could not blind me to his power in debate. 
 
 I am obliged to speak of his qualities chiefly from my memory of that 
 session, and especially of that occasion. There were in him certain traits of 
 character which have led me to compare him with Oliver Cromwell among 
 persons of English history, and with but few known to American history. 
 He combined great self-poise and apparent consciousness of power with a 
 certain solid, adamantine honesty of purpose which gave to the movements 
 of his intellect unusual, extraordinary strength. Earnest in countenance, 
 he expressed in that respect only the earnestness of his nature. He moved 
 with solidity in the development of his intellectual forces. He could not be 
 cast off his balance by any light attack whatever. He kept the main objec 
 tion point always in view. His mind, like Cromwell s, was impregnated 
 with a sense of the obligations of religion. No man can be a great power 
 in a Christian country without this inward sense of responsibility to a greater 
 power, a power greater, higher than the people, and to whom the people 
 themselves owe allegiance and acknowledge responsibility. It is the strong 
 rock in human character to which, above all other qualities, the people 
 themselves attach their confidence. 
 
 While I recognize these great controlling elements of the human mind in 
 him, I did not fail to see that he, like most of us, was still animated chiefly by 
 his great sense of responsibility to that part of the country which he repre 
 sented. I recognized that same honesty of character when he determined 
 that the sentiments of those who elected him should be also fairly mani 
 fested on this floor, and should be maintained by all the force of debate. 
 
 And while from our point of view we often thought we discovered in 
 him a strength of prejudice which was ineradicable, we also were obliged to 
 remember that our opponents, bearing the same relation to us as we to him, 
 would find for the same reason, for identically the same cause, ground to 
 believe that our views also were influenced or controlled by prejudice of 
 section and of association. 
 
BIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 165 
 
 Sir, I cannot speak of Mr. Hill s character prior to his entrance into the 
 Forty-fourth Congress. We knew him to be a man of power. We in the 
 North rejoiced when we heard that his voice was lifted to save us from the 
 disasters that followed the opening era of secession. We mourned when 
 we found that naturally, if not logically for we appreciated that it was 
 natural he cast in his lot with his own State for disunion and separate 
 government. But we rejoiced again when at the close of that great strug 
 gle, as shown by the gentleman from Georgia who first spoke to-day [Mr. 
 Hammond], he again presented himself in the front of that column which 
 sought to return to the Union with honesty of purpose, with perfect integ 
 rity of heart, and with an earnest desire to do their duty to the whole 
 country as faithfully as they had done it to their own section. I prefer to 
 remember Mr. Hill from such utterances in that speech, to which reference 
 has been made, as this : 
 
 "We had well hoped that the country had suffered long enough from feuds, from 
 strife, and from inflamed passions ; and we came here, sir, with the patriotic purpose to 
 remember nothing but the country and the whole country, and, turning our backs on the 
 horrors of the past, to look with all earnestness to find glories for the future. 
 
 When a man like Mr. Hill returns to what we may fairly call his first 
 love and his first devotion, it means more than the flippant remark of one 
 who desires to turn a phrase in oratory. He was of that rugged honesty of 
 nature that, whether or not wholly justified by an impartial judgment in 
 the course he took upon any question, he never failed to impress his audi 
 ence with the certainty and honesty of his conviction and of the opinion he 
 professed to entertain. I mourn when such a man passes from the midst of 
 us. I regret deeply that the Senate will no longer hear his voice nor have 
 the benefit of his sound judgment. 
 
 Sir, among the many sorrows which death inflicts upon the human breast, 
 it carries with it one blessing. It is the disposition which then comes to us 
 all, to give to charity and justice their due dominion over intellect and heart 
 as we stand by the grave of the dead. Would to God that while all are 
 alive we could equally feel and exercise those qualities in regard to our 
 associates, whether opponent or friend. 
 
 I take to myself, I think we can all take to ourselves, from the comments 
 made upon such a character as Mr. Hill s, the thought how much more prof 
 itably, how much more agreeably, more patriotically, our duties on this floor 
 would be discharged if we could carry from his grave to our work here the 
 sentiments with which we all find ourselves inspired as we look into the face 
 of the dead. No higher tribute to the character which we now commemo 
 rate could be given than that each of us should attempt to exercise, in all our 
 relations, those virtues which we here celebrate as the ennobling qualities of 
 him to whose memory we this day render the final honors. 
 
 ADDRESS OF MR. HOOKER, OF MISSISSIPPI. 
 
 Mr. Speaker : Having been invited by my friend from Georgia [Mr. 
 Hammond], who sits beside me, to say something on this occasion, I have 
 felt it my duty to accept that invitation, because of the relations which have 
 existed between the people of my own State and the great State of Georgia, 
 to whose distinguished senator we have assembled here to-day to pay the 
 last solemn obsequies ; for while the daughter has somewhat outgrown the 
 
166 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 mother in many respects, she has not ceased to feel filial affection for that great 
 country which supplied so man}?" of her early citizens. As it is not my cus 
 tom to write speeches, on any occasion, I am constrained to speak to-day, so 
 far as affection for the dead is concerned, rather from the heart than from 
 the head. 
 
 With reference to the private life of the great statesman whose death we 
 mourn, I can say but little except what I gather from the friends who lived 
 closer to him than it was my fortune to do. But in regard to his public 
 character, and the two aspects in which it presents itself to the world at 
 large, I will say a few words. 
 
 Benjamin H. Hill underwent as a part of his education the severe train 
 ing of a lawyer. It was in this aspect that he first presented himself to the 
 people of his own State. His mind was formed by that vigorous discipline 
 which belongs to the profession of the law. It made him logical. He is said to 
 have excelled especially in that great power of the lawyer, the statement of his 
 case. This he made so simply, so briefly, so lucidly, that the most unintelli 
 gent court must seize the salient facts of the case. It was in his capacity as 
 a lawyer that Mr. Hill was first known to the people of his own State for his 
 distinguished ability as a reasoner and an orator. I have heard from a 
 friend of his an incident of his early life, when he was employed to defend a 
 man charged with murder. That defense was assumed by him in the courts, 
 and he failed. 
 
 At that time in the State of Georgia it was within the power of the de 
 fendant in a case of this kind to appeal to the Senate of the State. Mr. Hill 
 made that appeal, not so much in behalf of the defendant himself as of the 
 aged and widowed mother, from whose heart he wished to avert the blow 
 which would fall upon the head of her son. He went into the State Senate 
 with his case, with a widowed mother leaning on his arm. 
 
 This gentleman describes the scene as he witnessed it one in which Mr. 
 Hill looked, for the first time in his life, pallid with excitement, because of 
 the great responsibility which rested upon him ; for in all his advocacy at the 
 bar he was impressed with the sentiment of the great responsibility resting 
 upon the advocate and the intimate relation between the advocate and his 
 client ; a sentiment which has been beautifully, though perhaps somewhat too 
 strongly, expressed by one of the greatest of English lawyers and English 
 premiers, Lord Brougham, when he declared that it is the duty of a lawyer 
 to stand by the interest of his client even to the upturning of the govern 
 ment. Mr. Hill walked into that Senate Chamber and made his appeal to the 
 Senate on the ground of the insanity of the man who had committed the al 
 leged murder. He spoke for hours, and he obtained from the Senate a ver 
 dict which relieved the widowed mother, and spared the life of the son. 
 
 In all his relations as a lawyer Mr. Hill achieved distinction because he 
 was inspired with fidelity to the great duties which devolved upon him. 
 But his oreat intellect was not destined to be confined in its exercise to the 
 
 ^3 
 
 bar, though it was the shaping and the fashioning of that intellect, by close 
 attention to his profession, that prepared him for a new and different arena. 
 I had the pleasure of first meeting him here as we entered together the 
 Forty-fourth Congress. He leaped into this errand arena of debate like 
 
 c^ 1 O m 
 
 Minerva from the brain of Jove, armed cap-d-pie for any contest that niignt 
 occur. He was prepared to take rank among the first in this hall of debate 
 of the American Commons. 
 
 I remember especially an occasion a short time after the convening of 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 167 
 
 the Forty-fourth Congress, when he spoke here almost from the position in 
 which I now stand. The magnanimous, generous-hearted representative 
 from Pennsylvania [Mr. Randall], then the leader of this side of the House, 
 had introduced his bill for universal amnesty, thinking that the time had 
 come when there should be a restoration of the Union, not in name and 
 word, but in deed and in truth ; that amnesty should be extended to every 
 citizen, from the humblest subaltern, animated by a sense of duty, to the lofty- 
 plumed chief who led the Confederate forces ; that all the memories of the 
 war should be blotted from the hearts and the minds of the entire people. 
 
 In this spirit the gentleman from Pennsylvania introduced that resolution 
 upon which Mr. Hill s voice was first heard in this hall, as has been so beauti 
 fully described by my friend from Virginia [Mr. Tucker], He encountered 
 on that occasion an orator on the other side of the chamber who had been 
 for years the leader of his party, who had at one time occupied the seat 
 which you now occupy, who, as a debater, as a stater of facts, as a parlia 
 mentary tactician, had propably no equal at that time on either side of this 
 hall. 
 
 It was a conflict, as the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Tucker] has well 
 remarked, of giants, which took us back to the older days in these halls, 
 when Hayne and Webster, and Calhoun and Clay, and other orators of the 
 past, rendered illustrious the days in which they lived. As has been well 
 said, it was a battle of the giants, and both giants fought with Damascus- 
 like blades. 
 
 But, Mr. Speaker, it was a somewhat unequal contest, for he who 
 represented one side of the question was the victor and wore the laurel 
 wreath which crowns the victor s brow, while the other represented what 
 has become known in history as the " lost cause," and wore the melancholy 
 cypress, which is the emblem of defeat and death. Therefore, I say, it was 
 a somewhat unequal contest ; but those of us for whom he spoke, and spoke 
 with so much clearness, so much precision, so much wisdom, so much 
 patriotism, felt that he could appeal to the magnanimity of his great 
 opponent, great he was and still is, we felt that we could appeal to the 
 magnanimity of his great opponent in that contest, that Mr. Hill had stated 
 his side of the question as no other man could have stated it in this hall. 
 
 During the time he was here as our colleague, we all remember him with 
 the tenderest affection and esteem. We venerate his great ability. We 
 deplore his loss to the State who called him son, and to the country who 
 honored him for his patriotism and fidelity. 
 
 It was not long, Mr. Speaker, before the people of his State, in 1877, 
 called on him to occupy a higher position. I remember his being seated in 
 that portion of the hall, from which he had delivered his powerful and elo 
 quent speech a few minutes before, and receiving a tek grarn conveying to 
 him the intelligence that the State of Georgia had transferred him to the 
 other end of the Capitol. 
 
 He went there, Mr. Speaker, as he came here, and at once took his rank 
 in that graver, more dignified body, that body of loftier debate ; took his 
 seat there when that chamber was filled with men of the highest intellect in 
 this country ; when the gigantic intellectual form of Thurman sat on one 
 sid -, and on the other the equally gigantic intellectual form of Conkling. 
 Benjamin II. Hill took his place in the Senate of the United States, as he 
 had done in this hall, as the peer and equal of any man there. He had 
 achieved great triumph in every position of life, as lawyer, as representa- 
 
168 SENATOR . K HILL, OF G&ORGTA. 
 
 
 
 tive, as senator. He had strewed along the pathway of that life memorable 
 acts and wondrous intellectual efforts, "as the giant oak of the forest sheds 
 its foliage in a kindly largess to the soil it grows on." He has passed from 
 us to another scene of action. He has passed from us to that " home " to 
 which he looked so fondly. 
 
 Whether speaking to his people in the State of Georgia, or addressing 
 the representatives in this hall on the most delicate questions, or debating 
 in the Senate Chamber of the United States, there never fell from his lips 
 any other words than words of wisdom and patriotism. His were : 
 
 Not such words as flash 
 From the fierce demagogue s unthinking rage 
 To madden for a moment and expire 
 Nor such as the rapt orator imbues 
 With warmth of facile sympathy, and molds 
 To mirrors radiant with fair images, 
 To grace the noble fervor of an hour ; 
 But words which bear the spirits of great deeds 
 Winged for the future ; which the dying breath 
 Of Freedom s martyr shapes as it exhales, 
 And to the most enduring forms of earth 
 Commits to linger in the craggy shade 
 Of the huge valley, neath the eagle s home, 
 Or in the sea-cave where the tempest sleeps, 
 Till some heroic leader bid them wake 
 To thrill the world with echoes. 
 
 \ 
 
 Wherever he spoke and whatever he said, all was for his country s good. 
 He rose superior to all partisanship because he was a statesman, looking 
 always to the best interests of his people 
 
 It may be said of him, Mr. Speaker, as was said by the great Marshall of 
 his friend Menafee, when he was describing him after death : 
 
 " His escutcheon is broad, spotless, bright, and beautiful as Bayard s ori- 
 flamme adorned with the lilies of France." 
 
 ADDRESS OF ME. COX, OF NEW YORK. 
 
 Mr. Speaker : When a great French leader of opinion died the other day, 
 it was queried whether French institutions would survive. " The republic is 
 Leon Gambetta," was the sententious phrase. Wherever the signs of sor 
 row were displayed over the death of the great Frenchman, from San Fran 
 cisco to Syria, the powerful tribune of the people, the vehement orator, the 
 energetic patriot was mourned as if France herself were lost. The very 
 floral offerings were shaped into the tricolor of France. Not so in other 
 lands. Disraeli dies, and though his party goes on, sadly lacking his genius, 
 the English government in form and structure receives no detriment. I saw 
 nobles of ancient lineage and peasants of the country he had so long repre 
 sented, follow his remains to its sepulcher. All that was mortal of the dead 
 Hebrew and brilliant minister received the last rites of the established church, 
 but the English constitution and English society received no shock. 
 
 So, too, in these cis- Atlantic republican commonwealths statesmen and 
 presidents come and go like rainbows, but the State survives. It is more 
 permanent because of the monumental service of the departed statesman it 
 has nourished. 
 
 The eloquent Georgian and senator whom we honor to-day rounded an 
 active life of rarest mold. No glamor of the soldier was his. He was the 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 169 
 
 peerless citizen who led men by voice and thought in perilous times, through 
 troubles and tyrannies, with a foresight and wisdom all too rare in this land 
 of mercenary, grasping, and unrelaxing excitement. He dies ; but his State 
 and the nation grow better by the emphasis of his life and the virtue of its 
 lessons. 
 
 It was my privilege to know Senator Hill, even before he became a mem 
 ber here. It is because of a delightful, almost intimate friendship, that his 
 friends have assigned to me a part in these sad obsequies. 
 
 The dates and events, the links connecting such details, which make the 
 chain of his personal history, and serve to illustrate the individual feeling 
 and life, the character of the man these, others have touched with mag 
 netic, loving hand. 
 
 This chain was fashioned, as all character is, by surrounding circumstances. 
 Those who knew him in his early days love to trace the main elements of 
 his character to his parentage. His father was of slender education, but of 
 robust virtue. He was remarkable for his invincible will and force. His 
 mother was of an earnest, gentle nature, full of reflective and religious quali 
 ties. These made up the rudiments of that character which enabled him to 
 overcome obstacles by endurance and palliate them by persuasion. The 
 sturdy oak was garlanded with tenderest flowers. Like a Grecian or Doric 
 fane, to which the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Tucker] likened it, his 
 character combined beauty with strength. 
 
 The old farm-house and the red hills where he passed the scenes of his 
 boyhood modified these inborn elements of his nature, and gave fresh vigor 
 to his healthful life and added grace to his gentleness. 
 
 In his college experience the development and discipline of his mind was 
 prodigious. His shyness and awkwardness, born of the country, soon gave 
 way before his energy and ambition. From the rustic boy, in his long- 
 jeans coat and scant trousers, he at once became a thoughtful student. His 
 habit of abstraction began thus early. Whether in the Dernosthenian 
 Society, or as its anniversarian orator, or delivering the valedictory of his 
 class, he impressed those who listened with his unequaled power of debate 
 and the rare felicity of his eloquence. One index of the gentle side of his 
 character may be noted. His theme at the junior commencement was the 
 " Life, Love, and Madness of Torquato Tasso," into which he threw all his 
 mother s poetic sensibility with his scholarly warmth. 
 
 Soon the scholar ripened into the advocate. Here was his field. He had 
 a legal mind. He drove the logic of the law bravely through every obstacle 
 of fancy and fact. His fluency of speech and fertility of expedient, 
 together with his power of application and study, gave him a forensic power 
 which Lord Coke said a good lawyer should have for the "occasion 
 sudden "; a power which partial friends have compared with that of Erskine. 
 As a lawyer few men, even in our largest cities, have had such success. 
 Although diverted again and again from his jealous mistress, the law, to 
 canvass for Congress, legislature, elector, and governor, he was still em 
 ployed in all the leading cases of the State. It is estimated if such 
 estimates may be quoted here and now that Ire had made a million dollars, 
 as fees, by the time he was fifty. He was as lavish in the expenditure and 
 as improvident in the investment of his earnings, as he was indefatigable 
 with head and voice in their accumulation. 
 
 There is another phase of his life which gave its impress to the scholar, 
 the citizen, the orator, the advocate, the statesman, and the man. It is the 
 
1VO SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 sectional or Southern aspect of his life. Without this place, he would not 
 have made the mark which he so indelibly did upon his State. He had no 
 act of the demagogue, no party tactics at command, no storied lore racy of 
 the soil such as made the " Georgia Scenes r so whimsical and humorous, 
 and little or no conversational loquacity ; but he had the reserve which 
 carries the battle, and thus armed he was dauntless. 
 
 Yet there seems to be an unevenness and inconsistency in his career and 
 character. This unevenness may have been the result of the vicissitudes of 
 the eventful times when the best of men were distracted as to duty. In 
 consistency ? Gladstone, the young Tory, becomes the venerable Liberal, 
 and Palmerston laughed at the vanity of consistency. 
 
 Call it what you will, State pride or local affection, and say it is irrecon 
 cilable with a larger love of country, yet is it not the same patriotic impulse 
 which made Tell love the mountains of Switzerland, and Webster the rock- 
 bound shores of New England ? Besides, is it necessary to reconcile the 
 love one bears the mother with that one bears the wife ? When one is true 
 to his bridal troth, is he less true to the mother who bore him ? 
 
 It was this State pride which led the youth to prefer his own State university 
 at Athens for his education rather than follow the advice of his teacher, who 
 was a graduate of Yale. It was the same sentiment which colored his after 
 life and gave glow and glory to his oratory. Even while protesting against 
 secession ordinances on the hustings and in convention he followed with no 
 laggard step his State into revolt against the Federal domination. When 
 the question came home to him whether he would have the unity of his 
 Georgian people or the unity of all the States, he chose, and honestly chose, 
 the unity of his home. 
 
 Herein lies that seeming unevenness and inconsistency which some have 
 observed in his character. I shall rather call it the tough fiber of his native 
 robust being, its nature gnarled by soil and tempest, but none the less 
 beautiful because it had the hard intertwisted knot of local devotion. 
 
 True, he contended for " the Union, the Constitution, and the enforce 
 ment of the laws." He left his lawyer s desk and sought legislative honors, 
 to champion constitutional Federal unity. It was because he thought the 
 mother was the loving friend of his bride. 
 
 The first test of the young statesman, thirty years ago, was in the con 
 test for the compromise of 1850. He desired to signalize the end of slavery 
 agitation, which he foresaw would end in civil war and Southern disaster. 
 Hence his entrance upon political life in 1851 as a Union man. 
 
 Throughout his subsequent life, up to the signing of the secession ordi 
 nance, he was, in its best sense, an ardent Federalist. He was of such 
 moderate views and so opposed to the ultraists of his State that he traversed 
 Georgia, proclaiming fealty to the Union. He sounded the tocsin of revolt 
 against the leaders of revolution. Never was a crisis met so courageously. 
 At a time when Yancev s sentences thrilled the South, and when even 
 
 . 
 
 Howell Cobb was the coadjutor of Senator Iverson, the silver voice of Ben 
 jamin H. Hill, joining that of Alexander H. Stevens, was a trumpet, not of 
 sedition, but of loyalty to the Union. 
 
 In his speeches, full of the fervor of that wild dny, and in a minority, he 
 was to Southern Unionism what Gnmbetta was to distracted France. Both 
 were too late to save, but both lived to rebuild and restore. 
 
 It is not for me to inquire why the late senator gave his voice only for 
 secession and not his arm. It was not from lack of courage, physical, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 
 
 mental, or moral ; but he was doubtless continually shadowed by his own 
 prophecy. " Take care," he said, " that in endeavoring to carry slavery 
 where nature s laws prohibit its entrance you do not lose the right to hold 
 slaves at all ! 
 
 The senator had no love for the secrecies and ritual of Know-nothingism, 
 and when that semi-religious and anti-American crusade was preached it 
 was condemned by him. But from his conservative habitude he defended 
 the Fillmore administration, and in 1860 he became a Bell and Everett 
 Union elector. Georgia rang from side to side with his elegant and urgent 
 phillipics against radicalism, North and South, and his fervent patriotism 
 for the Union of our fathers. 
 
 It is impossible to analyze a life so full of incident or a mind so well dis 
 ciplined, and an oratory so alert and brilliant, without drawing upon the 
 language of high encomium. 
 
 All the virtues and genius as well as faults of the man and senator center 
 around the love he bore to his own State of Georgia. 
 
 He was a native of Georgia, and had he lived till now would have been 
 three-score years of age. He was born at the center of that " old red belt 
 which encircles the State from Savannah to the Chattahoochee." To bor 
 row the language of a friend in the days of my first service here, Judge 
 James Jackson : 
 
 He was all a Georgian. The robust physique of the man sprang from the soil of our 
 beloved State, and the giant intellect which so distinguished him was equally Georgian. 
 If honey was upon his lips, the Georgia bee gathered it from Georgia flowers. If the 
 silver ring of his eloquence touched all hearts, the silver was dug out of the red old hills 
 we love so much. 
 
 Georgia, geologically and picturesquely, under and above the genial 
 soil, has natural advantages and beauties, which along with her liberal insti 
 tutions early attracted such adventurous minds as the Hebrew Mendez, the 
 English soldier Oglethorpe, and the Methodist Wesley. Even the mounds 
 are yet pointed out, in the "county where our senator was born, into which 
 De Soto delved for gold. Her mountains dip and curl in crested grandeur 
 toward the west, while her savannas add their greenery and wealth to her 
 shores. 
 
 General James Oglethorpe, who, as Burke said, had called a province 
 into existence and lived to see it an independent State, was the epitome of 
 Georgia history. Oglethorpe s life was so full of achievement and variety 
 that it is a romance. Pope eulogized, Dr. Johnson admired, and Thompson 
 celebrated him. He was not only ready to defend his honor in the duel, 
 but was the prisoner s friend and the founder of an "empire State." Sir 
 Robert Montgomery called the new colony which the gallant general 
 founded " the most delightful country of the universe." Even the poet of 
 the Seasons, Thompson, in his " Liberty," sang of the swarming colonists 
 who sought the "gay colony of Georgia." He eulogized it as the calm re 
 treat of undeserved distress, the better home of those whom bigots chased 
 from foreign lands. It was not built on rapine, servitude, and woe. The 
 V "-y history and literature of England thus imbound with this colony is 
 :-)^t, unknown to the North. Other States, it seems, attracted more 
 
 oro- ia, th<- asylum and hope of man, and founded in honor, 
 . ;ivery, that our senator loved. Even John Wesley s raother v 
 
172 SENATOR B. H. BILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 wlion the higli church Methodist asked her whether he should proceed to 
 Georgia, said : " Had I twenty sons, I should rejoice if they were all so em 
 ployed." The very religion of Georgia had in it a courage which does not 
 belong to our time, when the voyage across the Atlantic is robbed of most 
 of its terror. 
 
 In the center and heart of this historic State, and in a county which 
 bears the name of the bravest soldier that ever bore a banner to victory, 
 Jasper, and with the heroic and religious associations of its founders, young 
 Hill was born. At an early age he followed his family and its fortunes to 
 the Alabama border, near the Chattahoochee River. The town of La 
 Grange, to which they removed, is the county seat of Troup. It was then, 
 and is yet, noted for its love of education and its school facilities. There 
 are many associations in this county, and even connected with its very name, 
 which might well attune a young mind to thoughts of ambition in the forum 
 of law and politics. Giants were arrayed in Georgia in those days, and their 
 efforts, especially about 1833, when force bills and nullification were rife, 
 gave impassioned tone as well as high temper to political discussion. 
 
 Doubtless, the mind of young Hill took its hue from these surroundings ; 
 but in a State, the very name of whose counties betokens a lofty division of 
 sentiment where Washington, Jackson, Jefferson, Franklin, and Madison 
 speak of the Federal Constitution, and Henry, Randolph, Troup, and Craw 
 ford speak of State sovereignty and local liberty ; but where, above all, the 
 names of Pulaski, De Kalb, Morgan, and Carroll shine like primal virtues, 
 all starry with our Revolutionary radiance, it could not be otherwise than 
 that men of earnest thought should perceive a divided duty, and that great 
 controversial acumen and power should enter the arena and inspire conten 
 tious oratory. 
 
 Doubtless, Senator Hill was greatly influenced in his pursuits and char 
 acteristics by such rare men and events as Georgia has produced. These 
 names may not be as familiar to Northern ears now as in the days of Jack 
 son and Calhoun, but they are still potential to start a spirit in Georgia, 
 where State pride has lost but little of its prestige by the result of the civil 
 war. Read the roster of Georgia s forum the brilliant lights of her bench, 
 bar, literature, and Senate : Beall, Crawford, Berrien, Mclntosh, Clayton, 
 Colquitt, Cobb, Tripp, Davvson, Forsythe, Lumpkin, Lamar, Jackson, Shorter, 
 Reid, Warner, Johnson, Wilde, and Baldwin, not to speak of men who yet 
 survive, like her present wonderful chief magistrate, and his contrast in 
 stature and mate in intellect, Robert Toombs. 
 
 A State like this, so grand in its beginning and so splendid in its hun 
 dred and fifty years of prosperous history, must be proud of its heroes, 
 whether fit 
 
 For arms and warlike amenance, 
 Or else for wise and civil governance, 
 To learn the interdeal of princes strange ; 
 To mark the intent of councils, and the change 
 Of States. 
 
 Her annals are shining with the names of De Soto, Raleigh, and Ogle- 
 thorpe ; and the names of their successors, under conditions of later days, de 
 tract nothing from the luster of their worth and renown. 
 
 To emulate the fame of Hortensius, king of the forum, Cicero never 
 ceased his efforts till he ascended the throne of oratory. So in this unrivaled 
 galaxy of gifted Georgians. Emulation made ambition reach high. From 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 173 
 
 sire to son the names of eminent Georgians appear again and again, show 
 ing the elevating incentives which enlivened and exalted this imperial State 
 of the South. The gold in her hills, the silver on the cotton-pod, the sun 
 with its balm, the rivers which flow from her mountains, the opulence of her 
 soil, are not more Georgian and imperial than the high standard of those 
 who gave Georgia to the world as a colony, preserved her independence of 
 England, brought her through fire into the federation of States, and after 
 the vicissitudes of a great civil trial rescued her first, among the recusant 
 States, from the chaos of war. 
 
 The senator we meet to honor was no exception to the emulation and 
 exaltation of his surroundings. His natural ardors and ambitions thus re 
 ceived their stimulus and food. But the massive mind which made the 
 sjreat advocate, and the moral heroism which made the defender of individual 
 
 j 
 
 and civil liberties these are of no soil ; they belong to no time. They 
 illustrate the age of Aristides and given a glory to the fame of Rienzi. 
 They made Samuel Adams and Patrick Henry possible, not as provincial 
 men, but as enlarged and loving patriots. 
 
 He who would best portray the salient features of Benjamin Harvey 
 Hill must remember that his devotion to Georgia was but the stepping-stone 
 to a broader and loftier devotion to that Union which he loved to serve in 
 our councils here. 
 
 The people of New York City have not yet forgotten the ringing pe 
 riods of Senator Hill, in one of her halls, as he discoursed of the Magna 
 Charta and other precious monuments of popular liberty. To his impas 
 sioned utterance, his fine frame and musical voice gave a charm beyond the 
 reach of art. 
 
 His State love was, sir, after all, the golden key which unlocked the 
 secrets of his grand elocution and opened the casket wherein were the jew 
 els of his splendid imagery. 
 
 When the war had ended, and his State was in the grasp of unprinci 
 pled adventurers and under the heel of an unbridled satrapy, and in the chaos 
 wrought by the war, he gave to the reconstruction acts his defiance, and 
 hurled his anathemas against its spoilers. 
 
 In 1868 he went among his people with the stride of a demi-god. He 
 fired their hearts, and, though surrounded by bayonets and threatened by 
 bastiles, he uttered such sarcasm, scorn, and dauntless defiance that the sa 
 traps, who outraged every canon of law and impulse of liberty, shrank from 
 their hateful work in the very midst of a conquered people. 
 
 Since the war ended we know something of his Federal service and 
 career. The gentleman from Iowa [Mr. Kasson] has truly given us some 
 rare sentences of fidelity to the Union. One sentence he did not quote, 
 which I well remember : "This is our father s house. We have returned to 
 it to stay ! In hope and despair ; in and out of his party ; in his place 
 of business ; in the forum of his love, the bar, and outside upon the platform, 
 the same heroic altitude he illustrated to the end gave him power to com 
 bat the enemies of local and constitutional liberty. No weakness called on 
 him for championship that he did not respond. His State was lifted up 
 out of the reconstruction mire into the life and vigor of a new birth under 
 the impulses of his eloquence. He gave her beauty for ashes. Under his 
 magic wand a new Atlantis such as Bacon loved to picture arose above 
 the tide of desolation ; and a new Atlanta, with its goblin of steam and its ener 
 gies, was recreated under the ribs of death. Matchless in his winged words, 
 
SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 and fearless in his consummate bravery, he stopped at no post of trust until 
 he became the foremost Georgian at this Federal center ; and in the flower 
 of his genius he laid down his eventful life with a Christian resignation and 
 devotion only next to that of the martyred Polycarp. 
 
 I doubt, Mr. Speaker, if ever man suffered in the flesh as this man. It 
 would not be fitting here to describe the details of that mortal malady 
 and those surgical agonies that racked him so long and so terribly. He per 
 ished day by day, hopelessly perishing with a pain which only his Christian 
 fortitude relieved. Out of his torture at length came deliverance ; and in 
 the middle of August last his courage yielded, but jdelded only to death. 
 
 When the great Frenchman Gambetta was agonized by his disease he 
 cried out, " It is useless to dissemble. I welcome death as a relief." This 
 was the end of one of Plutarchian mold ; but it was not the end of our beloved 
 American statesman. Amid the tender farewells of his wife and family, 
 with a patience sanctified on high and a faith which "endured as seeing 
 Him who is invisible," this more than classic hero, this gentle follower of 
 the meek and lowly One, sought consolation, courage, and hope in his faith. 
 His last words, as given to his pastor, and repeated by my friends from Vir 
 ginia [Mr. Tucker] and from Texas [Mr. Wellborn], were, "Almost home." 
 
 It is an illustration of the sympathy and loving kindness which make the 
 comforts of home so tender and eloquent that two gentlemen have most 
 touchingly referred to these last words. But to me they have a double, al 
 most personal, meaning. 
 
 I remember after the war, with a tenderness all too gentle for words, the 
 first greetings I received from this senator. He was pleased that I had 
 aided to defeat, by a speech based on the constitutional clause as to attainder 
 of treason, the attempt to take more than the life estate, i.e., the fee-simple, 
 which belonged to the innocent children of the South. I had, he said, 
 thought of the future homes of the South. That was our first bond of 
 friendship. 
 
 Home ! best of all solaces, without whose social benignities and affec 
 tionate sweetness all the learning, eloquence, \vit, lore, and renown of men 
 fade away. His own sweet home ! In the midst of his own beloved circle, 
 the immortal spirit looked to that home beyond in the mansion not made 
 with hands. Yes ! oh, yes ! he was almost there his heavenly home where 
 pain no longer tortures, where the world has no temptation and the grave 
 no terror; where, with the loved ones gone before and the loved ones to fol 
 low, he would join in the song of the Lamb forever ! 
 
 In conclusion : It remains for us that we should so live that we be neither 
 surprised, nor leave our duties imperfect, nor our sins uncanceled, nor our 
 persons unreconciled, nor God unappeased ; but that when we descend to 
 our graves we may rest in the bosom of the Lord till the mansions be pre 
 pared, where we will sing and feast eternally. Amen! Te Deum laudamus. 
 
 This would be the language of our departed friend from his home above, 
 as it is the admonition of sweet Jeremy Taylor in his " Holy Living and Dy 
 ing." It comes from beyond the tomb. 
 
 To the dead lie sayeth, Arise ! 
 
 To the living, Follow Me ! 
 And that voice still soundeth on 
 From the centuries that are gone, 
 
 To the centuries that shall be. 
 
TRIBUTES FROM THE PRESS. 
 
 EXTRACTS FROM THE PRESS OF GEORGIA. 
 
 ATLANTA CONSTITUTION. 
 
 FOR weeks and months the public mind has been preparing itself for the 
 announcement of Mr. Hill s death, and yet all the preparation has 
 been of no avail. The shock is almost as great as if the whole State had 
 been taken by surprise, for, as Mr. Grady has suggested in his sketch of the 
 dead senator, behind all the apprehension aroused by the various statements 
 in regard to Mr. Hill s condition, there has always existed a lively hope that 
 the medical experts might here be brought face to face with another of the 
 many illusions conjured up in a period of make-believe science. This hope 
 was vain as it was vague, but it existed, nevertheless, and it was natural that 
 it should exist. It is the fate, or the fortune, of but few men to be recog 
 nized, while they are yet alive, as a definite part of the institutions of the 
 people. Mr. Hill received this recognition from the people of Georgia, and 
 hence no degree of apprehension or anticipation could prepare them for or 
 reconcile them to his death. 
 
 They know that a few months ago he was in the full vigor of a mature 
 manhood, with the prospect of many years of usefulness before him, and 
 they know now that he is dead. It is impossible for the human mind to 
 reconcile these two facts in connection with a man whose personality was 
 powerful enough to arouse the interest of the public and gain the confidence 
 and affection of the people. 
 
 We can add nothing to the elaborate sketch of the dead Georgian to be 
 found elsewhere in to-day s Constitution, but his character and his career 
 may be studied from various points of view. Mr. Hill was about as near to 
 the standard of statesmanship established by Webster, Clay, and Calhoun 
 as our modern conditions will allow. He was a great constitutional law} 7 er. 
 He had made a profound study of our system of government, and he under 
 stood it as thoroughly as any American who ever lived ; he was a great 
 orator ; he was an original thinker ; he was passionately devoted to his 
 State and his country ; he was a patriot whose fearless sincerity was fre 
 quently misunderstood and misinterpreted. In the federal Legislature his 
 speech was fettered by the circumstances that fetter the speech of every 
 Southern man ; but had he lived in the days of Clay, he would have taken 
 rank with that remarkable man. He was vigorous, aggressive, and brilliant ; 
 he was profound, earnest, and fluent. He was attached to republican insti 
 tutions and was thoroughly impressed with their efficacy. There was no 
 room in his mind for sectionalism ; he was an American. He was sensitively 
 opposed to those political methods that look to sectionalism for their inspira 
 tion, and he dreaded the success of such methods. 
 
 Some public men seem to lead the people by divining their wishes and 
 
 175 
 
U6 SENATOR B. If. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 carrying them out. Mr. Hill was really a leader. He was sure to carry the 
 people with him in the end, but he sometimes progressed more rapidly than 
 some of the more timid thought necessary. Thus, until toward the closing 
 years of his life, he always found himself obliged to fight a strong faction. 
 Some of these fights were very bitter, but in all essential particulars Mr. Hill 
 was sure of a vindication. It has been said that he lacked judgment, and 
 the idea involved in this suggestion tickled those who found it impossible to 
 relish the complacency with which he upheld his own opinions. What Mr. 
 Hill really lacked was policy. He was no politician ; perhaps he was not 
 even discreet, so far as his own interests were concerned. He never paused, 
 for instance, to consider whether this or that opinion would be popular. The 
 world was welcome to whatever opinion he entertained ; welcome to com 
 bat it if it chose to take the risks of controversy. 
 
 This confidence in his own opinions was mistaken by his opponents for 
 egotism. If his opponents were right, it was a very high order of egotism. 
 It was the result of the most profound investigation and meditation, and it 
 was not the least attractive quality of a grand intellectual equipment. What 
 Mr. Hill lacked was not judgment, but policy. He was by no means infal 
 lible, but he generally vindicated his judgment by waiting until the public 
 was ready to take charge of his opinions and follow where he had led. Mr. 
 Hill also lacked that humor which is the shield and protection of genius. 
 Perhaps humor is too broad a term here. He lacked that qualification or 
 modification of earnestness which relieves and sweetens its aggressiveness, 
 and which quickens and convenes the popular appreciation. At the last, no 
 Georgian ever possessed the love and confidence of his people to a greater 
 degree than Mr. Hill, and it may be that the manifestations of these were all 
 the more sincere because of the severity with which he dealt with those who 
 opposed his convictions. 
 
 Mr. Hill s greatest effort in behalf of the people of Georgia was not in the 
 Senate nor in the House. It was his remarkable campaign in 1868 against 
 the reconstruction measures. Perhaps we ought to call it a crusade instead 
 of a campaign. The man and the opportunity met, and no other Georgian 
 ever had the advantage of such an opportunity. First came the well-re 
 membered " Notes on the Situation." It was the voice of one crying in the 
 wilderness. Never before did political essays attract such instant attention. 
 " Out of the depths of desolation a trumpet was blown." It is only by an 
 effort that one can remember the awful despair of that period. The people 
 were supine ; utter apathy had taken possession of all their faculties and activi 
 ties ; they were disfranchised ; their slaves had been placed over them ; 
 aliens were rioting in high places ; the social organization was in danger ; 
 bayonets gleamed everywhere. 
 
 At this moment Mr. Hill pressed his way to the front and made his voice 
 heard in his " Notes on the Situation." He stirred the hearts of the people 
 and aroused them to a sense of their duty. And then he went upon the 
 hustings and made a campaign through the State. It is a campaign which 
 must remain without a parallel in the history of the State. The circum 
 stances under which it was made can never be repeated, and if they could 
 there is no longer a Ben Hill to take advantage of them. His soul and his 
 intellect were both aflame. He went through the State with the ardor of a 
 prophet. He met the people face to face and lifted them upon their feet. 
 He could not go into every hamlet, but his influence went. He was the 
 Greatheart to whom the new Pilgrim turned. What fire, what fluency, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 177 
 
 what tenderness was his ! How terse, how simple his language ; how glow 
 ing his periods ; how terrible his denunciation. He had set himself to the 
 task of revolutionizing a revolution, and he was equal to every demand 
 made upon him. He was surrounded by bayonets ; he walked amid the ruins 
 of a peculiar civilization ; upon every hand doubt, fear, and despair had pos 
 session of the people. He attracted the attention of the government. John 
 Pope, a satrap whose career is pronounced ignominious by Northern 
 writers, was in command of the State, and he proposed that Mr. Hill be 
 arrested and banished from the State. In the midst of all the confusion, and 
 uncertainty, and doubt of that trying period, the great orator went among 
 the people, and bade them lift their lips from the dust. Few of his speeches 
 I during that campaign have been preserved, but it is impossible to remember 
 them without a thrill. The remedies he proposed were the remedies of 
 peace, but with what marvelous eloquence he denounced the oppressors ! 
 How suave his passion, how serene his scorn ! He was charged with incon 
 sistency some years afterward, but his purpose throughout was grandly con 
 sistent. He knew that any attempt to defeat the reconstruction acts would 
 be hopeless, but he desired to arouse the people from their apathy and put in 
 motion that machinery of peaceful resistance to oppression that exists in all 
 republican communities. It was his purpose to divert the attention of the 
 people from their grief, and to remind them that they were still men. In 
 this he succeeded, and to his campaign in 1868 is due in a great measure the 
 present political prosperity in Georgia. 
 
 It all seems like a dream ; a dream of life an awakening to the reality 
 of death. Happy are they who die young, but happier they who die 
 mourned by old and young. Worn with sickness and disease, the great 
 Georgian has found peace and rest. 
 
 It all seems like a dream a dream of life curiously confused with an ex 
 perience of the reality of death. And yet, when death exalts, as its gradual 
 approach and presence exalted this man, it is no longer to be feared. 
 Months ago, when the great Georgian was in the very prime of life, in the full 
 maturity of perfect manhood, the dread shadow placed itself at his side. It 
 brought no terrors then, and at the last it was a welcome guest. It took the 
 senator from the tumult of politics, where the eloquent tongue, the grand in 
 tellect, and the fiery magnetism of a high and earnest purpose carried him 
 always to the front, and bore him gently into the bosom of his family, where 
 peace, comfort, and utter devotion awaited him. It gave him an oppor 
 tunity to test the love of his people ; an opportunity to discover be 
 fore he died that he had not lived in vain. He beheld, in some meas 
 ure, the fruition of his life s purpose. He saw Georgia prosperous, 
 contented, and free, and he was satisfied ; nay, more, life was happy. He 
 was hopeful, not for himself, but for the people. He had no troubles of 
 his own. The complacency of profound rest fell upon him and wrapped 
 him round about ; so that his sufferings seemed to come to him as angels 
 and ministers of peace. 
 
 And yet, in the midst of the serenity that surrounded him, there was 
 one trouble that obtruded itself. He had a message to deliver to the people 
 that could not be delivered. Communicating with a friend, he wrote out 
 his desire. If he could only gather the strength that remained he would 
 write out his reflections, which he was confident would be of greater service 
 
 ^^ 
 
 to the people than all the acts of his life. This desire was the burden of his 
 thoughts. His own personality, his own suffering, he had placed aside ; 
 
178 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 waking or dreaming, his thoughts were of his country, his State. He had 
 measured the spirit of sectionalism, and he feared it ; he appreciated the 
 social and political problems which the South inherited from the chaos of 
 war. He desired, as a last effort, to give the people the benefit of his ma- 
 turest thoughts. But it was not to be. His strength ebbed away and his 
 last thoughts remained unwritten. 
 
 Nevertheless, his best thoughts and his high purposes live in the hearts 
 of the people. Though he is dead, yet the day has never been when he was 
 a more potent influence in Georgia. Happy are they who die young, but 
 happier they who die mourned by old and young. 
 
 ATLANTA POST APPEAL. 
 
 To-day the eloquent lips of the South s greatest orator are cold in death. 
 The sad intelligence has been so long expected and dreaded by a sorrowing 
 people, that there will be no shock of surprise when it is announced that 
 Benjamin Harvey Hill is no more. 
 
 In this hour of universal grief, no tribute to the illustrious dead could 
 adequately voice the deep feeling of the people. A history of Senator 
 Hill s life would be a history of the most stirring period in the existence of 
 our commonwealth. No Georgia statesman was ever more closely identified 
 with his native State, and no Georgian ever served her more faithfully or 
 with more signal brilliancy and success. 
 
 With the leading incidents in the career of Senator Hill the country is 
 familiar. His triumphs at the bar, on the hustings, and in the Senate are 
 matters of current history. His talents were so conspicuous, his character 
 so colossal, and his devotion to his people so steadfastly loyal that they re 
 quire no mention here. 
 
 The closing months of the great senator s life were months of untold 
 physical agony, but the sufferer bore it all so grandly, with such sublime 
 resignation and with such perfect trust in " Him who doeth all things well," 
 that the admiration of the world was excited and its sympathy stirred to 
 its deepest depths. It will be time, when the first shock of popular grief 
 has passed away, to speak at length of the dead statesman, his life, character, 
 and works. At present we cannot do it. The lamentations of the bereaved 
 people speak louder than any studied panegyric. 
 
 ATLANTA HERALD. 
 
 The hand of disease was never laid upon a son of Georgia more truly and . 
 universally beloved ; the shaft of death never struck down a leader to whom 
 his people were mftre implicitly devoted and for whom their eyes could 
 yield more copiously the tearful tributes of affection. It will be many long 
 years before that poignant sorrow is assuaged, arid two generations must 
 pass over to the "other side " before Georgia can forget the influence of hia 
 great example or feel unmoved by recollections of his words and deeds. 
 No man could leave to his people a brighter, purer, grander legacy of ex 
 alted ambition and unselfish public service than Benjamin Harvey Hill has 
 bequeathed to Georgia. In the very early stages of his useful life, his 
 character took form and crystallized around those principals of honor, integ 
 rity, courage, independence, purity of person, and cleanliness of methods that 
 are the aids and inseparable elements to all high and noble careers. How 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 
 
 well he adhered to and exemplified those grand attributes is judged in the 
 profound respect of the nation and the unalterable affection of his immediate 
 people. 
 
 CHRONICLE AND SENTINEL. 
 
 Before the day of steam or telegraph, a message was mysteriously left at 
 the house of Lady Holland, in London, simply containing these words : 
 " The great man is dead." She knew immediately that this was a voice 
 from St. Helena proclaiming that the discrowned and exiled Napoleon was 
 no more. Of all English persons she had been his most constant friend, and, 
 though her country s most redoubted foeman, she had a soul to appreciate 
 his wonderful gifts and to bewail his melancholy end " on that lone, barren 
 isle of the ocean." Yesterday the swift lightning sent all over the earth 
 the sad tidings that " The great man is dead " that Benjamin H. Hill, the 
 pride of Georgia, the most eloquent of the children of men, the profound 
 lawyer, the brilliant statesman, the suffering Christian gentleman had 
 passed the gates of pain and entered the kingdom where the weary rest 
 from their labors. His death has left a gap in the State that cannot soon be 
 tilled, but who that saw his changed physical condition can grieve that the 
 martyr has laid down the cross and received the crown in higher worlds than 
 this ? He did not expire, like that other marvelous man already alluded to, 
 far from country, home, and friends, baffled, disappointed, and Promethean- 
 like. His latter days were the most victorious, most splendid, most dazzling, 
 most worthy. He had love by his bedside to the last, and even ancient hate 
 had grown to be an affection when his doom was sealed. If he had sinned, 
 as all men do, his repentance was vaster than the imperfection. If he had 
 gone astray for a season from the All-Father, he came back with a child-like 
 faith and surrendered himself to cruel wounds and unspeakable torments 
 without a murmur, for the sake of him who died on Calvary. Nothing in 
 life became him so well as the act of leaving it. Future ages may forget 
 the advocate and the senator and the wizard of the hustings, but never shall 
 the story of his pathetic descent into the Valley of the Shadow, and glori 
 ous emergence into the Mountain Land of Mystery, cease to be a record of 
 undying fame. Less than a week ago the writer of these poor words, who 
 feels that language fails him at the supreme moment, received from the 
 hands of the dying Hill lines that must have been among the last ever 
 traced by his fingers. The agony of that moment left an impression that 
 then found vent in words appropriate to the occasion ; but now that the 
 mighty spirit is emancipated and the breath is gone and the husk of human 
 ity alone remains, words fail, and language itself becomes bankrupt to 
 utter what he would like to say. Just as our friend could only, in a dumb 
 eloquence, convey his welcome, so, in some such way, the pen is paralyzed 
 that would so gladly speak of him as it never was at a loss to do in the days 
 that are gone. The painter who veiled the face of Agamemnon because he 
 could not adequately express on canvas the grief of the father at the sacri 
 fice of his daughter, appealed most irresistibly to the sympathies of all the 
 world that gazed upon the picture. Let the powerlessness of our pen 
 betoken the grief that cannot grow vocal. In the struggle to give utter 
 ance to the thought that is in us we feel that if Prospero s wand were 
 ours it would be broken and cast into the grave where the most cele 
 brated Georgian of the century is so soon to be laid down to pleasant 
 dreams, 
 
180 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 TELEGRAPH AND MESSENGER. 
 
 A telegram from Atlanta gives the mournful message, Benjamin H. Hill 
 is dead. The sad intelligence was not unexpected. For weeks the people 
 of Georgia have been conscious of the fact that their great senator had re 
 ceived his summons, and that he was hastening out in obedience to it. At 
 first they clung to the hope that the magnificent physique of the great 
 Georgian would enable him to rally, and put the destroyer, at least tempo 
 rarily, under his feet. But it was one of those soft illusions of hope that leave 
 one only the more desolate for having entertained them. The destroyer had 
 come to stay, and there was no relenting from his purpose to strike at the 
 great man, and lay him low. Death has never found a more " shining mark," 
 nor struck a more fateful blow. The death of Mr. Hill, while yet in the vigor 
 of manhood and scarcely at the prime of his mental powers, is an irreparable 
 loss. Georgia could ill have afforded to give him up, had he been an old 
 man, tottering on his staff and trembling on the boundary of the borderland; 
 for none like him has gone forth from her midst into the shadowland. And 
 there is no present promise that his mantle shall be worthily worn by any 
 one who will come after him. 
 
 It would be something worse than useless to murmur at this sad dispensa 
 tion. There is nothing of future gain or of present contentment in a spirit 
 that does not bend under the blow of bereavement dispensed by the All-Wise 
 One. The shadow of this loss may in some unseen way embody the promise 
 of some future life of sunshine, like that of the sleeping patriot. 
 
 There are lessons in the life of Mr. Hill, and there is a lesson in his death 
 which should not be lost on the people of this State. He was an orator, a 
 statesman, a patriot, a Christian. He illustrated in his remarkable career the 
 great truth that courage true courage constitutes the foundation of every 
 virtue. The courage of conviction marked all that he said and did. A life 
 less earnest than his could not have won such triumphs as make up his 
 record. 
 
 As an orator he was without a peer. The eloquence that fell from his 
 lips was of the purest, sweetest character. In some of his grandest flights, 
 it would have been easy to imagine the words in which he clothed his 
 thoughts to be little less than inspired. 
 
 Mr. Hill s statesmanship has been often decried by his political antago 
 nists ; but it will stand a test of comparison with that of Clay, Calhoun, and 
 Webster ; his equals, perhaps, but not his superiors. In purity of purpose, 
 and clearness of insight, and breadth of view, he has never had a superior 
 among all the public men who have, at any time, adorned the civic records 
 of the country. 
 
 As a jurist he had no superior, perhaps no equal, in the United States. 
 His legal arguments, at various times in the Senate, were worthy of the 
 greatest men of the Republic, in the day when there were giants in the land. 
 Georgia will be better able now to appreciate his matchless gifts in this de 
 partment of usefulness. Joys brighten as they take their flight. 
 
 No man ever loved Georgia with truer, more constant, more unquestion 
 ing devotion than Ben. Hill. He was always ready to fight her battles, and 
 to spend and be spent in her cause. His record, from boyhood down to 
 1861, was one unmarred by the shadow even of selfish disregard of the high 
 duties of citizenship. From 1801 to the day of his death, there was not a 
 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 181 
 
 moment in which he claimed for self what he denied to duty. His war 
 record will be the pride of his children s children, and every true Georgian 
 will count them blessed in such an inheritance. In the fearful days that 
 followed the close of our heroic though unavailing struggle, he towered 
 above the mean herd that trembled and cowered and skulked a king among 
 men, and a very eagle amid the inaccessible crags. Ben Hill was a hero then ; 
 a hero for the sake of Georgia, not for fame. Personal ease, personal secur 
 ity, personal popularity were to him but meaningless considerations in com 
 parison with the claims that Georgia had upon him for the labor of his hand 
 and mind, and the devotion of his heart. 
 
 There is still another phase in the character of this wonderful man which 
 is worthy of mention in this brief outline. So far as concerns the fame and 
 honors of this world, no one will deny that the life of Mr. Hill was one of 
 more than ordinary success. The highest offices in the gift of Georgia were 
 his for the asking ; and he discharged every duty growing out of his official 
 relations to the people with unsurpassed skill, wisdom, and fidelity. But 
 there is another life beyond the hopes, fears, ambitions, and strife of the 
 present a life often lost to the view of the great of earth. Mr. Hill began 
 public life as an humble follower of the lowly I^azarene. How far the wan 
 derings of a long and eventful life may have carried him to the right or to 
 the left of " the straight and narrow path " of Christian duty, we do not 
 know. Sure it is the wandering great man returned again in the deep 
 ening shadows of life s twilight ; and ended a glorious career, as he had 
 begun it, leaning upon the arm of Omnipotence. Thus sustained, he bore the 
 frightful sufferings that fell to his lot without a murmur ; and went out 
 into the sunshine of the great Beyond, as an infant sinks to slumber in its 
 mother s arms. 
 
 Benjamin H. Hill s last victory was his greatest victory. Let the young 
 men of the State remember this when, in laying their plans for a life of pub 
 lic endeavor, they seek a model in the glorious man, now silent in death in 
 Georgia s capital. The great as well as the lowly have need of rest when the 
 struggle of life is ended. 
 
 COLUMBUS ENQUIRER. 
 
 Senator Benjamin H. Hill is dead. The long suspense is over and the 
 South mourns. All the States of the Union, responding to that touch of 
 sympathy which makes the whole world akin, stand uncovered in the pres 
 ence of calamity. In every home in the South sits his personal mourner. 
 Their grief and affection, poured out without stint, could not save him, but 
 it must have been comforting to him, beyond expression, to know how pre 
 cious was his life in the sight of the people. The suspense of the early days, 
 when it was seen that the cancer was eating his life away, succeeded by con 
 fidence and a happy hope, has made the blow still harder, it seems, to bear. 
 For by these days, that now seem so long ago; by this watching and painful 
 anxiety from hour to hour, the country grew to love Senator Hill more and 
 more. It seems that death was kept waiting until the full measure of his 
 noble life was meted out, giving all a chance to know him closer and better. 
 As we scan and learn by heart every feature of the dying face of our loved 
 ones, so these days gave the world an insight to Senator Hill s character. 
 Not forgetful of his human weakness, men began to see him in his activity, as 
 he stood before heads of party, a zealous leader, a generous foe. They pic 
 tured him on the floor of the House and in the Senate Chamber, his gauge 
 
182 SENATOR . ff. HILL, Of 1 GEORGIA. 
 
 of statesmanship so broad, his judgment so direct, his argument so cour 
 teous as to win regard even from his adversaries. Eminently a fair man in 
 legislative controversies, while foremost in earnestness on the side he es 
 poused, and full of zeal for his view of public affairs. No lukewarm advo 
 cate was he ; his beliefs were the sober passion and maturity of his life. 
 
 SAVANNAH TIMES. 
 
 Let Georgia and, in fact, the entire South mourn, for death has robbed 
 her of her brightest and most valued jewel. Senator Benjamin H. Hill is 
 no more. He died at his residence in Atlanta after a long and terrible suf 
 fering, which he bore with a patience and fortitude that was truly sublime. 
 Senator Hill was the shining light in the bright constellation of Southern 
 statesmen. His great intellect, coupled with his indomitable energy and 
 keen forethought, commanded the unbounded respect and admiration of even 
 his bitterest political enemies. In the United States Senate, where he was 
 ever ready to aid and defend the South, he was well recognized as a man of 
 a powerful intellect, the peer of any in that assemblage of statesmen. But 
 he has gone ; no more can the South claim his valuable aid. No more will 
 the hall of the Senate ring with his eloquent appeals in behalf of his beloved 
 people. No more can Georgia look to his valued advice or claim his strong 
 influence. He has left us to join a council above, where dissensions are 
 unknown. 
 
 DAWSON JOURNAL. 
 
 No man, since the days of Clay, Webster, and Calhoun, has illustrated the 
 true statesman more nobly than the Hon. Benjamin Hill, and in his death 
 Georgia will sustain a loss that can never be repaired. 
 
 COVINGTON (OA.) ENTERPRISE. 
 
 Words cannot express the sorrow felt at the loss of such a statesman. 
 His name and fame will live on and on forever. Our pen fails to convey 
 the sentiments of a heart that deeply mourns for the deceased. May he 
 
 sleep sweetly in the silent city of the dead. 
 
 
 
 WEST POINT (GA.) ENTERPRISE. 
 
 His biography is as familiar as the alphabet to all Georgians, and it is 
 needless to write it here. His was a life of unbroken brilliancy from the 
 cradle to his death. Georgia can never fill his place. There was one Shake 
 speare, one Cicero, one Napoleon, and there can be but one Ben Hill. But 
 he is dead, and in common with a bereaved people we mingle our grief, our 
 sympathy, and our sorrow. 
 
 ALBANY (GA.) NEWS. 
 
 Although the death of Senator Hill has been expected for several weeks 
 past, the news which came by telegraph from Atlanta that he had breathed 
 his last was a great shock to our community and a sorrow that entered the 
 hearts of our people like a sudden shaft from a cruel hand. 
 
 His death is to the people of the South what Stonewall Jackson s was to 
 the Southern Confederacy an irreparable loss, and there is no man in 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 183 
 
 Georgia who can be to us what he was up to the time the fatal hand of 
 affliction was laid so heavily upon him, and he was compelled to quit his 
 post of duty at Washington a few months ago. He was the peer of any 
 man in the American Congress, and had the courage to defend his people 
 and the South whenever and by whomsoever assailed. 
 
 MARIETTA JOURNAL. 
 
 Thus Georgia loses one of the greatest men that ever was born within 
 her limits. Our people will mourn his death with sincere sorrow, for we 
 shall never see his like again. Georgia has lost a noble son, democracy a 
 true friend, and constitutional government a staunch defender. May his 
 soul rest in peace. 
 
 AUGUSTA NEWS. 
 
 Benjamin H. Hill is at rest. As goes down the stately ship in a quiet 
 sea, after the storm is over, but scarred on the surface and broken by the 
 fury of the flood, wrecked in mid ocean and waiting to be engulfed, he 
 sinks beneath the waves ; and the great ocean of humanity is troubled and 
 distressed. But although his wonderful frame has gone down, his strong 
 and faithful heart outlasted the tempest, and he carried into eternity the 
 well-preserved freight of love and happiness and the itying white sail of a 
 great name and a proud record. 
 
 SAVANNAH (GA.) RECORDER. 
 
 He was known throughout this broad land as a man of towering intel 
 lect, of undoubted genius ; a ready debater and brilliant writer ; a fluent 
 speaker, and an orator who could enter the forum and entrance the listening 
 thousands. The South possessed no more stalwart defender and her enemies 
 always found in him a foeman worthy of their steel. His lofty strains of 
 eloquence, however, are now hushed forever, and the music of his voice will 
 no more be heard. He has gone the way of all earth, and Georgia to-day 
 mourns the loss of a faithful son and a truly great man, and one whose place 
 can scarcely be filled. 
 
 ROME (GA.) BULLETIN. 
 
 From the day that it was ascertained that his disease would terminate 
 fatally, a gloom has rested over the State that gave him birth, and that has 
 ever been proud to do .him homage. To-day, although the blow was ex 
 pected, Georgia mourns for her favorite, gifted son, as a mother mourns for 
 her best loved child, who is rudely and suddenly stricken down by the fell 
 destroyer. In his death a bright light has been extinguished, and the void 
 created by his removal from our midst may never be filled by another. His 
 loss is not his family s nor the State s, but the loss is a national one, and 
 will be so regarded throughout the United States of America. 
 
 SUNNY SOUTH, ATLANTA. 
 
 The great suffering spirit has had 
 Another morn than ours, 
 
 passing away resignedly, surrounded by his devoted family; thus closing at 
 once a splendid career and an ordeal of pain such as has seldom fallen to the 
 
184 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 lot of mortal to bear. With burning ulcers eating up his throat and tongue, 
 unable to enjoy food or drink, to converse with friends, or even to breathe 
 freely, his life had long been a burden, and when to this is added the con 
 sciousness (so bitter to an active, ambitious spirit) that he was dying while 
 in his prime, with genius and energy still strong within him, and much good 
 work to be accomplished, we can partly realize the sadness of this affliction. 
 
 HOME (GA.) COURIER. 
 
 President Davis pronounced him a powerful pillar of his administration, 
 and relied upon his great talents and his eloquent tongue for his defense in 
 the Confederate Congress. When that ill-fated cause went down in defeat 
 
 Cr? 
 
 and disaster, Mr. Hill was the first politician of distinction to arouse the 
 people from their state of despondency and demoralization, to a heroic 
 rally for the preservation of their remaining constitutional rights against 
 the encroachments and the usurpations of the party in power. If his life 
 afforded no other proof of his innate greatness and heroism, his resolute 
 stand on that momentous occasion would have endeared his memory to a 
 people capable of appreciating patriotic courage and unflinching devotion 
 to a conquered section and its rights. In this, as in every other political 
 emergency, he was found " great on great occasions." 
 
 His record in the Senate is one of which his State may well be proud, 
 for he was the admitted peer of any senator North or South, and by many 
 regarded as the most eloquent man who had held a seat in that body since 
 the days of Henry Clay. Representing a State still laboring under political 
 disadvantages, he was a foeman whom every senator, hostile to her interests 
 or rights, dreaded to meet in debate, and a champion upon whom the people 
 of Georgia could aiwavs relv for the vindication of their honor or the main- 
 
 O . / 
 
 tenance of their rights. 
 
 Such was the man whom we mourn to-day the statesman, the orator 
 and patriot, whose life was devoted to one long struggle for principle and 
 right against whatever odds or reverses. He, more truly than any other 
 man of late years, fulfilled Pollok s description of the faithful legislator. 
 
 The man who in the Senate house, 
 Watchful, unhired, unbribed, and unseduced, 
 In virtue s awful rage battled for right. 
 
 In the relations of private life, as a citizen, a friend, or the head of a de 
 voted family, he was equally reliable, sincere, and pure. Living in an era 
 of public corruption and individual greed, the breath of suspicion was never 
 raised against his private honesty or public integrity. He was the soul of 
 honor, love, and fidelity in all his relations to his country and to his fellow- 
 men. The void caused by his death in the large circle of his relations and 
 friends can never be adequately filled, and Georgia can hardly replace in the 
 Senate a statesman and orator of whom she can be so justly proud ; for, as 
 Lady Percy said of her slain lord, it may be said of Benjamin H. Hill, intel 
 lectually : 
 
 The earth that bears him dead bears none alive so stout. 
 
 BANNER WATCHMAN. 
 
 There is sorrow in the land. As the news was flashed over the wires 
 announcing that Senator Benjamin H. Hill, one of nature s noblemen, one of 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 185 
 
 the country s greatest and grandest men, was no more, a whole nation was 
 bowed in sorrow, while the silent tear, the voiceless anguish of aching 
 hearts gave utterance to those emotions which lie forever beyond the 
 domain of human language. To attempt the eulogy of one so well and 
 widely known, one whose nature was so grand, whose statesmanship was so 
 matchless, whose eloquence was so sublime, and whose oratory was so peer 
 less, would be as useless as we are incompetent to the task. Equipped for 
 the duties of this life, with an intelligence as strong as it was ever active, 
 with an eloquence as powerful as it was pleasing, to the full measure did he 
 discharge those duties, making himself known and felt throughout the 
 length and breadth of the land. Well and truly may it be said, that, as a 
 patriot, as a statesman, and as an orator, one more highly honored and 
 esteemed never lived, one more lamented never died ; that : 
 
 A nobler and a grander man, 
 Framed in the prodigality of nature, 
 
 The spacious world could not again afford. 
 
 How strange and how sad is that dispensation of Providence which has 
 closed to this great and grand man a career so useful, so distinguished, and 
 so brilliant, while yet in the full-orbed vigor and splendor of manhood s 
 high meridian ? Although it is true that the distinguished deceased has 
 been called hence, while yet in the full maturity of his powers, yet, the 
 splendor of his intellect, the power of his eloquence, and the sublimity of 
 his patriotism was given to the country and to his people during the most 
 eventful and trying periods of their history. 
 
 How the memory of this great man will ever be cherished by Southern 
 people, when they recall with what undaunted, and with what reluctantly 
 yielding patriotism he held on to their cause, for which he was ready and 
 willing to sacrifice his all, and which was the cause of that people with whom 
 he was reared and whom he so much loved. Never will the Southern people 
 cease to forget those dark days of reconstruction, when this departed states 
 man, this lamented patriot and hero, with a magnetic presence, with a vigor 
 of intellect, with a love of justice that knew no compromise, with an elo 
 quence and an utterance as strong and as fearless as it was persuasive and 
 convincing, and with a love of country which was the inspiration of his 
 every effort, his every ambition did quicken into new life the dormant 
 patriotism of others, thus dispelling the dark clouds which overshadowed an 
 outraged and oppressed people, and causing the bright sun of peace and 
 prosperity to again gladden our sunny South. Never will a nation cease 
 to forget that fervid eloquence, that able and earnest advocacy of constitu 
 tional law and government, with which Mr. Hill electrified the halls of Con 
 gress, commanding for him the respect, the confidence, the consideration, 
 and the esteem of both friend and foe, and which made him the peer of the 
 grandest of all his predecessors. While these and all these grand, heroic, 
 and patriotic events in the life of Senator Hill go to make up the life of a 
 great man, yet there was in the closing scenes of a life so full of history and 
 so full of all that is great, that which ever induce the belief that a kind 
 Providence, which had so endowed this noblest type of man, spared unto 
 him that length of day, that fullness of manhood, and that concentration of 
 his powers, which made his last, his greatest, his grandest, his best days. 
 Yes, that true love of Him who doeth all things well ; that Christian 
 
186 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 patience, fortitude, and heroism ; that meek and humble submission to the 
 Master s will, which so beautified the last long-suffering days of Senator 
 Hill, will ever show forth the closing scenes in the life of this Christian 
 hero, patriot, and statesman with a glory, a grandeur, and a resplendency 
 that will far eclipse all that may be said or written of a life so renowned. 
 Farewell to him, so great, so renowned, so beloved, and so lamented. 
 
 LA GRANGE REPORTER. 
 
 The agony is over and Senator Hill is at rest. For two or three days be 
 fore his death it had become evident to his physicians and family that his 
 sufferings would not be protracted much longer. He had not only lost the 
 power of utterance, but his hand was also powerless to indite his thoughts 
 on paper. Almost to the last, he* retained consciousness. His patient hero 
 ism, his uncomplaining fortitude through his long and agonizing illness, 
 were a wonder to all but those who realized that his strength to endure was 
 derived from Omnipotence and was his through Christian faith and love. 
 More lustrous than his oratory, more resplendent than his statesmanship, 
 and more grand than his matchless fame, shone those Christian virtues which 
 the night of his suffering brought out like stars in the firrnanent. Truly, the 
 night reveals beauties never dreamed of in the day. 
 
 And now, how shall we describe our loss ? Georgia, speechless with grief, 
 stands by the bier of her mightiest child. Since the days of the glorious 
 " Harry of the West," no orator equaling Hill has appeared on this conti 
 nent. The power of his eloquence was matched by the brilliancy of an intel 
 lect that towered in majesty above all his contemporaries. On the hustings, 
 in the forum, and in the halls of Congress, he was the peerless orator, the 
 irresistible advocate, the powerful champion of whatever cause he espoused. 
 His celebrated reply to Blaine, his arraignment of the Louisiana iniquity, 
 and his denunciation of Mahone, stand alone in the annals of Congress and 
 have made him a reputation that will live in the history of his country. 
 
 But here in Georgia he will be missed most keenly. A Georgian of 
 Georgians, he loved his State with all the ardor of his great nature. When 
 others quailed in the presence of a military despotism, Ben Hill advanced 
 fearlessly to the front and raised the cry whose reverberation awoke the en 
 thusiasm that saved the State from negro-radical domination. We owe him 
 a debt of gratitude second only to that due the founder of our commonwealth, 
 for he went into the " imminent deadly breach," and " plucked the flower 
 safely from the nettle danger." 
 
 Troup County mourns her illustrious son as no other part of the State can. 
 Here he grew to greatness ; here are the friends who watched most intensely 
 the development of his genius, and whose suffrages first wreathed his daunt 
 less brow with civic honors. Capturing the imagination of our youth by 
 his political prowess, and stirring the blood of age by his wonderful oratory, 
 he was first borne in the halls of legislation on a tide of popular enthusiasm, 
 which, mounting still higher, almost landed him, a few years later, into Con 
 gress over the barrier of a tremendous opposition. Again Troup boomed 
 him for governor, and the contest which ensued, though ending in defeat of 
 her youthful champion, revealed to the whole State his marvelous gifts and 
 prepared the way for his subsequent promotion. The memory of Ben Hill 
 will be handed down as a tradition from father to son by our citizens who 
 knew him in his prime. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 187 
 
 But he is gone, How hard to realize the fact. His long identification 
 with our politics will cause him to be missed as few public men of this gen 
 eration have been. 
 
 CARTERSVILLE COUKANT. 
 
 Benjamin Harvey Hill is dead. A brilliant intellectual light has faded 
 from this world, only to shine more transcendently beyond the skies. A 
 colossal mind has left its tenement of clay to find rest beyond " the beauti 
 ful river." A grand soul has taken its flight to bask in the eternal realms of 
 light and bliss. The athletic form must slumber with the dust of his native 
 State he loved so well. Grand old Georgia, the mother of so great and so 
 good a man, in whose bosom he must be laid away to rest. No more shall 
 we hear his clarion voice venting words of matchless eloquence, forming 
 sentences that sprang from a genius of unparalleled brightness. The mas 
 terly mind will never again express its great wisdom to an admiring and 
 loving people. Nor shall we again witness the coruscations of as bright a 
 genius as the world ever produced. 
 
 It is sad to think that Ben Hill is no more to be seen by the people 
 of Georgia, who loved him so well and honored him so confidingly. The 
 simple announcement of his demise will cast the shadow of a great sorrow, 
 a poignant grief, over the hearts of all true Georgians. But he is gone. 
 Virtually, the people of Georgia are t( clothed in sackcloth and ashes," for a 
 prince of mighty mind, with a magnanimous heart, the Christian, the neigh 
 bor, and the statesman is no more. 
 
 For more than twenty-six years the writer of this feeble tribute to his 
 memory has known personally and intimately the honored deceased. For 
 many years we lived as his neighbor and friend in beautiful La Grange, 
 where we know every heart to-day is bo wed down in sorrow and grief ; where 
 he was beloved as no other man was ever loved by those people, who almost 
 worshiped him. 
 
 GAINESVILLE EAGLE. 
 
 At his home in Atlanta, Hon. Benjamin Harvey Hill, Georgia s gifted 
 son and senator, the statesman, orator, and patriot, has breathed his last. 
 A great light has gone out in the starry firmament of genius ; a grand soul, 
 strong in a noble faith, has gone to greet the God who gave it ; the most 
 eloquent tongue in all this land has been stilled in death ; the finest eyes 
 that ever windowed a soul of fire are glazed in dissolution. 
 
 Georgia weeps to-day. Words of tenderest sympathy will tremble on 
 ten thousand tongues. Ten thousand eyes will shed tears, those jewels with 
 which affection decks its loved ones. But words will be hollow, tears will 
 not glitter as is their wont, and dumb sorrow will stand round about the 
 hearthstones of the Empire State of the South. In the presence of a great 
 sorrow like this, when the leaden wing of woe hangs low its sable shadow 
 athwart the pathway of life, we can only stand still, wring our helpless 
 hands, wonder, and weep. 
 
 ROME TRIBUNE. 
 
 To-morrow the lifeless body of Benjamin Harvey Hill will be consigned 
 to the cold and silent tomb. Atlanta, the home of the great patriot-states 
 man, is in sack-cloth. Emblems of mourning greet the eye in whatever 
 
188 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 direction it may be turned. The capitol, the public buildings, the stores, 
 and the residences of the devoted city, are draped in somber black, a fit 
 emblem of the darkness and solitude which prevades the entire community. 
 Atlanta is not alone in the burden of grief which is weighing her down. 
 Not a city, not a town, not a village or hamlet within the boundaries of the 
 commonwealth, but what is equally afflicted in the death of Benjamin H. 
 Hill. From his earliest manhood he has enjoyed the love and the confidence 
 of the people ; and how richly he deserved this homage of a community, a 
 commonwealth, a life of labor and devotion, such as has been rarely given 
 to men to bestow, best attests. Lying on his bier to-day, thousands upon 
 thousands of eyes will moisten with sorrowful tears as they behold for the 
 last time their worshiped senator. To-morrow will ever be memorable as 
 the day of that funeral at which our entire State was the mourner. Although 
 every bosom to-day heaves with grief and sorrow, every heart bleeds at the 
 loss forever of our idol ; yet the full measure of the calamity sustained can 
 not yet be realized. It will require time and reaction from the excitement 
 which to-day prevails, time to think and consider before the people of 
 Georgia can realize to its full extent the magnitude of the calamity which 
 has befallen them. The ways of Providence are mysterious, and our re 
 ligion teaches us to bow submissively to its decrees. Yet how difficult to 
 acquiesce in this injunction. In the zenith of his manhood, in the prime of 
 his glory, he is called away to that bourn whence no traveler returns, 
 mourned by a State and a nation. 
 
 HARTWELL (GA.) SUN". 
 
 The blow has fallen, and Georgia s grandest citizen is dead. Our pen is 
 too weak to write a suitable tribute to the illustrious dead, and we will not 
 attempt it. But every heart is saddened at the news of his death. A grand 
 man, he died calmly, grandly ; his last words showing the grandeur of his 
 faith in his Heavenly Father. 
 
 WASHINGTON (GA.) GAZETTE. 
 
 What an irreparable loss to Georgia and the Union the end of this 
 grand man, whose thrilling eloquence no orator has ever surpassed, and 
 whose magnificent intellect has left its indelible impress on the history of the 
 world. The life of Ben Hill will pass into the classics. He was a man who 
 preserved his integrity through all the vicissitudes of an upheaving revolution 
 and a disastrous defeat in a country around which his heartstring were bound 
 so closely. Georgia weeps, and well she may, over the bier of her noble son. 
 
 ALBANY (GA.) NEWS AND ADVERTISER. 
 
 Although the death of Senator Benjamin Harvey Hill has been expected 
 for several weeks past, the news which came by telegraph from Atlanta that 
 he had breathed his last was a great shock to our community, and a sorrow 
 that entered the hearts of our people like a sudden shaft from a cruel hand. 
 
 Ben Hill, Georgia s silver-tongued orator, the South s ablest defender, is 
 no more. No more will his eloquent voice be heard upon the hustings, nor 
 in defense of his beloved South, in the halls of the United States Senate. 
 His death is to the people of the South what the death of Stonewall Jackson 
 was to the Southern Confederacy an irreparable loss; and there is no man 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WAITINGS. 189 
 
 in Georgia who can be to us what he was up to the time the fatal hand of 
 affliction was laid so heavily upon him, and he was compelled to quit his post 
 of duty at Washington a few months ago. He was the peer of any man in 
 the American Congress, and had the courage to defend his people and the 
 South whenever and by whomsoever assailed. 
 
 There are few pens capable of paying a just tribute to Ben Hill. Ours 
 will not presume to try. We can only mingle our tears with those of the 
 thousands who weep for him to-day, and embalm his virtues and brilliant 
 career in life s memory. 
 
 EATONTON MESSENGER. 
 
 Ben Hill requires no eulogy at our hands. Our pen is totally unequal to 
 the task of paying just tribute to one whose life presented in every attitude 
 a spectacle of grandeur seldom witnessed in an age like this, and his best 
 panegyric must come from the broken words of love for his life and sorrow 
 for his death that escape the lips of every Georgian. The past few decades 
 have presented no such event of sorrow, and the death of no one man has 
 so solemnized the hearts of a people among whom he lived and to whom he 
 gave his almost superhuman powers. The assassination of President Gar- 
 tield aroused to a unit the sympathies and the indignation of Georgians ; 
 but the silence of the most eloquent tongue in American politics, the decay 
 of an intellect that has seen few equals and met no superiors, and the loss of 
 one of the most potential powers for good that has made its impress upon 
 the footprints of the nineteenth century must constitute a sorrow and calam 
 ity that cuts deeper among his own people than the death of a President. 
 
 The Republic will mourn the death of Senator Hill as a calamity over 
 spreading the entire country. His devotion to the Union and his states 
 manlike career in behalf of the Union s prosperity and good, entitles him to 
 the respect and homage of an American people. 
 
 The South, his native section, must mourn him as a man who has been 
 unceasingly devoted to her existence. He was a Southerner in the days of 
 our prosperity ; his devotion rose to the summit of grandeur in the days of 
 our misfortune. 
 
 Georgia, the State of his nativity and his love, bows under the calamity of 
 his death. His place in our highest position of honor will be supplied, but 
 as long as two generations exist it will not be filled. We must look to some 
 marvel of coming generations for the man who can fill Senator Hill s shoes. 
 
EXTRACTS FROM THE SOUTHERN PRESS OUTSIDE OF 
 
 THE STATE. 
 
 NEW ORLEANS (LA.) TIMES-DEMOCRAT. 
 
 SOME months ago Georgia s great orator, whose eloquence had spoken 
 out so nobly for our people, and whose brave and courageous defense 
 of Louisiana in the hours of her greatest need, of her suffering and her 
 misery, had endeared him so much to us, found that his tongue, with 
 which he had lashed hypocrites and defended right and justice, was 
 threatened with that fatal and mysterious disease of cancer. Ever since, 
 Senator Ben Hill, the foremost statesman that the South ever produced, and 
 among the ablest and strongest men in Union, has been dying. 
 
 BALTIMORE DAY. 
 
 It was not until the villainies and oppressions of Reconstruction began 
 in the South that the name of Ben Hill became familiar to the whole coun 
 try. From that time until long after a care for his physical condition 
 should have forbidden his attendance, he continued at Washington in the 
 service of his State, the most prominent of her representatives in either 
 House, making for himself a reputation exceeded by none of the great 
 Georgians whom the Empire State of the South has from time to time 
 commissioned as her public servants. When Blaine, with the craftiness 
 for which he is famous, made charges against the honor and humanity of 
 the Southern people, Ben Hill would not sit silently and hear those he loved 
 \illified, traduced, and libeled, but with burning words of indignation he 
 met the accusations and proved their falsity without stopping to ask whether 
 fools or fanatics in the North should find in his words fuel with which to 
 feed fat the grudge of their hate. The people of his State and the whole 
 South will look back now with gratitude to the so-called rashness with 
 which he ever sprang to defend them from charges which involved their 
 honor and good name ; but bravely as he lived, the metal of his courage 
 was never fully shown until, all illusive hopes abandoned, he turned and 
 faced the torture of his lingering death. The annals of our race present no 
 higher spectacle of courage than that seen in the quiet home in which this 
 man of eager words and earnest deeds, while yet in the years which should 
 have been those of his strength, gave up activity, honors, and life, without 
 a murmur or regret or one vain struggle, with dignity, cheerfulness, and 
 resignation. 
 
 VICKSBURG (MISS.) COMMERCIAL. 
 
 He has been the ablest champion of democratic principles and the most 
 earnest advocate and eloquent defender of the ex-President of the Confed 
 erate States and the rights of the South. 
 
 190 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 191 
 
 
 
 NEW ORLEANS (LA.) PICAYUNE. 
 
 Not yet fifty-nine years of age, the foremost lawyer in Georgia, the idol 
 of the people, whom his oratory always charmed and controlled, it seemed 
 but the other day as though there yet remained before him many years of 
 zealous service in the national forum where real service is worth something 
 to the country. 
 
 CHARLOTTE (N. C.) OBSERVER. 
 
 The public career of Mr. Hill is well known, for but few men in public 
 life had attracted more attention in the councils of the nation or made a 
 more brilliant record, honorable alike to himself and to the State which 
 proudly pointed to him as one of her representatives. Georgia has had and 
 may have other great men, but she has never had a son who has done her 
 more honor, or in whom her trust was more worthily bestowed, than in the 
 honest, incorruptible, fearless, eloquent, and brilliant Benjamin H. Hill, 
 whose death she mourns to-day, and in which she has the sympathy of all 
 who admire chivalric devotion to duty and honor and virtue. Such men 
 die, but are not often forgotten. 
 
 LOUISVILLE (KY.) COURIER- JOURNAL. 
 
 The strong man has gone, with the brilliant, alert mind, and he leaves a 
 vacancy difficult to fill in the really small group of our public men posses 
 sing genuine oratorical talent. Senator Hill s speeches in Congress were 
 always good, keen, and incisive. He met and parried the assaults of the 
 Northern demagogues during the days of sectional bitterness, a few years 
 back, with marked ability. He had great distinction as a lawyer, and no 
 man in Congress surpassed him in legal ability. The South loses in him 
 one of the most judicious and patient of champions, and the country cer 
 tainly loses one of her most talented and patriotic citizens. 
 
 NASHVILLE (TENN.) WORLD. 
 
 He ranked first among the ablest debaters in Congress, and his ready 
 wit, caustic and scathing sarcasm, and brilliant eloquence gained for him 
 the soubriquet of the " silver-tongued orator of the South." His services to 
 his country were manifold and his connection with the political history of 
 his times and the fortunes of his section gained for him pre-eminent ascen 
 dency. Georgia will long mourn her dead hero and embalm his memory in 
 the innermost shrine of her heart. 
 
 BALTIMORE (ID.) SUN. 
 
 Senator Benjamin H. Hill, whose death occurred at Atlanta, Ga., will 
 be sincerely mourned throughout the whole country. He was greatly 
 admired in the North as well as in the South for his brilliant talents, 
 while his courtesy and kindness of heart won for him hosts of friends 
 among those who differ most widely from him in political opinion. He 
 was a man of strong, earnest convictions, and had the courage to express 
 them without regard to immediate consequences, but he was also one of 
 the most generous and tolerant of men toward those whose opinions did 
 not accord with his own. 
 
192 SENATOR B. ff. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 In the Confederate Senate he was a conspicuous figure, and his defense 
 of Jefferson Davis brought him into sharp antagonism with a number of the 
 leading men of that body. In the House of Representatives he won a 
 national reputation as a ready debater and courageous party leader, and when 
 transferred to the Senate he fully sustained the fame which he had won in 
 the House. 
 
 MONTGOMERY (ALA.) TIMES. 
 
 
 
 An orator and a statesman, he led men and molded events by the powers 
 of his peerless intellect, for the prowess of his arm played no part in beating 
 out his way to fame. He was none the less a hero, a citizen hero, out of 
 whose eloquent eyes a great soul looked upon the world and spoke just 
 enough of kinship with its weakness and its sin to make men love him as a 
 brother while they venerated him as a leader. His heart was full of human 
 nature, its joys and its sorrows, its passions and its aspirations, and, as one 
 grasping his birthright, he won the admiration as he captured the hearts of 
 all men. His crowning virtue was his wealth of patriotism. The word has 
 become the mouthing cant of cheap demagogues and mercenary placemen, 
 and the world is forgetting its primitive truth and beauty. But in him it 
 was a breathing life, instinct with freshness, and purity, and beauty, as in 
 the old Roman days when patriots died for the heritage of the name. He 
 wrapped his country in his heart of hearts and joyed with all her joys and 
 wept with all her sorrows, and trembled at the thought of harm to her. To 
 make his country rich, and prosperous, and great ; to preserve his people s 
 liberties and promote their happiness, was his thought by day and dream by 
 night, and the last study of his priceless wisdom was to solve the great prob 
 lem that threatens her future of to-day. 
 
 NASHVILLE (TENN.) BANNER* 
 
 His public life was teres atque rotundus a completed volume. His 
 faults, as his virtues, were those of a sincere, frank, impulsive man, whose 
 impulses were just and under control of a ripe judgment. Short sight called 
 him impracticable, because he would plant for to-morrow where short sight 
 demanded instant fruition, and sordidness looked only to the usufruct of 
 politics. He was willing to labor for the coming years without present 
 returns, and it is a credit to Georgia, the only truly progressive State in the 
 South, that he has been uniformly sustained. Georgia is the only Southern 
 State which preserved the seed of true statesmanship in the wreck of war 
 and the scenes which followed war. Hill was the best of her statesmen. 
 He was broad, liberal, progressive. He held firmly by as much of the past 
 as should be ever cherished. He allowed no man to asperse the honor and 
 the patriotism of his country and his people. He met with stern rebuke 
 every foul imputation upon the honor of those who did well to fight, did 
 well in the fight, and did well to fail in securing, but gathered, nevertheless, 
 glorious fruits of all their work. He never paraded these memories in 
 politics. He forgot the past in the duties of the present, while treasuring 
 them as a people s noblest heritage. He was the noblest champion of his 
 people attacked, the most liberal and progressive of Southern statesmen. 
 He was not a Bourbon, obstinate fossil, like Toombs, nor a charlatan pro 
 gressive, like Mahone, or Joe Brown, in some respects. He was a philo 
 sophical statesman, who recognized the present as descending from the past, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WAITINGS. 193 
 
 not one of those shallow blabblers who think oblivion of all the past is 
 necessary to progress; who would sweep away the very foundation beneath 
 them upon which their progress must be built ; nor yet one of those who sit 
 hugging the delusive phantoms of a fading past, lost to all realities of the 
 living present, having no care for the increasing future. Conservative pro 
 gressive aptly describes Senator Ben Hill as a public man. The only true 
 conservatism is progressive : the only true progressivism is conservative. 
 
 SHELBINA (MO.) INDEX. 
 
 After a living death of several months, the pure, noble soul of Ien Hill 
 took its flight to the great unknown eternity beyond. His death was re 
 gretted by every living soul save himself, who gladly welcomed the eternal 
 rest of death. 
 
 As a statesman he was brave and sagacious ; as a political opponent he 
 was aggressive and daring ; and when his large heart, which ever beat in 
 true Southern chivalry, felt the jabs and insults of some Northern prostitute 
 in politics, the words and eloquence of Ben Hill were all fire ; as a senator, 
 statesman, counselor, and friend his words were full of wisdom and calm 
 ness ; when the miseries of the afflicted and the sorrows of his oppressed 
 people appealed to him as an advocate, his tones were so loving and tender 
 as to touch the tenderest chords of every true heart. In his own terrible 
 suffering with that dread disease (cancer), for which human science has 
 never found a remedy, he displayed that Christian forbearance, faith, and 
 fortitude possessed only by the true, noble, and brave. People used to 
 praise the forbearance of Garfield during his long months of intense suffer 
 ing ; here we have one even greater than he. In prosperity, just reaching 
 the years of usefulness, surrounded by a loving family, and with fame at his 
 feet, he is greatest in suffering ; as a few hours before his death he told his 
 son, " Of all his days, his days of suffering were his happiest." Truer 
 philosophy or " grander words were never uttered by a Plato or a Socrates." 
 
 Noble, generous, great-hearted man. Little can this nation spare such as 
 thee. His silvery tongue is forever hushed ; his kind, generous heart has 
 ceased to beat ; his words of wisdom and comfort will be heard no more 
 Ben Hill is dead. But his pure example, his honesty of purpose, his great 
 faith under such torturing mental sufferings will live as a shining example 
 long 1 after his mortality has crumbled to dust. 
 
 HOUSTON (TEX.) DAILY POST. 
 
 The long agony is over and Benjamin Harvey Hill is dead. One of the 
 greatest and purest men that America has ever produced has departed from 
 his earthly scene of labor and has entered upon the experiences of that 
 higher sphere for which he was well prepared. Since the days of Webster, 
 Calhoun, and Clay, the country has seen no nearer approximation to their 
 forensic altitude. Men, of course, will be swayed in their judgments as to 
 the comparative excellence of representative characters by circumstances 
 and feeling, but at the South, at least, the opinion of the pre-eminence of 
 Mr. Hill as a political orator will be but slenderly questioned, while his 
 noble purity and force of character is revered throughout the land that he 
 loved so well and served so well. Indeed, Mr. Hill was a man of so intense 
 and magnetic force, that, had not his lot been cast in times of sectional 
 strife, his reputation would have been as wide as Clay, and his death would 
 
194 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 have been as sincerely mourned in New York and Boston, as at Athens and 
 Houston. 
 
 MOBILE (ALA.) BEGISTEB. 
 
 Among the great men of this land, and especially among those of the 
 South, the name of Benjamin Harvey Hill will ever find a place. His career 
 as a statesman was characterized by fearlessness in defense of what he felt 
 to be the right, by devotion to his country, and by an eloquence that was 
 matchless in the Senate. He was ever foremost in defense of the South when 
 attacked, and the people of our section will not soon forget his eloquent 
 utterance. But Mr. Hill was by no means a bitter partisan. He believed 
 in the Democratic party and earnestly sought its success, and he loved 
 Georgia and the South ; but in addition he was an American and a patriot. 
 But it was the close of Mr. Hill s life that gave it its chief grandeur. 
 Clouds were about his pathway on earth, but his soul was bathed in the 
 waves of light that flowed from the golden city. Rarely has there been 
 witnessed such a complete resignation to the will of the Almighty, such 
 patience under suffering, an evidence of a meek and quiet spirit. 
 
 MEMPHIS (TENN.) APPEAL. 
 
 The lightning has smitten the eagle upon his cliff. Benjamin Harvey 
 Hill, United States Senator from Georgia, died at his residence in Atlanta, and 
 the event will cause a profound sensation throughout the Union, as the 
 deceased was one of the greatest of American intellects and was a conspicu 
 ous figure in the Senate and before the whole country. His life was pros 
 perous and his home was happy. He never betrayed a friend. He never 
 struck an enemy in the back. In the history of his time he will stand 
 out conspicuously. His name will be associated with a period of gigantic 
 corruptions, which he did not share. He was surrounded by a cluster of 
 politicians whose baseness and hypocrisy he did not emulate. He fought 
 his own battle right out from the shoulder, giving no quarter and asking 
 none. He died in the midst of the splendors which encircled his name. 
 The death of such a man is an event. He was a power in the land, and if 
 he had lived ten years longer, his statue would have been placed in the 
 highest niche in the Pantheon of fame, for age had mellowed a nature natu 
 rally fierce, and he was rapidly developing into a wise counselor. The 
 political enemies of Benjamin H. Hill feared him more than any man in the 
 Senate, and they will be the first to acknowledge his greatness and join in 
 weaving a garland to his fame. The Southern people have lost a powerful 
 arm in his death, and an eloquent voice ever ready to defend them. The 
 body of the dead senator will return to dust, but his name and his glory will 
 be transmitted to the remotest generation. 
 
 CHATTANOOGA (TEISTN.) TIMES 
 
 i 
 
 The country is familiar with the public figure of the dead senator. He 
 was, in some respects, the ablest and most conspicuous personage in Congress 
 from the South. As a debater he had no superior and few equals on the 
 floor of either House. His " smoking out " of JVf ahone is still fresh in recol 
 lection and was a masterpiece of logic, ridicule, invective, and pathos, under 
 which the " Virginia Lucifer " writhed and fretted for weeks. Mr. Hill was 
 not what might be called a " thoroughly reliable >: partisan. His head and 
 heart were both too large and active for true blue thick and thin party work. 
 
EXTRACTS FROM THE PRESS OF THE NORTH. 
 
 BOSTON POST. 
 
 WHEN the war was over, the arena of public debate was virtually closed 
 to Southern men, for confidence was a plant of slow growth, and 
 they had to more than deserve it before receiving it. Perhaps it is not 
 too much to say that the war took from Senator Hill s career at least a dozen 
 of its best years, and yet he was a commanding figure in the Upper House 
 of Congress from the day when he first obtained a hearing there to the day 
 when he left it, ringing with his eloquent voice for the last time. His 
 death robs the councils of the nation of a brilliant advocate and command 
 ing individuality. 
 
 WASHINGTON POST. 
 
 During the past few years, Mr. Hill has had a steady growth in the 
 respect of the whole country. His patriotic bearing in the House and Sen 
 ate ; his calm, clear, convincing statements of the views and feelings of the 
 Southern people, of their desire to do their full share in promoting national 
 harmony and prosperity, made a deep impression on the public mind. Ani 
 mosity died out, and respect came in its place, and since the stricken senator 
 retired to his home, there to certainly await the final scene, the hearts of 
 the people have been deeply touched. Mr. Hill s public services as states 
 man were great, but they were not lost benefactions to mankind. He has 
 shown the world how a great mind can conquer most awful surroundings, 
 and pass away from earth in such sweet dignity as has rarely graced the 
 end of any man. . 
 
 PHILADELPHIA TIMES. 
 
 Not the State of Georgia alone, nor the South alone, if sectional divis 
 ions must still be recognized, but the whole country suffers a loss in the 
 death of Benjamin H. Hill. He was one of the strongest men of his gener 
 ation, with capacities of public usefulness that were not bounded by sec 
 tional lines. Earnest, eloquent, impulsive, and always true of heart. The 
 South might well be content to recognize him as a representative man. He 
 was never a wire worker. He opposed secession, while he could ; went with 
 his State and served it and the Confederacy wisely while the Confederacy 
 lasted, and then accepted the inevitable and frankly devoted his ability, 
 experience, and eloquence and influence to the restoration of peace, pros 
 perity, and cordial union. That he should find himself opposed and mis 
 represented by jealous partisans was inevitable, and scheming politicians 
 did what they could to drive him back into Bourbonism ; but through all the 
 controversies of the last few years " Ben " Hill has steadily made his way 
 
 195 
 
196 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 in the public esteem and confidence, and in this last year of his patient suf 
 fering has added to this large measure of affectionate admiration. Georgia 
 will treasure his memory as one of the most brilliant of her many brilliant 
 sons, and in her loss she will have the cordial sympathy of the whole Ameri 
 can people. 
 
 NEW YORK MAIL AND EXPRESS. 
 
 A great and heroic soul has been released from the intense, constant, and 
 prolonged agonies of an incurable disease, Senator Hill, of Georgia, found 
 happy escape from his body, early this morning. His disease, cancer of the 
 throat, had for several months been of the most painful character. The 
 only relief he got was that obtained by the constant use of opiates. The 
 only consolation he had, aside from the tenderest of loving care and the 
 sympathies of political friends and foes all over the country, was that which 
 he found in the Christian s faith and hope. The consolation has never been 
 stronger in any recorded case of modern times that we know of. The most 
 brilliant and ablest of the Southern senators, one of the most successful of 
 her politicians, one of the ablest lawyers and judges of evidence, found that 
 at the time when he knew that only constant suffering remained between 
 him and the end of earth, he could say, with as much assurance as any 
 apostle or martyr, " I know that my Redeemer liveth," and this faith car 
 ried him triumphantly through an ordeal even more severe and prolonged 
 than that which Garfield bore so heroically and with the same faith. 
 
 Mr. Hill s public career is known to the whole country. Few were his 
 equals in debate. He met few peers as a lawyer. He stormed the highest 
 pinnacles of success by pure force of will, pluck, and brains. He accepted 
 in good faith the results of the war. He was a progressive man in his in 
 stincts. But the noblest part of his career was just that which, to a selfish 
 materialist, would have afforded sufficient provocation for self-destruction. 
 With death staring him constantly in the face, disabled, arrested in the full 
 ness of his career and laid aside, tortured by indescribable agonies, the faith 
 of Ben Hill in his Redeemer made him the victor, and made his example a 
 powerful antidote to the specious unbelief and materialism that are so 
 prevalent at present. He still lives. And the country is incalculably the 
 better for a career so nobly ended. 
 
 TJTICA OBSEEVER. 
 
 Inexpressibly sad and touching have been the last days of the Georgia 
 tribune, who, abandoning finally the hope of recovery at Washington, went 
 home to his people to die. The warmth and fervor of the greeting Georgia 
 gave him have found a reflection in the press of the whole land, and North 
 ern people have learned from it to think tenderly and solicitously of the 
 man who was so beloved at home. Here in the North we will all speak as 
 respectfully and regretfully of his departure as will those of his own State 
 and section. North and South, Republicans and Democrats, will alike say 
 over his grave that Ben Hill was an honest and manly man, an earnest and 
 faithful servant of the people, and a true American. 
 
 CINCINNATI ENQUIRER. 
 
 The flags over the Senate and House of Representatives floated at half- 
 mast this morning, indicating plainly to those left in Washington that 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WAITINGS. 197 
 
 Senator Ben Hill, of Georgia, had passed away. For months past his life 
 has been gradually wasting away from the ravages of a disease which defied 
 the skill of surgery and medicine. For days and weeks he had been calmly 
 awaiting the inevitable end. His death removes one of the most conspicu 
 ous figures in modern politics and hushes a voice of powerful eloquence. In 
 the contest between the Republicans and Democrats which caused the noted 
 dead-lock in the Senate immediately following General Garfield s inaugura 
 tion, Mr. Hill took a most prominent part. He was the real leader of his 
 party in that fight. Although the disease which sapped his strength and 
 carried him to the grave had then begun its deadly work, there was no out 
 ward evidence of it. Of all his compeers in the Senate he was the last to 
 have been selected by human vision as the first of that body to die. 
 
 One of the senators whom visitors to the Capitol invariably asked to 
 have pointed out to them was Senator Hill, of Georgia. He won his spurs 
 in political debate years ago in the House, and in the Senate he maintained 
 his fame as one of the ablest orators and readiest debaters in public life. 
 Mr. Hill was one of the few public men who retained the habit of speaking 
 extemporaneously. He never read his speeches, no matter how important 
 the subject or how much time he might consume. He never spoke from 
 manuscript, and rarely ever used written notes. He possessed a wonderful 
 memory, and would treasure in it all the points of an intended speech. He 
 was ready, prompt, and incisive, and he and Mr. Elaine frequently antago 
 nized each other in the Senate. Mr. Hill was a man of genial nature and 
 kind disposition, though of strong passions and determined will. His per 
 sonal qualities were recognized during his illness, and before it assumed a 
 necessarily fatal shape, by a joint letter from his brother senators, signed 
 by every one of them, assuring him of their regard and sympathy. 
 
 THE FRANKFORT (iND.) BANNER. 
 
 The South loses one of its wisest leaders in the death of Senator B. H. 
 Hill of Georgia. He was originally a Whig. He was carried into the re 
 bellion by the maelstrom of excitement, and after the war he accepted the 
 results as settled, and expressed an earnest desire to aid in building up a 
 united country. He had few faults, and his patient endurance of never ceas 
 ing pain, and his heroic meeting with the dread messenger death, won for 
 him the respect of every American. He was a man of convictions, fearless 
 in advocating them, and ever loyal to what he conceived to be his duty. 
 He died in the prime of life, in the possession of all his faculties, and his last 
 days were his most peaceful ones. Quick tempered, he was gentle as a 
 woman. Though in the rebellion, he ardently desired a united country, and 
 Indianians mourn with the South their great loss. 
 
 SPRINGFIELD (MASS.) REPUBLICAN. 
 
 The event will cause profound sorrow throughout his native State, where 
 Hill was a popular idol, much as Charles Simmer used to be in Massachusetts. 
 In many respects Hill was wonderfully endowed for public service. Tall, of 
 fine presence, with a mobile face, and ready command of language, alert, 
 trained in debate and thought, he was earnest and at times most powerful. 
 As a leader and manager of men, Hill was more brilliant than his con 
 temporary in Georgia politics and the United States Senate, Joseph E. 
 Brown. 
 
198 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 WASHINGTON (D. C.) CRITIC. 
 
 Ben Hill was one of the men whom the country could ill afford to lose. 
 The faults he had were those common to men of big, active brains, and dis 
 played his excess of manhood rather than the want of it in any respect. In 
 his pursuit of power he was bold, somewhat heedless of the feelings of 
 smaller men who got in his way, and in the heat of contest he struck, right 
 and left, heavy blows. But fierce and aggressive as his nature was, vindic- 
 tiveness of vengeance found no lodgment in his mind, and it was his habit 
 to leave all his feuds on the field where he had fought. Personally, Ben Hill 
 was a companionable, likeable man, toward whom it was well-nigh impos 
 sible to harbor resentment, and from whom it was impossible to withhold 
 admiration. 
 
 In his public capacity he was a man of the times in which he lived. 
 Joined to no idols and wedded to no traditions, he was ever ready to enter 
 tain innovation and tolerate new departures. Intensely devoted to the 
 practical re-establishment of the unity of the Union, and to the resurrection 
 of the material fortunes of his prostrate section, Ben Hill s vote was ever 
 heard in favor of advanced policy and progressive legislation. 
 
 The influence of such a man for good and wisdom upon the rising genera 
 tion of intellect could not be overestimated. He and those who co-operated 
 with him were slowly but surely training up a new school of public senti 
 ment in the South, whose dominance at an early day promised the happiest 
 results. As we said, the country could ill afford to lose such a man. But 
 we have the satisfaction of reflecting that he has done his work well so well 
 that it will live after him and go on profiting almost as much by the memory 
 of his precept and example as by the living demonstration. We had hoped 
 to write a great many things about Ben Hill before penning his obituary. 
 But it was willed otherwise. Peace to his ashes. Honor to his name. 
 
 PHILADELPHIA (PA.) PRESS. 
 
 The death of Senator Hill, of Georgia, is a great loss to his State and his 
 country ; the greater because the mellowing influence of time and the drift 
 of events had begun to place the man before the country in a new light. 
 The seeming development was really a return to his earlier and better self. 
 Mr. Hill was a Democrat under protest, a Bourbon by accident. His first 
 appearance in politics was in opposition to the Democracy, an opposition 
 which he maintained with all the ardor of his aggressive nature through local 
 contests and national campaigns, first as follower, afterward as leader, pur 
 suing it into the Secession Convention of his State, and battling against it 
 there until resistance was swept away by a maddened majority. The war 
 over, the white men of the South, having been fused into a common opposi 
 tion to the new order, Mr. Hill stood with his people against reconstruction, 
 but was in advance of the mass of them in accepting the results of the war. 
 But on this very question he showed one of the strong and admirable traits 
 of his character. When the Reconstruction acts had passed he recognized 
 the commanding voice of Congress, and gave to their support the weight of 
 his influence and eloquence. He believed in the maintenance of the law, 
 however unpalatable. 
 
 An honest man and an able lawyer, an orator of high order and lover of 
 
HI8 LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 199 
 
 his reunited country has gone from us ; a man whose public career was embar 
 rassed by a local sentiment which he could not drive but strove to lead ; who 
 passed away before he had developed to the world the best that was in him. 
 Kind feelings and sincere regret will follow the dead Georgia senator to his 
 grave. 
 
 NEW YORK SUN. 
 
 His death removes one of the most distinguished and familiar figures in 
 Washington life. He was not a man who hid his talents or his frailties 
 under a bushel, and his career had a human interest which attached to but 
 few other members of the Senate. With his death there passes away another, 
 and almost the last of that extraordinary group of men which made the con 
 flicts in the Forty-fifth and Forty-sixth Congresses so notable. A visitor to 
 the Senate Chamber now notices the absence of Conkling, Elaine, Thurman, 
 Carpenter, Harnlin, and Hill, all of whom took a conspicuous part in those 
 controversies, but none a more brilliant and influential part than the sharp- 
 eyed, emphatic senator from Georgia. Of those leaders, Beck, Hoar, and 
 Edmunds are now almost the only senators of note who remain. Among 
 senators he was personally very popular, and the round robin letter of sym 
 pathy which they sent him, and in which tribute Senator Hoar took the 
 initiative, expressed the sincere feelings of his colleagues. This letter gave 
 Senator Hill the greatest pleasure, and did much to sustain him in his last 
 illness. 
 
 CINCINNATI TIMES-STAR. 
 
 The nation had become so familiar with his sufferings, which were so 
 intense and which were borne with a patience that marked the greatness of 
 the man, that the announcement of his death falls upon almost every com 
 munity like a death in their midst. Since the war Senator Hill s policy has 
 been one of peace, progress, and reconciliation, and there can be no doubt 
 that to him, as much as any other man, Georgia is indebted for the wave of 
 prosperity that is now sweeping over the State. His services and his suffer 
 ings will live long in the memory of Georgians. 
 
POEMS. 
 
 ON THE PORTALS. 
 
 Tenderly inscribed to Georgia s dying Senator, by John W. Campitt, of Illinois, 
 Counselor-at-Law. 
 
 I am weary of my burden 
 
 And fain would rest ; 
 For the somber winds are sighing, 
 And my fondest hopes are dying, 
 And like autumn leaves are lying 
 
 On earth s cold breast. 
 
 And I hear the voices calling, 
 
 Sweet, soft, and low ; 
 And their plaintive tones are pleading, 
 While the day of life is speeding, 
 And worldly scenes receding, 
 
 For me to go. 
 
 Come with us across the border, 
 
 Seek rest profound ; 
 Where no somber winds are sighing, 
 Where no hopes and joys are dying, 
 Where no dream of love is lying 
 
 Dead upon the ground. 
 
 We will show a light bright burning 
 
 Like a golden star ; 
 Tis a hope you one day buried, 
 In the busy world all hurried, 
 But became the resurrected 
 
 To shine thus afar ! 
 
 We will show you Heaven s morning 
 
 A never ending day ; 
 Where the softest rays are shining 
 And the blossoms sweet entwining ; 
 Where the angels are divining 
 
 Every thought upon the way. 
 
 200 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 201 
 
 Every leaf upon its shore-lines 
 
 Is a gem ; 
 
 Not a withered one is drooping, 
 While the hand of love is looping 
 And into garlands grouping 
 
 All of them. 
 
 In that world there is no sorrow, 
 
 Not a tear ; 
 
 Never comes the broken-hearted, 
 From whose eager life departed 
 The hopes that once had started, 
 
 Fond and dear ! 
 
 Not a storm-cloud ever gathers 
 
 On the air ; 
 
 Only summer clouds are drifting, 
 And summer breezes sifting, 
 And sweetest perfumes lifting, 
 
 From gardens fair. 
 
 Only music soft and melting 
 
 Soothes the soul ; 
 And its billows mild and wooing, 
 With a gentle hand undoing 
 All the cares that were bestrewing 
 
 Each earthly goal. 
 
 Lead me to that land of beauty, 
 
 So I may abide ; 
 
 Lead me where the flowers are blooming, 
 Where the music mild is wooing, 
 Where the hand of love is moving 
 
 On every tide. 
 
 Like a little child I ll follow 
 
 Swift after thee ; 
 To the land of never weeping, 
 Where my Father s love is keeping 
 Mortal 8ouls who failed in reaping 
 
 Earthly ecstasy. 
 
 I ll take my burden for a pillow, 
 
 And lie down to rest ; 
 God s love shall dwell beside me, 
 And no clouds shall ever hide me 
 From the loving ones that guide me 
 
 To the portals of the blest. 
 
202 SENATOR 3. H. BILL, OP GEORGIA. 
 
 FRONTING THE SHADOW. 
 
 In one of Mr. James R. Randall s graphic Washington letters he details an interview 
 with Senator Hill, yi the course of which, referring to his present condition, the senator 
 spoke as follows : 
 
 " If I recover, it is well. If I die, it is also well. While I think it strange that a man 
 whose constitution was formed by physical labor on a farm, and who, up to a year ago, 
 never had a day of ill health, should be afflicted with an inexplicable disorder of the blood, 
 I resign myself into the hands of my Creator, who will do with me what seems best to 
 Him, and either raise me up to further usefulness or summon me away. I await with 
 patience either event." 
 
 Oft hast thou triumphed in the keen debate ; 
 Lightened and thundered through the Senate hall ; 
 Now o er thee clouds of muffled silence fall, 
 And by the flickering Future s veiled gate 
 A somber shadow seems to watch and wait ! 
 Still, round thy House of Life, from wall to wall, 
 Dost thou not hear the golden trumpet call 
 To those hijjh lists which gird the strifes of state ? 
 
 
 
 The old instinct stirs ! the ancient warrior heat 
 Flushes thy blood ! and ne er (thou know st it) yet 
 Have thy strong pulses felt a loftier beat, 
 Nor nerve nor brain to lordlier praise been set. 
 Come, lift thy weapon ! Heaven ! what spell is here? 
 Our Launcelot s hand but meets a phantom spear ! 
 
 His firm hand drops. Across his face a line 
 Of furrowing anguish flashes to dark flame. 
 Dear to his soul is action, dear is fame. 
 " What, must I rest," he murmured, " lost, supine, 
 While other s drink of Glory s radiant wine ? 
 Yea, if God will," in softened accents came ; 
 " To Him I yield life, honor, purpose, name, 
 Kneel to His wisdom, worship at His shrine." 
 Ah, chastened heart, these words of simple trust, 
 Are nobler than thy lordlier speech before ! 
 They mount on wing of Pentecostal fire. 
 And when yon Senate halls are blackened dust, 
 May crown the fullness of thy soul s desire, 
 With peace unknown by mortal sea or shore. 
 
 PAUL HAMILTON HAYNE. 
 COPSE HILL, GA. 
 
 THE RIVER. 
 
 The follow::- 1 - beautiful poem was written by theaccomplished wife of Senator Hill s 
 son, Mr. B. H. Hill, Jr. It was written apropos of Senator Hill s sickness and in view of 
 his approaching death. Journal. 
 
 Oh, rugged river ! restless river ! 
 River of years river of tears 
 Thou river of Life ! 
 
fflS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 203 
 
 River of tears ! Yet o er thy bosom Joy, as a bird flashes its gaudy wing, 
 And drinks its draught of ecstasy from out thy crystal spring. 
 
 Oh, sunlit river ! shadowy river ! 
 River of gladness river of sadness 
 Thou river of Life ! 
 
 River of gladness ! Yet o er the blue of the beautiful sky floats a cloud. 
 Out of whose fleecy whiteness the Loom of God is weaving a shroud. 
 
 Oh, beautiful river ! while the star of youth is glowing. 
 
 From the silver sprinkled sky ; 
 River of Life ! when health s elixir flowing 
 
 Paints thy waters its rosy dye. 
 
 Sunlit river ! when the days are full of peace, 
 
 And the calm of the song the river sings, 
 
 And the quiet joy the lullaby brings, 
 We feel will never cease. 
 
 And while the waters glow and glisten, 
 Ah ! how seldom do we listen 
 
 To the turning of the ponderous wheel of Time. 
 Over whose granite side are rushing 
 
 The waves of the river in a symphony sublime ! 
 
 But when the waters are black and bleeding, 
 
 Dyed with dread Disease s breath, 
 And we feel the river leading: 
 
 To the fathomless sea of Death 
 
 Then, ah ! then, in our agony of soul 
 
 We cry, " Oh ! wheel of Time, one moment stay ! 
 
 Turn back the river, and cease to roll 
 For a life we love is passing away." 
 
 But God is the Miller, and the wheel is turning, 
 Though Grief s hot irons our hearts are burning. 
 And the river s song is only a moan, 
 And the grinding wheel sounds a groan. 
 
 
 
 But from out our midnight gloom 
 
 Look up ! God knoweth best. 
 See the life we love as it catches the bloom 
 
 Of infinite radiance and rest ! 
 
 Its waters have mingled with the crystal stream 
 
 Flowing so close to the throne, 
 And the waves have caught the golden gleam, 
 
 And the river s voice, God s tender tone. 
 
204 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 And the river in heaven in its crystal calm 
 Found its way through the golden bars, 
 Flowing upward beyond the garden of stars 
 To the feet of God and His lamb. 
 
 Oh, royal river ! radiant river ! 
 River of Light river of Life 
 Thou river of God ! 
 
 " ALMOST HOME ! 
 
 Last Words of Senator Benjamin H. Hill. 
 
 " Almost home ! Thus spake with resignation 
 
 Divinely meek, the South s illustrious son, 
 Drinking the dregs of mortal pain s potation, 
 
 With all, save death s supremest suffering, done ; 
 The splendor of his days was swift declining, 
 
 Fast fell upon his path the night of death, 
 Yet still one steadfast star for him was shining 
 
 Amid the gloom the star of Christian faith. 
 
 " Almost home ! I see the beacon burning ! 
 
 The home-bound sailor sings abreast the bay ; 
 " Almost home ! The weary child, returning 
 
 From the fields of frolic, murmurs on the way. 
 Sweet words of cheer are they, on land or ocean, 
 
 And like a blessing to our hearts they come, 
 But who can measure the sublime emotion, 
 
 The transport, of the Christian s " Almost home I * 
 
 " Almost home ! The light of life was fading, 
 
 The glory of the world grew wan and dim, 
 Its fame or shame, its praise or its unbraiding, 
 
 What, in that awful hour, were these to him ? 
 Hushed the majestic voice whose mighty thunder, 
 
 Reverberating neath the Senate s dome, 
 Was wont to fill men s hearts with awe and wonder 
 
 It could but breathe in whispers, " Almost home ! 
 
 But such a whisper ! Fame in all her sounding, 
 
 Triumphant music hath no tones like these, 
 With bliss surcharged, with ecstasy abounding, 
 
 A wondrous anthem of immortal peace. 
 Strange, passing strange. Death gave for his adorning 
 
 The grandest crown of all his glorious past, 
 And like a star that melts into the morning 
 
 Heaven took his soul and he was at home at last. 
 
 CHARLES W. HUBNER. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS 205 
 
 ALMOST HOME! 
 
 Where moaning rolls the troubled wave, 
 Whose tempest-tortured waters lave 
 Life s furthest shore, his spirit stands 
 Half pausing on the crumbling sands. 
 Exultant words of triumph wrung 
 In joy from that long silent tongue, 
 He looks beyond the tossing foam 
 And sweetly murmurs, " Almost Home ! 
 
 No more with woe and weakness cursed 
 
 Disease and death have done their worst ; 
 
 The dream of life is left behind, 
 
 Though near are hearts whose cords are twined 
 
 Around his own. Forgetful quite, 
 
 His kindling eye reflects the light 
 
 Resplendent from the radiant dome 
 
 Of heaven. He whispers, "Almost home ! 
 
 All heedless of the winds that wail 
 Along the lone and shadowy vale, 
 And recking not the storms that sweep 
 The desert strand, or eyes that weep 
 Salt dews in bitterest anguish shed, 
 Blent with the death damps on his head. 
 Hark ! Softly through the gathering gloom 
 The tremulous accents, " Almost home ! : 
 
 As when among the shivering leaves 
 The parting sigh of autumn grieves, 
 So comes the plaintive, shuddering gasp, 
 And snaps in twain the golden clasp. 
 The boatman plies his muffled oar, 
 The bark glides quickly from the shore, 
 And from the faltering lips there come 
 The dying echoes, " Almost home ! r 
 
 No more with pain or passion blind, 
 
 That kingly spirit, unconfined 
 
 By earthly fetters, bolts or bars, 
 
 Victorious mounts beyond the stars, 
 
 And winged its flight with undimmed eyes 
 
 Across the plains of Paradise, 
 
 In freedom evermore to roam 
 
 Not " almost " now, but quite " at home ! 
 
 MONTGOMERY M. FOLSOM. 
 
206 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 THE FALLEN SHAFT. 
 
 Lines on the late Senator Hill, of Georgia. 
 
 Alone the shaft of granite stood, 
 
 And raised it head on high ; 
 No rival in its neighborhood 
 
 Dared with its grandeur vie. 
 
 Among the shining stars its crown 
 
 With lustrous glory shone ; 
 With splendor seen afar, and down 
 
 Where waves did fret and moan. 
 
 Men wondered, as it met their gaze, 
 
 And made the welkin ring 
 With loud acclaim, and words of praise, 
 
 Words such as poets sing. 
 
 V 
 
 Full long the stately shaft defied 
 
 The work of all the years ; 
 Men thought it proof gainst time and tide, 
 
 And smiled away their fears. 
 
 But all at once the thunder s blight 
 
 Shattered the granite stone ; 
 Gainst all save this, its matchless might 
 
 Had royally held its own. 
 
 Men mourned their idol lost when higher, 
 
 And in the self-same place, 
 There darted up a pillared fire 
 
 Celestial sign of grace. 
 
 WALLACE PUTNAM REED. 
 
 FALLEN ! RISEN ! 
 
 On the Death of Senator Hill, of Georgia. 
 
 Fallen ! Fallen ! 
 The stateliest oak on the hill-side 
 
 Has crashed to the quivering lea, 
 While the echoes by field and rill tide, 
 
 Roll down to the troubled sea ; 
 Or rise, till the Heavens awaken, 
 And their startled spaces afar 
 Would seem by the tumult shaken, 
 Which follows a bursting star ! 
 
 Ah, me ! 
 
 How low is the crown of the giant tree ! 
 How fallen ! fallen ! fallen ! 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 207 
 
 The eagle that soared thro the azure, 
 
 By a God-like will possessed, 
 With truth as the grand emblazure 
 
 Of his proud, puissant crest, 
 In his loftiest flight was haunted 
 
 By the shadow of blasting blight, 
 And saw but with eyes undaunted 
 
 His noontide change to night, 
 
 From the beckoning sun, 
 To the web death s ebon loom had spun, 
 
 The woven glooms of a place of tombs, 
 He hath fallen, fallen, fallen ! 
 
 Yet, what if the oak in thunder 
 
 Be hurled from his mountain hope, 
 To perish in darkness, under 
 
 Its savage and sullen slope ; 
 And what if the dumb, dead eagle, 
 
 Unchallenged by gleam or gust, 
 No longer enthroned and regal, 
 
 Lies prone in the pulseless dust, 
 
 Cold, cold, 
 
 In the deepening fold of the frozen mold, 
 Fallen ! fallen ! fallen ! 
 
 To the soil of a realm enchanted, 
 
 Shall the germ of the withered tree 
 By invisible hands transplanted, 
 
 Rebloom on a deathless lea, 
 O er the height of the hills of Adenn 
 
 Shall the replumed eagle soar, 
 While the luster of eyes unfading, 
 
 And a wing that shall droop no more ! 
 
 
 
 Ah ! cease your wailing cease, 
 
 From the flame of his torture prison 
 
 From the woe of his hopeless blight 
 
 From the anguish of day, and the doom of night, 
 
 From the vulture-beak, whose dart 
 
 Flashed over his fainting heart, 
 
 The spirit ye loved has gained release ! 
 
 Release ! Release ! 
 
 To the central calms, to the golden palms, 
 Whose shadowy glories quiver 
 In the depths of the sacred river, 
 To the chrism of Christ, to the perfect peace, 
 He has risen, risen, risen ! 
 
 PAUL HAMILTON HAYNE. 
 
208 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 SENATOR BENJAMIN H. HILL. 
 
 A noble hymn is that of yore, 
 
 Of one who faced the opposing host ; 
 With courage calm his legend bore ; 
 
 Tho oft the unequal fight seemed lost. 
 For ofttimes weak and prone he lay 
 
 Upon our common mother s breast, 
 Yet ever rose from the dread fray 
 
 With victory on his flaming crest. 
 
 Giant nor gnome their aid would lend 
 
 His lance and battered shield to right, 
 Nor fairy forms their way would wend 
 
 To cheer him in the inconstant fight ; 
 One single touch of earth, and then 
 
 Redoubled strength would nerve his arm, 
 And hero shades, unseen of men, 
 
 Fought by his side, all leal and warm. 
 
 Lost hero, weak thine earthly part, 
 
 No foes hadst thou with whom to strive, 
 All love enshrines thee in the heart, 
 
 With Honor s name thy name shall live ; 
 Earth could not nerve thy wasting frame ; 
 
 The better part, thy dauntless soul, 
 Gaining the victor race of fame, 
 
 Hath strong been made to win its goal. 
 
 " H." 
 DETROIT, October 21, 1882. 
 
 THE UNVEILING OF THE BEN HILL MONUMENT. 
 
 Foremost of nations, all the world admits, 
 
 Stands the Sorosis sisterhood of States ; 
 
 Grand in the broad expanse of her domain, 
 
 Fringed with two oceans, striped by all the zones. 
 
 More grand in the unmeasured heights and depths 
 
 Of nature s convolutions ; hills of rock 
 
 Hewn into gorges by the mighty force 
 
 Of mountain torrents, which but symbolize 
 
 The grand careers of her majestic sons ; 
 
 Who, through the adamant of prejudice, 
 
 The selfishness of monarchs, and the sloth 
 
 Of centuries of bigoted misrule, 
 
 Have hewn a path for liberty and truth. 
 
 One and another of the sisterhood 
 Have carved the records of their favorite sons 
 In monuments of everlasting stone, 
 To-day fair Georgia, pivot of the South, 
 Centers a nation s thought and gratitude, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WHITINGS. 209 
 
 Aye ! thankful, we, for that best gift of God, 
 A noble soul lent to a struggling world. 
 
 We have no rule to measure all the force 
 
 Of one pure life, abounding in great deeds, 
 
 It is not admiration of his power 
 
 In sharp bebate or graver counseling. 
 
 Not that alone, nor chiefly is it that 
 
 Which draws this multitude from far and near, 
 
 But in our heart of hearts there stirs a depth 
 
 That only can be reached by some rare soul 
 
 Through whom the power of Almighty God 
 
 Is sifted, that it may not dazzle us. 
 
 A life of zeal and honest rectitude, 
 
 Passing unscathed the tiery ordeal 
 
 Of public trust and opportunities, 
 
 That have of late so many victims slain ; 
 
 * 
 
 A life like his, whose marble counterpart 
 Is here unveiled to our admiring eves, 
 
 ti 
 
 Lays hold upon the very springs of life, 
 And leads men up forever to their God. 
 
 Behold this statue ! Fittingly it stands 
 
 Where the broad road divides and points two ways. 
 
 So, we remember, did this hero stand 
 
 Where the broad highway of onr nation s life 
 
 Was cleft in twain, and he compelled to choose. 
 
 O ! the great agony that rived his soul ! 
 
 Long as a spark of hope remained alive, 
 
 He strove to avert the dread calamity ; 
 
 But when the die was cast, and hope was dead, 
 
 He ranked himself where his nativity 
 
 Impelled allegiance ; then he freely gave ; 
 
 And never was a cause more truly served. 
 
 / 
 
 O ! cold and stubborn is the Northern heart 
 That finds no inspiration in the theme 
 Of honest sacrifice to honest faith. 
 
 Behold this statue ! Facing the broad road, 
 Where these two ways unite. Behind us now 
 Lie all the enmity and all the strife. 
 Before us is the path which he has trod, 
 The path of Union leading up to God. 
 
 H. T. W. 
 
 . IMMORTAL. . . 
 
 At the Unveiling of the Hill Statue in Atlanta, Ga., May 1, 1886. 
 
 O, marvelous man ! Lo, Genius, with a breath, 
 
 Hath bid thee live and speak in effigy, 
 To prove to us that neither Time nor Death 
 
 Can ever have dominion over thee. 
 
 CHARLES W. HUBXEB. 
 
The Unveiling of the Statue of Senator Benjamin H. Hill, at Atlanta, Ga., May 1, 
 1886. Taken from the Atlanta Constitution, May 2. 
 
 BEN HILL FORTY THOUSAND ENTHUSIASTIC GEORGIANS BEHOLD His 
 FORM IN MARBLE A DEMONSTRATION SUBLIMELY GRAND AND UNSUR 
 PASSED ELOQUENT SPEECHES IN HILL S HONOR A GREAT AND GLO 
 RIOUS DAY. 
 
 trains that arrived in Atlanta on Friday night brought fifteen thou- 
 I sand visitors. Those that rolled into the depot yesterday brought 
 thirty-five thousand more. At no period in her previous history has Atlanta 
 had within her borders such a host. From every section of the State, from 
 Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, Kentucky, Virginia, North Caro 
 lina and South Carolina, from a score of other States, including even those 
 of the far North. The people came to do honor to those two exponents of 
 all that is true and noble and chivalrous in Southern manhood, the lamented 
 Hill and the revered Davis. They were of every condition. The child 
 just learning to exercise the power of thought, the lads and lasses but just 
 beginning to feel the approach of young manhood and young maidenhood ; 
 the young men and women filled with the lofty aspirations known only to 
 those in whose veins course young and vigorous blood ; the men and women 
 of middle age, the grandsires and granddames with whitened hair and 
 trembling limbs, all were represented in the vast throng that surged into 
 Atlanta and filled her streets throughout the length and breadth. About 
 the Kimball House, the depot, the court-house, and the Capitol the throng 
 was densest ; it was a matchless outpouring of enthusiastic humanity; it was 
 a magnificent tribute to the good that is in humanity as represented in the 
 two illustrious sons of the South it was meant to honor. It was inde 
 scribable. 
 
 When Mr. H. W. Grady arose to open the exercises he faced at least 
 fifty thousand enthusiastic men and women. Advancing to the front of the 
 speaker s stand, he said : 
 
 MR. GRADY S SPEECH. 
 
 Friends and Fellow -citizens : We have met here to-day to honor the 
 memory of a great man, to perpetuate his virtues in our hearts, and fix 
 his manly beauty in enduring marble. This vast assemblage, inspiring in 
 its numbers, and in the ardor of its sympathies unequaled by any that ever 
 stood on Georgia s soil, honors itself, no less than him, in gathering at the 
 base of this statue. Callous must be the heart that is not ennobled by the 
 touch of this hour s inspiration, sluggish the soul that does not kindle with 
 new aspirations as the morning sun catches the gleam of this marble, and 
 this mute interpretation of a great life is given to the morning air. And if 
 in the mercy of God that great soul, enthroned beyond the skies, is per 
 mitted to look upon this thrilling scene, and read the hearts of this loving 
 
 210 
 
Cite yi, 32[ IS ! 
 
 ,n: niiuw)i; is HKTES H 
 
 SENATOR HILLS STAT17E. ERECTED TO HIS MEMORY IN ATLANTA. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 211 
 
 multitude in tlie swift revelation of that one glance, in that one chapter of 
 fathomless love, it would find recompense for the crosses and trials of an 
 arduous life and the agonies and sufferings of an heroic death. 
 
 In behalf of the committee, I ask your silent and earnest attention, while 
 General A. Evans, beloved friend and pastor of our lamented dead, invokes 
 the blessing of Almighty God on this scene, this people, and these cere 
 monies. 
 
 THE PRAYER BY GENERAL EVANS. 
 
 General Evans arose, and the thousands of heads were bowed. General 
 Evans said : 
 
 O, Thou, who art the Lord God, and Sovereign Father of all men, unto 
 Thee we uplift our eyes in the hope of Thy favor, and before Thee we 
 spread abroad our hands and implore Thy divine blessing upon all who are 
 here assembled. We rejoice in the knowledge that Thou wilt accept our 
 worship with that of all the Heavenly host and of all our comrades who 
 have passed before us into Thy presence. Our thanksgivings abound as we 
 remember Thy mercies, which are more in number than the green leaves 
 that now enfold these trees afresh. 
 
 Invited by Thy promise we pray Thy blessing may rest richly upon our 
 State, upon these United States, and upon this good city. We thank Thee 
 for this land of ours. Our lines have fallen in pleasant places, and we have 
 a happy heritage. The priceless blessings of good government, of religious 
 liberty and temporal prosperity, are Thy gifts to us. Inspire us with the 
 lofty purpose of becoming a people exalted by righteousness and worthy of 
 the great national vocation whereunto we are called. Defend us from all 
 foes, send us harmony among all sections, perpetuate the Union of the 
 States, and preserve the liberty, intelligence, and religion of the people. 
 We pray Thy blessing upon the generation now rising, who knew nothing 
 of the strife of their fathers. Inspire them with the love of country and 
 the fear of God. Grant, O Lord, that these veterans who have survived 
 their fallen brothers may remain under Thy special providence ; their num 
 ber grow fewer and their heads grow more honored with gray. As one 
 after another crosses over the river, may they all " rest under the shade of 
 the tree," until the last of the army shall pass and all assemble before Thee 
 in the peace of heaven. We thank Thee, O Lord, for the exalted Christian 
 character of the reverend chieftain who is the guest of this occasion and 
 for the example of faith in God which we will transmit as a legacy to his 
 countrymen. And now that the surges of passion cease to roll around him 
 or to beat upon him with any power, grant Thy blessing on the warm and 
 worthy flow of the waves of popular affection which now embrace him. 
 Spare him yet many years of peace and let his departure be as the sun re 
 tiring in his strength and crowning the last summit with golden glory. 
 
 We remember most especially the noble life of thy servant whose statue 
 stands on this spot, whose death is deplored with fresh grief, and whose 
 dying testimony verified Thy word. God bless the bereaved woman who 
 with mingled tears of sadness and satisfaction beholds this honor paid to her 
 illustrious husband. May she and her children be guided by Thy wisdom 
 and afterward received with erlorv. 
 
 T *" 
 
 Let these, our prayers, be acceptable in thy sight, and may the grace of 
 the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy 
 Spirit be with?us all, Amen. 
 
212 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Mr. Grady said : I cannot proceed further in the duty assigned me with 
 out testifying|tlms publicly, in behalf of the Hill Committee, to the invaluable 
 services rendered by Dr. R. I). Spalding, President of the Hill Monument 
 Association. It is not too much to say that while this statue is based in the 
 love of the people, it was evoked by his abiding affection for Senator Hill, 
 and largely fashioned by his energy and ability. Georgia will learn with 
 gratitude that it is to a gallant and devoted Kentuckian she owes so much of 
 this great work, and will rejoice in the knowledge that when this precious 
 gift is delivered into the keeping of the commonwealth, to Governor Henry 
 D. McDaniel, that it has gone into hands entirely worthy. 
 
 Dr. Spalding, President of the Association, will now present, and Gov 
 ernor McDaniel will receive for the State, the statue of the Hon. Benjamin 
 H. Hill. 
 
 DR. SPALDING S SPEECH. 
 
 No higher evidence could attest the love of the people of Georgia for her 
 dead senator, of their admiration for the living patriot and statesman who 
 honors this occasion with his presence, than this vast concourse of her 
 citizens. 
 
 Georgia, as loyal to the memories of the past as to the responsibilities of 
 the present, yields to no State in her devotion to the principles of the lost 
 cause or to the great champion of self-government, home rule, and popular 
 liberty, whom we welcome to-day as our guest. Mr. Davis is here to unite 
 in a tribute to his friend, upon whom in the darkest hours of the Confederacy 
 he leaned as implicitly in the Senate Chamber as upon Lee in the field. 
 
 The Ben Hill Monument Association was organized with no expectation 
 of building a pretentious structure, but for the purpose of erecting a modest 
 testimonial to the worth of a good and great man. 
 
 The name and memory of Benjamin H. Hill will be ever dear to Geor 
 gians, and to all everywhere, who honor unsullied patriotism or who admire 
 profound statesmanship. 
 
 As a genuine work of art, the statue is deserving the highest praise, and 
 yet. although beautiful in conception and faultless in execution, is an utterly 
 inadequate memorial of him whose renown is destined to widen with the 
 lapse of time. 
 
 We tread to-day amid the ashes of a conflict whose smoldering fires 
 are still unextinguished. While it is true we are again a united people, liv 
 ing under a constitutional form of government ; while it is true that Forrest, 
 and Sheridan, and Stewart no longer ride at the head of their columns ; 
 while Lee and Grant, the representative soldiers of the blue and the gray, 
 are asleep in honored graves ; while the war drum has ceased to beat, and 
 the battle flag is furled, it is equally true that the sentiments and convictions 
 that inspired the contest still linger in the breasts of our countrymen North 
 and South. Nor may it be safely questioned that these sentiments are not 
 less the basis of national harmony than of national prosperity. 
 
 In this gigantic struggle, Mr. Hill was thoroughly and consistently identi 
 fied with his native section. Others may have faltered in their trusts or 
 wavered in their allegiance to the Confederate administration, but Hill was 
 alike unawed by the shock of arms or the strife of tongues. 
 
 His brave spirit " rose under pressure and shone the brightest when 
 weaker natures yielded to despair." Never did his heroic virtues shine forth 
 more resplejidently than in the gloomy days of Reconstruction, when the 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 213 
 
 " pleasure of the usurper was the supreme law and there shone not a single 
 star of substantial promise." Then it was that his " Notes on the Situation" 
 inspired his dispirited countrymen with renewed hope and roused them to 
 fresh endeavors. 
 
 In quick succession came the Davis Hall and Bush Arbor speeches, in 
 which lie spoke no mincing words, but words of lofty defiance to the enemies 
 of constitutional liberty. Afterward, in the halls of Congress, in the ever 
 memorable contest with Mr. Blaine, he made himself immortal and filled 
 every Southern heart with joy and pride. Still later, he scourged Virginia s 
 faithless son as Cicero scourged the guilty pro-consul of Sicily. 
 
 And now, sir, permit me, in behalf of the association which I have the 
 honor to represent, to present to the State through you, her chief magistrate, 
 this statue of one who not less signally illustrated the honor of Georgia than 
 her most distinguished sons from Oglethorpe, the founder of the common 
 wealth, to Toombs, the dead Mirabeau of the South. 
 
 At the signal from Dr. Spalding, Captain J. F. Burke removed the veil, 
 and the statue of Hill was revealed to the great crowd. A shout of applause 
 went up. 
 
 SPEECH OF GOVERNOR At DANIEL. 
 
 Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen of the Hill Monumental Association : 
 The shouts of this vast multitude, gathered from farm and village and city, 
 at sight- of the features of Benjamin H. Hill, proclaim that the people of 
 Georgia accept your offering to his memory and will cherish it with affection, 
 boundless as their admiration for his character. Georgia is rich in illustrious 
 names, the jewels of the commonwealth. Her Jackson and Troup, and 
 Crawford and Cobb, and Johnson and Jenkins, and Stephens and Toombs, 
 and others who have passed away, are honored wherever American states 
 manship is known. None of these, great as is her affection for them, is more 
 deeply enshrined in her heart than Hill ; no name thrills her with loftier pride. 
 
 His portrait, with those of other illustrious men, has been placed \>y the 
 State in the Hall of Representatives to inspire all who assemble there for 
 purposes of government with patriotic ends. But his services to the country 
 deserve a more imposing representation, which shall remind all the people, 
 now and forever, of his virtues as a man, his patriotism as a citizen, and his 
 wisdom as a statesman. Future generations will catch the sentiments which 
 prompted the erection of such a monument by the voluntary contribution of 
 devotion and admiring countrymen. And the association of patriots who 
 conceived and executed this labor of love, deserves and will receive the thanks 
 of all the people of Georgia. 
 
 The chisel of sculptor nor the brush of painter has ever wrought into 
 expression the lineaments of a man which manifests a life nobler in patriotic 
 purpose and endeavor, or richer in endowments of learning, eloquence, and 
 thought. For more than a quarter of a century he was in State and Federal 
 affairs, the peer of the most illustrious. He loved the Union of the States, 
 and during the years preceding its dissolution his voice pleaded eloquently 
 for its preservation. Exchanging the forum for the hustings, his impassioned 
 logic, which has swayed courts and juries, was heard in the van of the devoted 
 minority, struggling vainly to preserve the rights of States in the Union. 
 But he was a Georgian, true to the commonwealth that gave him birth and 
 sheltered his household. When the State withdrew from the Union she had 
 
214 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 voluntarily entered, be responded to her summons, and represented her in 
 the Government of the Confederate States. During the mighty conflict 
 that ensued, his voice never faltered in patriotic appeal and heroic counsel. 
 He was undismayed by accumulating disasters. The trusted friend of the 
 President, with every throb of his heart, and every faculty of his nature, and 
 every resource of his genius, he held up the hands of that devoted leader of his 
 people. It is not the least of hismany claims to immortality that he merited 
 and enjoyed the confidence of Jefferson Davis, whose dignity in defeat, not 
 less than his courage and fidelity in the Presidency of the Confederate States, 
 have won for him the undying love of the people who trusted and followed 
 him, and the admiration of every lover of constitutional liberty. The love 
 of Georgians, beaming in the faces of the thousands around this consecrated 
 spot, would be deepened, if that were possible, by his presence to-da}^, to 
 add a leaf to the fadeless garland that crowns the brow of Benjamin H. Hill. 
 
 When the flag of the Union floated again over all the States, and the 
 soldiers of opposing armies, with mutual respect and pride in American 
 valor, parted in peace, the victors returning to bonfires and feastings, and 
 honors and power the vanquished to ruined homes and poverty and toil ; 
 when partisan hate offered proscription instead of reconciliation, and sought 
 by military force to degrade States into provinces, the voice of Hill, never 
 silent in times of peril, sounded the first note of warning and resistance that 
 roused Georgians to a sense of the danger, and inspired them with courage 
 to maintain their rights under the Constitution. No people of any age have 
 been confronted with evils of such magnitude, and none have overcome 
 them with a nobler spirit of patience, forbearance, and loyalty to the 
 pledges of their leaders and the principles of their fathers. Impoverished, 
 proscribed, and maligned, they bent the energies which in warfare had 
 astonished the civilized world to the task of regaining control of the State 
 government. They rebuilt the social fabric, restored material prosperity, 
 extended the blessings of education, and secured to every citizen, without 
 distinction of race, color, or previous condition, all the rights and privileges 
 to which he is entitled. 
 
 Mr. Hill lived to share in the grand triumph, and to rejoice at the dawn 
 of prosperity. He lived to vindicate in the Congress of the United States 
 the conduct of the South during the war, and to silence the slanders that 
 impugned our honor. His eloquence first awakened the American people to 
 the truth of the sentiment embodied in the immortal words that speak from 
 yonder tablet, and connect his name with the brightest page of his country s 
 history. 
 
 But he was denied by divine providence a share in the final victory, by 
 v/hich the American people, at the ballot-box, in the election of a President, 
 adopted this sentiment. Could he have lived to celebrate that event, no 
 tongue of orator or pen of genius in the annals of time would have glad 
 dened lovers of liberty with sublimer praises of our system of government. 
 
 Mr. Grady arose and said : Can I say more in presenting to you the 
 orator of the day, and bespeaking for him the attention which I am sure he 
 will hold when you have once heard him, than to say that the mantle of Ben 
 Hill s eloquence seems to have fallen on his shoulders, and that in the Chris 
 tian integrity of his character and the strength and purity of his life, Mr. 
 Hill s career is sure to find its best interpretation. I introduce to you the 
 chosen orator of the association, the Hon J. C. C. Black, of Georgia. 
 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 215 
 
 ADDRESS OF HON. J. C. C. BLACK. 
 
 Mr. President, Ladies, and Gentlemen : History has furnished but one 
 perfect character, humanity has but one example in all things worthy of 
 imitation. And yet all ages and countries have recognized that those who, 
 devoting themselves to the public service, have led the people through great 
 perils, and by distinguished careers added to the just renown of their coun 
 try, were entitled to their highest respect, honor, and veneration. 
 
 The children of Israel wept for their great leader and deliverer on the 
 plains of Moab. The men of Athens gathered at the graves of those who 
 fell at Marathon and pronounced panegyrics upon them. This sentiment is 
 an honor to the living as well as the dead. It is just, for no merely human 
 pursuit is higher than that public service which honestly and intelligently 
 devotes itself to the common weal. There is no study more worthy of the 
 highest faculties of the mind than that which seeks after the nature of civil 
 government, applies it to its legitimate uses and ends, and properly limits 
 its powers. No object is more worthy of the noblest philanthropy of the 
 heart than society and the State. It is not only honorable and just, but, like 
 all high sentiment, it is useful for honors to the dead are incentives to the 
 living. Monuments to our great and good should be multiplied. May I 
 take the liberty on this occasion of suggesting to the bar and people of the 
 State to provide a fitting memorial to the distinguished Chief Justice who 
 so long presided over our Supreme Court ; whose decisions are such splendid 
 specimens of judicial research and learning, and whose career recalls Whar- 
 ton s picture of Nottingham " seated upon his throne with a ray of glory 
 about his head, his ermine without spot or blemish, his balance in his right 
 hand, mercy on his left, splendor and brightness at his feet, and his tongue 
 dispensing truth, goodness, virtue, and justice to mankind." And by its 
 side, and worthy of such association, another to commemorate the sturdy 
 virtue, unswerving fidelity under great trials, and worthy public career of 
 that other Chief Justice who so recently passed from among us. The public 
 disposition to honor the dead too often finds its only expression in the 
 resolutions of public assemblies, and the exhibition in public places of 
 emblems of mourning, soon to be removed. 
 
 " And the children of Israel wept for Moses in the plains of Moab thirty 
 days ; so the days of weeping and mourning for Moses were ended." Too 
 often the great and good lie in unknown sepulchers ; or, if known, they 
 are unmarked by any lasting monument. When the feeling does crystallize 
 in enduring marble or granite, in most cases it is after painful effort and 
 long delay. Eighteen years elapsed after the laying of the corner-stone of 
 the Bunker Hill monument, erected by the patriotism of New England, he- 
 fore its completion was celebrated. The statue of Chief Justice Marshall, 
 appointed during the second administration, was unveiled within a very re 
 cent period. Immediately after his death, in 1799, Congress voted a marble 
 monument to Washington. Half a century elapsed before the foundation 
 was laid. After this, for seven and thirty years, it remained unfinished. 
 Although intended to commemorate the life and character of him who was 
 first in the hearts of his countrymen," and had just claims upon the treasury 
 of the Government, it stood as if insulting him whom it should have honored, 
 symbol of nothing but the ingratitude of the country, prophecy of nothing 
 but a broken constitution, a divided people, and a disrupted Union. Its 
 
216 SENATOR . H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 completion was not celebrated until the 21st day of February, 1885 more 
 than three-quarters of a century after the resolution of Congress voting it. 
 The history of these similar organizations marks with peculiar emphasis 
 that of the association whose completed work we come to celebrate with 
 becoming ceremony. Amid profound and universal expressions of grief 
 at the public calamity to the country inflicted by his death on the 16th 
 day of August, 1882, his body was buried to await the dawn of that resur 
 rection day of which he so beautifully wrote after he could no longer speak. 
 Within a few days after his burial, a public meeting was called to assemble 
 in the State Capitol on the 29th day of August thereafter. That meeting 
 resolved itself into an organization that undertook the patriotic duty of 
 commemorating his public life by some lit and enduring memorial. The 
 success, brilliant as his own resplendent career, which calls us together 
 within less than half a decade after its inauguration to crown the comple 
 tion of its work, is highly honorable to those who have achieved it, but 
 most honorable to him who inspired it. It has few, if any, parallels. It is 
 in itself a more fitting and eloquent oration than human language can pro 
 nounce, for that may speak in exaggerated phrase of the worth of the dead 
 and the sorrow of the living ; this is Love s own tribute ; this is grief s 
 truthful expression. 
 
 As we come to dedicate this statue to his name and memory, all the 
 surroundings are most auspicious. No place could have preferred a claim 
 above this. It was his own home ; it is the capital of the State, and his 
 fame is a common heritage. The progressive spirit that has already made 
 this populous and growing city the pride of every citizen, the wonder of 
 every stranger, shall furnish opportunity to speak, as it shall speak, to the 
 largest number of beholders. It is the time, too, when all over this Southern 
 land, in the observance of a custom that should be perpetuated, fair women 
 and brave men pay tribute to our dead. May we not think of the spirits of 
 our honored dead who preceded him in our history, as well as those of his 
 worthy contemporaries, coming from that world where no uncharity mis 
 judges, no prejudice blinds, no jealousy suspicions to hover over us, and 
 rejoice in the tributes of this day. And surely, if the honor this occasion 
 pays the dead could be enhanced, or the joy it imparts to the living could 
 be heightened by human presence, we have that augmented honor, and that 
 elevated joy in the presence of one worthily ranked among the most re 
 nowned of the living, whose strength of devotion to our lamented dead has 
 overcome the infirmities of age and the weariness of travel, and who comes 
 to mingle his praises with ours. Illustrious son of the South, thy silent 
 presence is loftier tribute than spoken oration or marble statue or assembled 
 thousands. Alas ! Alas ! w T e this day mourn the silence of the only tongue 
 that could fittingly and adequately voice the honor we would confer upon 
 thee. Beside the grave of him who never swerved in his devotion to thee 
 and the cause of which thou wert and art the worthy representative, we this 
 day acknowledge thy just claim upon the confidence, esteem, love, and 
 veneration of ourselves and our posterity. May these auspicious surround 
 ings help us to commemorate the life and character of him in whose honor 
 we are assembled, and move us with the higher purposes of devotion to our 
 State and country that life and character inspire. 
 
 As a son of Georgia he eminently merits this enduring memorial and all 
 the honors conferred by this vast concourse of his grateful and admiring 
 countrymen. Born upon her soil, reared among her people, educated at her 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 217 
 
 schools, permeated by the influences of her society and civilization, he plead 
 with an eloquence unsurpassed by any of her sons for whatever would pro 
 mote her weal, and warned against every danger his sagacious eye detected 
 threatening her prosperity. Called into public service at an early age, he 
 at once gave assurance of the high distinction he afterward attained. For 
 years his public career was a struggle against prevailing principles and poli 
 cies he believed to be dangerous, and he stood conspicuous against as 
 powerful a combination of ability and craft as ever ruled in the politics of 
 any State. Upon every field where her proudest gladiators met, he stood 
 the peer of the knightliest. He did not always achieve popular success, but 
 that has been true of the greatest and best. His apparent failures to 
 achieve victory only called for a renewal of the struggle with unbroken 
 spirit and purpose. Failure he did not suffer, for his very defeats were vic 
 tories. To say, as may be justly said, that he was conspicuous among those 
 who have made our history for thirty years, is high encomium. During 
 that period the most memorable events of our past have transpired. It 
 recalls besides his own, the names and careers of Stephens, Toombs, the 
 Cobbs, Johnson, and Jenkins. In what sky has brighter galaxy ever shone ? 
 The statesmanship, the oratory, the public and private virtue it exhibits 
 should swell every breast with patriotic pride. In some of the highest 
 qualifications of leadership, none of his day surpassed him. He did not 
 seek success by the schemes of hidden caucus or crafty manipulation. He 
 won his triumphs on the arena of open, fair debate before the people. An 
 earnest student of public questions, he boldly proclaimed his conclusions. 
 The power of opposing majorities did not deter him. As a leader of minori 
 ties he was unequaled. As an orator at the forum, before a popular assem 
 bly or convention, in the House of Representatives or the Senate Chamber 
 in Congress, he was the acknowledged equal of the greatest men who have 
 illustrated our State and national history for a quarter of a century. He 
 was thoroughly equipped with a masterly logic, a captivating eloquence, a 
 burning invective, a power of denunciation with every weapon in the 
 armory of spoken and written language, and used all with a force and skill 
 that entitled him as a debater to the highest distinction. 
 
 While the most unfriendly criticism cannot deny him the highest gifts of 
 oratory, some have withheld from him the praise due to that calm judgment 
 that looks at results ; that political foresight that belongs to a wise statesman 
 ship. Judged by this just standard, who among the distinguished sons of 
 Georgia in that period when her people most needed that judgment and 
 sagacity is entitled to a higher honor ? Who more clearly foresaw in the 
 clouds that flecked our political sky the storm that was coming ? What 
 watchman stationed to signal the first approach of danger had more far- 
 reaching vision ? What pilot charged with the guidance of the ship of State 
 struggled more earnestly to guide it into clearer skies and calmer seas? 
 With that devotion to the Union that always characterized him, and believ 
 ing that the wrongs of which we justly complained could be better redressed 
 in than out of the Union, or had better be borne than the greater evils that 
 would follow dissolution, he opposed the secession of the State. We may 
 not now undertake to trace the operation of the causes that brought about that 
 event. We can justly appreciate how it could not appear to others as it did 
 to us. As to us, it was not prompted by hatred of the Union resting in the 
 consent of the people, and governed by the Constitution of our fathers. It was 
 not intended to subvert the vital principles of the government they founded, 
 
218 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 but to perpetuate them. The government of the new did not differ in its 
 form or any of its essential principles from the old Confederacy. The Con 
 stitutions were the same, except such changes as the wisdom of experience 
 suggested. The Southern Confederacy contemplated no invasion or con 
 quest. Its chief corner-stone was not African slavery. Its foundations 
 were laid in the doctrines of the Fathers of the Republic, and the chief corner 
 stone was the essential fundamental principle of free government ; that all 
 goverments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. Its 
 purpose was not to perpetuate the slavery of the black race, but to preserve 
 the liberty of the white race of the South. It was another declaration of 
 American Independence. In the purity of their motives, in the loftiness of 
 their patriotism, in their love of liberty, they who declared and maintained 
 the first were not worthier than they who declared, and failed, in the last. 
 Animated by such purposes, aspiring to such destiny, feeling justified then 
 (and without shame now), we entered upon that movement. It was 
 opposed by war on the South and her people. What was the South and who 
 were her people ? There are those who seem to think she nurtured a Upas 
 whose very shadow blighted wherever it fell, and made her civilization in 
 ferior. What was that civilization ? Let its products as seen in the people it 
 produced, and the character and history of that people, answer. Where do 
 you look for the civilization of a people ? In their history, in their achieve 
 ments, in their institutions, in their character, in their men and women, in their 
 love of liberty and country, in their fear of God, in their contributions to 
 the progress of society and the race. Measured by this high standard, where 
 was there a grander and nobler civilization than hers ? Where has there 
 been greater love of learning than that which established her colleges and 
 universities? Where better preparatory schools, sustained by private 
 patronage and not the exactions of the tax-gatherer now unhappily 
 dwarfed and well-nigh blighted by our modern system ? Whose people had 
 higher sense of personal honor? Whose business and commerce was con 
 trolled by higher integrity ? Whose public men had cleaner hands and 
 purer records ? Whose soldiers were braver or knightlier ? Whose orators 
 more eloquent and persuasive ? Whose statesmen more wise and conserva 
 tive Whose young men more chivalric ? Whose young women more 
 chaste ? Whose fathers and mothers worthier examples ? Whose homes 
 more abounded in hospitality as genial and free to every friendly comer 
 as the sun that covered them with its splendor? Where was there more 
 respect for woman, for the church, for the Sabbath, for God, and for 
 the law? Which, next to God, is entitled to the highest respect and venera 
 tion of man, for it is the fittest representative of His awful majesty and 
 power and goodness. Where was there more love of home, of country, and 
 of liberty ? 
 
 Deriving their theories of government from the Constitution, her public 
 officers never abandoned those principles upon which alone the government 
 could stand ; esteeming their public virtue as highly as their private honor, 
 they watched and exposed every form of extravagance, and every approach 
 of corruption. Her religious teachers, deriving their theology from the Bi 
 ble, guarded the church from being spoiled " through philosophy and vain 
 deceit after the traditions of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not 
 after Christ." Her women adorned the highest social circles of Europe and 
 America with their modesty, beauty, and culture. Her men, in every society, 
 won a higher title than " the grand old name of gentleman J " that of 
 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WHITINGS. 219 
 
 " Southern gentlemen." Thus in herself, what contributions did she make to 
 the material growth of the country ! Look at the map of that country and 
 see the five States formed out of the territory north of the Ohio and east of 
 the Mississippi generously and patriotically surrendered by Virginia. Look 
 at that vast -extent of country acquired under the administration of one of 
 her Presidents, which to-day constitutes the States of Louisiana, Arkansas, 
 Missouri, Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, Minnesota west of the Mississippi, Colo 
 rado north of the Arkansas, besides the Indian Territory and the Territories 
 of Dakota, Wyoming, and Montana. 
 
 Is it asked what she had added to the glories of the Republic ? Who 
 wrote the Declaration of Independence ? Jefferson. Who led the armies of 
 the Republic in maintaining and establishing that independence ? Who 
 gave mankind new ideas of greatness ? Who has furnished the sublimest 
 illustration of self-government ? Who has taught us that human virtue can 
 set proper limits to human ambition ? Who has taught the ruled of the 
 world that man may be entrusted with power ? Who has taught the rulers 
 of the world when and how to surrender power ? Of whom did Bancroft 
 write, " But for him the country would not have achieved its independence, 
 but for him it could not have formed its Union, and now but for him it could 
 not set the Federal Government in successful motion " ? Of whom did Er- 
 skine say, "You are the only being for whom I have an awful reverence"? 
 Of whom did Charles James Fox say in the House of Commons, " Illustrious 
 man, before whom all borrowed greatness sinks into insignificance " ? 
 Washington. 
 
 What State first made the call for the convention that framed the Con 
 stitution ? Virginia. Who was the father of the Constitution ? Madison. 
 Who made our system of jurisprudence, unsurpassed by the civil law of 
 Rome and the common law of England? Marshall. Who was Marshall s 
 worthy successor? Taney. Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Marshall, 
 Taney these were her sons. Their illustrious examples, their eminent ser 
 vices, the glory they shed upon the American name and character were her 
 contributions to the common renown. Is it asked where her history was 
 written ? It was written upon the brightest page of American annals. It 
 was written upon the records of the convention that made the Constitution. 
 It was written in the debates of Congresses that met, not to wrangle over 
 questions of mere party supremacy, but, like statesmen and philosophers, to 
 discuss and solve great problems of human government. It was written in 
 the decisions of the country s most illustrious judges, in the treaties of her 
 most skillful diplomats, in the blood of the revolution, and the battles of 
 every subsequent war, led by her generals from Chippewa to the proud halls 
 of the Montezumas. 
 
 Breathes there a man with soul so dead, 
 Who to himself hath never said, 
 This is my own, my native land ! 
 
 Forced to defend our homes and liberties after every honorable effort for 
 peaceful separation, we went to war. Our leaders were worthy of their 
 high commission. I say our leaders, for I believe that he who led our 
 armies was not more loyal, and made no better use of the resources at his 
 command, than he to whom was intrusted our civil administration. Our 
 people sealed their sincerity with the richest treasure ever offered, and the 
 noblest holocaust ever consumed upon the altar of country. To many of 
 
220 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 you who enjoy the honor of having participated in it the history is known. 
 You ought to prove yourselves worthy of that honor by teaching that history 
 to those who come after you. Though in no wise responsible for it, though 
 he had warned and struggled to avert it, Georgia s fortune was his fortune, 
 Georgia s destiny was his destiny, though it led to war. Others who had 
 been influential in bringing about dissolution and the first to take up arms, 
 engendered disaffection by petty cavils, discouraged when they should have 
 cheered, weakened when they should have strengthened, but the spirit of 
 his devotion never faltered, and through all the stormy life of the young 
 republic, what Stonewall Jackson was to Lee, he was to Davis. If the sol 
 dier who leads his country through the perils of war is entitled to his coun 
 try s praise and honor, no less the statesman who furnishes and sustains the 
 resources of war. Our flag went down at Appomattox. Weakened by 
 stabs behind, inflicted by hands that should have upheld ; her front covered 
 with the wounds of the mightiest war of modern times, dripping with as 
 pure blood as ever hallowed freedom s cause, our Confederacy fell, and 
 Liberty stood weeping at the grave of her youngest and fairest daughter. 
 Our peerless military chieftain went to the noble pursuit of supervising the 
 education of the young, proclaiming that human virtue should be equal to 
 human calamity. Our great civil chieftain went to prison and chains, and 
 there, as well as afterward, in the dignified retirement of his private life for 
 twenty years has shown how human virtue can be equal to human calamity. 
 The one has gone, leaving us the priceless legacy of his most illustrious 
 character ; the other still lingers, bearing majestically the sufferings of his 
 people, and calmly awaiting the summons that shall call him to the rewards 
 and glories of those who have suffered for the right. 
 
 Our Southern soldiers returned to their desolated homes like true cava 
 liers, willing to acknowledge their defeat, abide in good faith the terms of 
 the surrender, accept all the legitimate results of the issue, respect the 
 prowess of those who had conquered, and resume their relations to the gov 
 ernment with all the duties those relations imposed. The victorious gen 
 erals and leaders of the North awaited the highest honors a grateful people 
 could confer. Their armies having operated over an area of 800,000 square 
 miles in extent, bearing on their rolls on the day of disbandment 1,000,516 
 men, were peacefully dissolved. Then followed the most remarkable period 
 in American history in any history. After spending billions of treasure 
 and offering thousands of lives to establish that the States could not with 
 draw from the Union, it was not only declared that they were out of the 
 Union, but the door of admission was closed against them. While it cannot 
 be denied that the gravest problems confronted those who were charged with 
 the administration of the government, a just and impartial judgment must 
 declare that the most ingenious statecraft could not have inspired a spirit, 
 which, if it permanently ruled, would more certainly have destroyed all the 
 States. Its success would have been worse for the North than the success of 
 the Southern Confederacy, for if final separation had been established, each 
 new government would have retained the essentials of the old, while the 
 dominance of this spirit would have destroyed every vital principle of our 
 institutions. The success of the Confederacy would have divided the old 
 into two Republics. If this spirit had ruled, it would have left no Republic. 
 It was, therefore, a monumental folly, as well as crime. It was not born of 
 the brave men who fought to preserve the Union ; it was the offspring of 
 that fanaticism that had in our early history, while the walls of the Capital 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 221 
 
 were blackened with the fires kindled by the invading array of England, 
 threatened disunion, and from that day forward turned the ministers of 
 religion into political Jacobins, degraded the church of God into a political 
 junto, in the name of liberty denounced the Constitution and laws of the 
 country, and by ceaseless agitation from press and rostrum and pulpit lashed 
 the people into the fury of war. 
 
 In this presence, at the bar of the enlightened public opinion of America 
 and the world, I arraign that fell spirit of fanaticism and charge it with all 
 the treasure expended and blood shed on both sides of that war, all the suf 
 ferings and sacrifices it cost, and all the fearful ruin it wrought. And in 
 the name of the living and the dead I warn you, my countrymen, against the 
 admission of that spirit, under any guise or pretext, into your social or politi 
 cal systems. 
 
 There are trials severer than war, and calamities worse than the defeat 
 of arms. The South was to pass through such trials and be threatened with 
 such calamities by the events of that period. Now and then it seems that 
 all the latent and pent up forces of the natural world are turned loose for 
 terrible destruction. The foundations of the earth, laid in the depths of the 
 ages, are shaken by mighty upheavals ; the heavens, whose blackness is unre 
 lieved by a single star, roll their portentous thunderings, " and nature, 
 writhing in pain, through all her works gives signs of woe." The fruits of 
 years of industry are swept away in an hour ; the landmarks of ages are 
 obliterated without a vestige ; the sturdiest oak that has struck deep its 
 roots in the bosom of the earth is the plaything of the maddened winds ; 
 the rocks that mark the formation of whole geological periods are rent, and 
 deep gorges in the mountain side, like ugly scars in the face of the earth, tell 
 of the force and fury of the storm. Such was that period to our social, 
 domestic, and political institutions. Law no longer held its benign sway, 
 t>ut gave place to the mandate of petty dictators enforced by the bayonet. 
 What little of property remained was held by no tenure but the capricious 
 will of the plunderer ; liberty and life were at the mercy of the conqueror ; 
 the sanctity of home was invaded ; vice triumphed over virtue ^ ignorance 
 ruled in lordlv and haughty dominion over intelligence : the weak were 
 
 / V 
 
 oppressed; the unoffending insulted ; the fallen warred on; truth was silenced ; 
 falsehood, unblushing and brazen, stalked abroad unchallenged ; anxiety 
 filled every heart ; apprehension clouded every prospect ; despair shadowed 
 every hearthstone ; society was disorganized ; Legislatures dispersed ; judges 
 torn from their seats by the strong arm of military power ; States subverted ; 
 arrests made, trials had, and sentences pronounced without evidence ; mad 
 ness, lust, hate, and crime of every hue, defiant, wicked, and diabolical, ruled 
 the hour, until the very air was rent with the cry. and heaven s deep con 
 cave echoed the wail : 
 
 " Alas ! Our country sinks beneath the yoke. It weeps, it bleeds, and 
 each new day a gash is added to her wounds." 
 
 All this Georgia and her sister States of the South suffered at the hands 
 of her enemies, but more cruel than wrongs done by hostile hands were the 
 wounds inflicted by some of their own children. They baselv bartered 
 
 _ v / / 
 
 themselves for the spoils of office. They aligned themselves with the ene 
 mies of the people and their liberties until the battle was fought, and then, 
 with satanic effronterv, insulted the presence of the virtuous and the brave 
 
 1 ** 
 
 by coming among them, and forever fixed upon their own ignoble brows the 
 stigma of a double treachery by proclaiming that they had joined our ene- 
 
222 SENATOR B. H. RILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 mies to betray them. They were enemies to the mother who had nurtured 
 them. " They bowed the knee and spit upon her. They cried Hail ! 
 and smote her on the cheek ; they put a scepter into her hand, but it was a 
 fragile reed ; they crowned her, but it was with thorns ; they covered with 
 purple the wounds which their own hands had inflicted on her, and inscribed 
 magnificent titles over the cross on which they had fixed her to perish in 
 ignominy and pain." They had quarreled with and weakened the Confeder 
 acy out of pretended love for the habeas corpus, and now they sustained a 
 government that trampled upon every form of law and every principle of 
 liberty. They had been foremost in leading the people into war, and now 
 they turned upon them to punish them for treason. Even some who were 
 still loyal at heart, appalled by the danger that surrounded, overwhelmed 
 by the powers that threatened us, were timid in spirit and stood silent wit 
 nesses of their country s ruin. Others there were, many others, as loyal, 
 brave, noble, heroic spirits as ever enlisted in freedom s cause. They could 
 suffer defeat in honorable war, but would not without resistance, though 
 fallen, submit to insult and oppression. Their fortunes were destroyed, 
 their fields desolated, their homes laid in ashes, their hopes blighted, but 
 they would not degrade their manhood. To their invincible spirit and 
 heroic resistance we are indebted for the peace, prosperity and good gov 
 ernment we enjoy to-day. Long live their names and deeds. Let our 
 poets sing them in undying song ; let our historians register them in imper 
 ishable records ; let our teachers teach them in our schools ; let our mothers 
 recount them in our homes ; let the painter transfer their very forms and 
 features to the canvas to adorn our public halls ; let the deft hand of the 
 sculptor chisel them out of the granite and marble to beautify onr thorough 
 fares ; let every true heart and memoiy, born and to be born, embalm them 
 forever. 
 
 Among all the true sons of Georgia and of the South in that day, one 
 form stands conspicuous. No fear blanched his cheek, no danger daunted 
 his courageous soul. His very presence imparted courage, his very eye 
 flashed enthusiasm. Unawed by power, unbribed by honor, he stood in the 
 midst of the perils that environed him, brave as Paul before the Sanhedrim, 
 ready for bonds or death; true as the men at Runnymede, and as eloquent 
 as Henry kindling the fires of the Revolution. As we look back upon that 
 struggle, one figure above all others fixes our admiring gaze. His crested 
 helmet waves high where the battle is fiercest, the pure rays of the sun 
 reflected from his glittering shield are not purer than the fires that burn in 
 the breast it covers. His clarion voice rang out louder than the din of 
 battle, like the bugle blast of a Highland chief resounding over hill and 
 mountain and glen, summoning his clans to the defense of home and liberty, 
 and thrilled every heart and nerved every arm. 
 
 It was the form and voice of Hill. 
 
 Not only is he entitled to the honor we confer upon him by the events 
 of this day, and higher honor, if higher there could be, as a Georgian, but 
 as a son of the South. The great West boasts that it gave Lincoln to the 
 country and the world. New England exults with peculiar pride in the 
 name and history of Webster, and one of her most distinguished sons, upon 
 the recent occasion of the completion of the Washington monument, in an 
 oration worthy of his subject, did not hesitate to say : " I am myself a New 
 Englander by birth. A son of Massachusetts, bound by the strongest ties 
 gf affection and of blood to honor and venerate the earlier and the later 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 223 
 
 worthies of the old Puritan Commonwealth, jealous of their fair fame, and 
 ever ready to assert and vindicate their just renown." Why should not we 
 cherish the same honorable sentiment, and point with pride to the names 
 with which we have adorned our country s history ? What is there in our 
 past of which we need be ashamed ? What is there in which we ought not 
 to glory ? They tell us to let the dead past be buried. Well be it so. 
 We are willing to forget ; we this day proclaim and bind it by the highest 
 sanction the sacred obligation of Southern honor that we have forgotten 
 all of the past that should not be cherished. We stand in the way of no 
 true progress. We freely pledge our hearts and hands to everything that 
 will promote the prosperity and glory of our country. But there is a past 
 that is not dead that cannot die. It moves upon us, it speaks to us. 
 Every instinct of noble manhood, every impulse of gratitude, every obli 
 gation of honor demands that we cherish it. We are bound to it by ties 
 stronger than the cable that binds the continents, and laid as deep in human 
 nature. We cannot cease to honor it until we lose the sentiment that has 
 moved all ages and countries. We find the expression of that sentiment in 
 every memorial we erect to commemorate those we love. In the unpreten 
 tious slab of the country church-yard, in the painted windows of the cathedral, 
 in the unpolished head-stone and the costliest mausoleum of our cities of the 
 dead. It dedicated the Roman Pantheon. It has filled Trafalgar Square 
 and Westminister Abbey with memorials of those who for centuries have 
 made the poetry, the literature, the science, the statesmanship, the oratory, 
 the military ami naval glory the civilization of England. It has adorned 
 the squares of our own Washington City and filled every rotunda, corridor, 
 and niche of the Capitol with statues and monuments and busts until we have 
 assembled a congress of the dead to instruct, inspire, and guide the Congress 
 of the living, while, higher than all surrounding objects, towering above the 
 lofty dome of the Capitol, stands the obelisk to Washington. 
 
 Long may it stand, fit but inadequate symbol of that colossal character. 
 Of all the works of man it lifts its head nearest to the bright luminary of 
 nature, so that every rising sun joins all human voices, and with the first 
 kiss of the morning proclaims him favorite of all the family of men. May 
 it and the character it commemorates and the lessons that character teaches 
 abide with us until the light of that sun is extinguished by the final dark 
 ness that shall mark the end of the days. 
 
 Taught by these high examples, moved by this lofty sentiment of man 
 kind, we this day renew the allegiance of ourselves, and pledge that of our 
 posterity to the memory of our Southern dead. 
 
 No son of the South had higher claims upon our gratitude than he whom 
 we this day honor. Against his convictions he followed the South into 
 secession and war. True to her in the days of that war she waged for sepa 
 rate nationality ; true to her in the darker days that followed that war, 
 when she was denied admission into the Union ; after her restoration he 
 stood in the House of Representatives and the Senate Chamber the bravest 
 and most eloquent of her defenders, resisting every invasion of her rights, 
 and defiantly and triumphantly hurling back every assault upon her honor. 
 Not only as a son of Georgia and the South does he merit the tribute of our 
 highest praise, but as a citizen of the Republic. He was a profound student 
 of our system of government, and his knowledge of that system was not 
 only displayed in his public utterances, but is written in the lives and char 
 acters of the young men of Georgia who learned from him at the State 
 
224 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 University, and who in all the departments of the public service are enter 
 ing into careers of the highest usefulness and distinction. " Melius est 
 petere fontes quam sectari rivulos." Madison and Webster were his 
 teachers. Never did student have better teachers ; never teachers better 
 student. Webster was not more intense in his love for the Union as origin 
 ally established by the founders of the Republic. With the underlying 
 principles of that Union he was familiar. To him the American Union was 
 not the territory over which the flag floated and the laws were administered. 
 It was a system of government embracing a general government for gen 
 eral purposes, and local governments for local purposes, each, like the spheres 
 in the heavens, to be confined to its own orbit, and neither could invade the 
 domain of the other without chaos and ruin. In the solution of all prob 
 lems, in the discussion of all questions, in the shaping of all policies he 
 looked to the Constitution. As the fierceness of the storm only intensifies 
 the gaze of the mariner on the star that shall lead him out of darkness and 
 danger, so the greater the peril the more earnestly he contended for the 
 principles of the Constitution. He regarded the American system of govern 
 ment as the wisest ever devised by the wisdom of men, guided by a benefi 
 cent Providence which seemed to have chosen them for the highest achieve 
 ments of the race. He esteemed it not only for his own, but for all people, 
 the greatest production of man, the richest gift of heaven, except the Bible 
 and Christianity. But to him the States were as much a part of that system 
 as the general government. His indissoluble Union was composed of inde 
 structible States. He opposed sectionalism under any guise, and from any 
 quarter. As long as it spoke the truth, he honored and loved the flag of 
 his country. For so long, wherever it floated, from the dome of the Na 
 tional Capitol at home, or under foreign skies, leading the armies of the 
 Republic to deeds of highest valor in war, or signalizing the peaceful pur 
 suits of commerce ; at all times and everywhere, at home or abroad, on the 
 land and on the sea, in peace or war, its stripes uttered one voice of good 
 will to its friends and proud defiance to its enemies while the stars that 
 glittered upon its ample folds told of free and equal States. Thus looking 
 at it he could exclaim with patriotic fervor : " Flag of the Union ! Wave 
 on, wave ever. Wave over the great and prosperous North, wave over the 
 thrifty and historic East, wave over the young and expanding West, wave 
 over our own South until the Union shall be so firmly planted in the hearts 
 of all the people that no internecine war shall break our peace, no section 
 alism shall disturb our harmony ! Flag of the free ! Wave on until the 
 nations looking upon thee shall catch the contagion of freedom ! Wave 
 on until the light of knowledge illumines every mind, the fires of liberty 
 burn in every breast, the fetters fall from every limb, the bonds are loosed 
 from every conscience, and every son of earth and angel of heaven rejoices 
 in the universal emancipation." There never was a time in his distinguished 
 career when he would not have arrested and stricken down any arm lifted 
 against that flag speaking the truth. But he would have it wave over 
 " States, not provinces ; over freemen, not slaves," and there never was a 
 time when flaunting a lie, by whomsoever borne, he would not have despised 
 and trampled upon it. This was true American patriotism. 
 
 Though loyal to Georgia and the South during the period of separation, 
 he rejoiced at their restoration to the Union. No mariner tosed through 
 long nights on unchosen and tempestuous seas ever hailed the day of return 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 225 
 
 to tranquil port more gladly than he hailed the day of the restoration of the 
 States. No son driven, by fortunes he could not control, from the paternal 
 roof, ever left that roof with sadder parting than he left the Union, or re 
 turned from the storms without to the shelter of home with wilder transport 
 of joy than he felt when the South was again admitted to " our Father s 
 house." 
 
 Permanent peace and unity in republic or monarchy cannot be secured 
 by the power of the sword or the authority of legislation. England, with 
 all her power and statesmanship, has tried that for centuries and failed, and 
 will continue to fail until her people and her rulers learn what her foremost 
 statesman has recognized, that the unity of all governments of every form 
 must rest in the respect and confidence of the people. If this principle had 
 been observed after the war between the States, that dark chapter in our 
 history that must remain to dim the glory of American statesmanship 
 would have been unwritten. Wisely appreciating 4 this principle after 
 the admission of the true representatives of the people in Congress, 
 with voice and pen, he devoted all the powers of his great mind, and 
 all the impulses of his patriotic heart, to the re-establishment of that cor 
 dial respect and good feeling between the sections upon which alone our 
 American system, more than all others, depends for permanent union 
 and peace. 
 
 The great and good do not die. Fourteen centuries ago the head of the 
 great apostle fell before the sword of the bloody executioner, but through 
 long ages of oppression his example animated the persecuted Church, and 
 to-day stimulates its missionary spirit to press on through the rigors of 
 every climate, and the darkness of every heathen system, to the universal 
 and final triumphs of that cross for which he died. Four centuries agone 
 the body of John Wickliffe was exhumed and burnt to ashes, and these 
 cast into the water, but " the Avon to the Severn runs, the Severn to the 
 sea," and the doctrines for which he died cover and bless the world. Half 
 a century ago the living voice of O Connell was hushed, but that voice to 
 day stirs the high-born passions of every true Irish heart throughout the 
 world. The echoes of Prentiss s eloquent voice still linger in the valley of 
 the Mississippi. Breckenridge s body lies under the sod of Kentucky, but 
 he lives among her sons an inspiration and a glory. 
 
 And to-day there comes to us, and shall come to those after us, the voice 
 of our dead, solemn with the emphasis of another world, more eloquent 
 than that with which he was wont to charm us. It says to us : Children of 
 Georgia, love thy mother. Cherish all that is good and just in her past. 
 Study her highest interests. Discover, project, and foster all that will pro 
 mote her future. Respect and obey her laws. Guard well her sacred 
 honor. Give your richest treasures and best efforts to her material, social, 
 intellectual, and moral advancement, until she shines the brightest jewel in 
 the diadem of the Republic. 
 
 Men of the South, sons of the proud cavalier, bound together by com 
 mon tradition, memories, and sentiment, sharers of a common glory and 
 common sufferings, never lower your standard of private or public honor. 
 Keep the church pure and the State uncorrupted. Be true to yourselves, 
 your country, and your God, and fulfill the high destiny that lies before you. 
 Citizens of the Republic, love your system of government, study and 
 venerate the Constitution, cherish the Union, oppose all sectionalism, pro* 
 
a-j SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 mote llie weal and maintain the honor of the Republic. " Who saves his 
 country saves himself, saves all things, and all tilings saved do bless him ; 
 who lots his country die lets all tilings die, dies himself ignobly, and all 
 things dying curse him." 
 
 Illustrious citizen of the State, of the South, of the Republic, thou hast 
 taught us to be brave in danger, to be true without the hope of success, to be 
 patriotic in all things. We honor thee for thy matchless eloquence, for thy 
 dauntless courage, for th-y lofty patriotism. For the useful lessons thou hast 
 taught us, for the honorable example thou has left us, for the faithful ser 
 vice thou hast done us, we dedicate this statue to thy name and memory. 
 Telling of thee it shall animate the young with the highest and worthiest 
 aspirations for distinction ; cheer the aged with hopes for the future, and 
 strengthen all in the perils that may await us. May it stand, enduring as the 
 foundations of yonder Capitol, no more firmly laid in the earth than thy just 
 fame in the memories and hearts of this people. But whether it stand 
 pointing to the glories of the past, inspiring us with hopes for the future, or 
 fall before some unfriendly storm, thou shalt live, for we this day crown thee 
 with higher honor than Forum or Senate can confer. " In this spacious 
 temple of the firmament," lit up by the splendor of this unclouded Southern 
 sun on this august occasion, dignified by the highest officers of municipality 
 and State, and still more by the presence of the most illustrious living as well 
 as the spirits of the most illustrious dead, we come in grand procession 
 childhood and age, young men and maidens, old men and matrons, from 
 country and village and city, from hovel and cottage and mansion, from shop 
 and mart and office, from every pursuit and rank and station, and with united 
 hearts and voices, crown thee with the undying admiration, gratitude, and 
 love of thy countrymen. 
 
 Mr. Grady rose, and in the following language introduced Mr. Davis : 
 Had the great man whose memory is perpetuated in this marble, chosen 
 of all men one witness to his constancy and his courage, lie would have 
 chosen the honorable statesman whose presence honors this platform to-day. 
 Had the people of Georgia chosen of all men one man to-day to aid in this 
 sacred duty, and, by the memories that invest him about, to give deeper 
 sanctity to their work, they would have chosen Jefferson Davis first and 
 last President of the Confederate States. It is good, sir (turning to Mr. 
 Davis), for you to be here. Other leaders have had their triumphs. Con 
 querors have won crowns, and honors have been piled on the victors of 
 earth s great battles, but never yet, sir, came man to more loving people. 
 Never conqueror wore prouder diadem than the deathless love that crowns 
 your gray hairs to-day. Never king inhabited more splendid palace than 
 the millions of brave hearts in which your dear name and fame are forever 
 "enshrined. Speaking to you, sir, as a son of a Confederate soldier who 
 sealed his devotion with his life holding kinship through the priceless 
 heritage of his blood to you and yours standing midway between the thin 
 ning ranks of his old comrades, whose faltering footsteps are turned toward 
 the grave, and the new generation thronging eagerly to take the work that 
 falls unfinished from their hands here, in the auspicious Present, across 
 which the historic Past salutes a glorious Future, let me pledge you that 
 the love we bear you shall be transmitted to our children, and our children s 
 children, and that generations yet unborn shall in this fair land hold your 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 227 
 
 memory sacred, and point with pride to your lofty and stainless life. My 
 countrymen (turning to the crowd), let us teach the lesson in this old man s 
 life, that defeat hath its glories no less than victories. Let us declare that 
 this outcast from the privileges of this great government is the uncrowned 
 king of our people, and that no Southern man, high or humble, asks no greater 
 glory than to bear with him, heart to heart, the blame and the burden of 
 the cause for which he stands unpardoned. In dignity and honor he met 
 the responsibilities of our common cause. With dauntless courage he faced 
 its charges. In obscurity and poverty he has for twenty years borne the 
 reproach of our enemies, and the obloquy of defeat. This moment in this 
 blessed Easter week that, witnessing the resurrection of these memories, 
 that for twenty years have been buried in our hearts, have given us the best 
 Easter we have seen since Christ was risen from the dead. This moment 
 finds its richest reward in the fact that we can light with sunshine the short 
 ening end of a path that has long been dark and dreary. Georgians, 
 countrymen, soldiers and sons of soldiers, and brave w r omen, the light and 
 soul and crown of our civilization, rise, and give your hearts voice, as we tell 
 Jefferson Davis that he is at home among his people. 
 
 MR. DAVIS SPEAKS. 
 
 Amid the most stupendous cheers, Mr. Davis advanced to the edge of 
 the platform. He spoke as follows : 
 
 ^Ladies and Gentlemen : You have been, I believe, generally apprised 
 that no address was to be expected from me. I came here to silently and 
 reverently witness the unveiling of this statue of my friend. I came as one 
 who wanted to show his respect for a man who in victory or defeat was 
 ever the same brave, courageous, and true. If I were asked from Georgia s 
 history to name three men who were fair types of Georgians, I w r ould take 
 Oglethorpe the benevolent, Troup the dauntless, and Hill the faithful. 
 It is known to you generally, it has been told to you to-day, what part he 
 took in the struggle w r hich has just passed. If it were expected of me, 
 and I felt able to speak, I should feel that nothing could properly 
 supplement the great orations to which you have listened. There is nothing 
 to be added. It is complete. But there is something I may say of my dead 
 friend. If he w r as the last to engage in the war between the States, he was 
 the last to give it up. If he did not precipitate the controversy, he stood 
 by the wreck of our fortunes, and it was his voice which was raised loudest 
 and rang clearest for Georgia to assert her sovereignty. When, under the 
 power of the conquering enemy, for they were still such when, paralyzed 
 by defeat and poverty, our people seemed to shrink back, hopeless of the 
 future, and despondent of the past, lie wrote those " Notes on the Situa 
 tion " that first kindled the fires of hope in Georgia and elsewhere. His 
 voice rang out and called the people to remember that their cause was not 
 lost ; it was the eternal cause of truth and justice, and he invoked Georgians 
 to renew the struggle in such form as has led to the independence you now 
 enjoy. But I dare not speak of Hill personally. From the beginning to 
 the end of the controversy he was one on whose shoulder I could place my 
 hand and feel that its foundation was as firm as marble. He had nothing 
 to ask, but he had much to give; and when I was the last from the South 
 who could excite any expectation of benefit, it was Hill whose voice rose 
 
228 
 
 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 triumphant in the Senate and mashed the ingenious Yankee down. My 
 friends, ours is the day of peace. The friend whose memory we have met 
 to honor taught us the lesson of peace as well as resistance. He taught 
 us that it was through peaceful methods we were to regain our riglits. We 
 have trodden the thorny path and passed over the worst part of the road. 
 Let us still remember fealty to every promise we have given, but still let us 
 love Georgia and her rights, and may her rights of freedom and independ 
 ence, such as your father gave you, be yours and your children s forever. 
 
PART THIRD. 
 
 SPEECHES AND WRITINGS OF SENATOR BENJ. H. HILL. 
 
 SPEECH DELIVERED AT MACON, GA, JUNE 30, 1860. 
 
 ^llr. Hill was one of the Presidential Electors for the State at Large, in support of 
 Bell and Everett, and the speech below was made by him in their behalf. It is a calm, 
 convincing presentation of the reasons why Bell should be elected President of the 
 United States. It is the only speech which the writer has been able to find made by 
 Mr. Hill during this great and momentous campaign. 
 
 Mr. President and Friends : The city papers have announced that I 
 would speak to this meeting to-day. The announcement was without my 
 knowledge or consent. I refer to this for the purpose of saying that my ap 
 pearance now shall not be regarded as a precedent requiring me to respond to 
 similar calls in the future. I am no politician to fill bills to order, but if I 
 were I should draw my own bills. Do not suppose I speak thus because I 
 am not settled in my convictions as to what we ought to do in this canvass, 
 for on that point I have no hesitation or doubt ; nor yet because I would 
 not regard respectfully the wishes of my friends. Whithersoever the 
 changes of the future may drift us, the affection I feel for every true Ameri 
 can, with whom I have struggled so long for those truths which make up 
 patriotism, is part of my heart, and the two must live and die together. 
 
 But my health, though almost entirely restored, is such that I must be 
 allowed to direct my own actions during this canvass. 
 
 The very distinguished gentleman (Governor Johnson) who addressed 
 you last night, said his mission was to speak to the Democracy his own 
 divided brotherhood. Mine is very different. I shall speak to the people. 
 Democrats, Whigs, Americans countrymen all, my word of warning is to 
 you ! This land of the free is full of corruption, strife, and distraction. 
 Party, party, party has done it all ! Oh, that the God of the patriot would 
 cast out from our people these seven devils of party, which have already 
 well-nigh ruined us ! 
 
 If I shall utter a word on this occasion which shall appear to be harsh, I 
 assure you I do not intend such a meaning. I certainly have no such 
 feel in or. 
 
 o 
 
 Let us determine first what great principle is involved in this canvass 
 which we ought to support, and secondly, for whom, as patriots, we should 
 vote, in order most effectually to secure and promote that principle. 
 
 In my opinion, the whole nation is now called on, the first time in its 
 history, to decide, at the ballot box, what power has the general govern 
 ment over the subject of slavery ? This question has often been voted on 
 in Congress, in State Legislatures, and by factions, but now the whole 
 nation must vote upon it directly at the ballot box. Whatever may be our 
 
 229 
 
230 SENATOR 11. B. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 opinions as to the wisdom, or necessity, or good or evil to result from such 
 an issue, still politicians and events have thrust it upon us, and we must 
 decide it, as far as the ballot box can decide it. 
 
 Then, in my opinion, if the issue is made, the people ought, as national 
 men and patriots, by this election to declare that the Federal Government 
 "has no power over the subject of slavery except the power, coupled with 
 the duty of guarding and protecting the owner in his rights." 
 
 We ought so to declare first, because it is law. The supreme judicial 
 tribunal of the nation has, in language, so declared. If we do not maintain 
 it, we shall simply subject the stability of the law to the whims of the mul 
 titude, and are in anarchy. We ought so to declare, in the second place, 
 because it is right. 
 
 Protection to the person and property of the citizen is the first duty of 
 every government, and it is the whole and sole power and duty of the govern 
 ment of the United States. It was made for this only, and it can do nothing 
 else. Every act of every department of the government can have no other 
 scope, purpose, or interpretation. Government can create nothing, and 
 destroy nothing unless creation or destruction, in a given specified instance, 
 be necessary to secure general protection. Whether it declare war or make 
 peace, whether it build a navy or levy an impost whatsoever it does must 
 be done for this end. The wisdom of every speech, the redress of every 
 wrong, the duty of every office, the legitimacy of every action, must depend 
 upon and be measured by its fitness for, and its directness toward the one 
 great goal the protection of the person and property of the citizen. Human 
 government has no other claim even to existence, and that form of govern 
 ment must be the most perfect which most perfectly secures this object. 
 
 But I do not demand a slave code. Southern men who demand it, I 
 think, reason badly. They leap over truths, and jump to a conclusion, 
 which if granted might render even the right questionable. The demand 
 for a separate specific slave code admits that the tenure to slave property is 
 peculiar different from that by which other property is held, and therefore 
 needs a different quality of legislation. The great original ground of this 
 demand is taken from the idea that slavery is the creature of, and solely 
 dependent upon municipal law. It is upon this doctrine that non-action is 
 said to be effectual to exclude slavery from the Territories. Some persons 
 say if there be no law directly to authorize slavery, it cannot exist. The 
 slave without law is free. Therefore, if the Legislature will provide no law 
 do nothing non-act, slavery is excluded. If we admit the premise, the con 
 clusion is irresistible. This is the foundation argument of all abolitionism. 
 I cannot admit it, because I do not believe it correct. Slavery is the creature 
 of Divine law. He who originally gave maw dominion over the beast of the 
 field, and the fish of the sea, and the fowl of the air, afterward made Japhet 
 the master of Canaan and decreed Canaan to servitude forever. The first 
 decree is older in date, but not higher in authority than the last, and it is 
 
 o / 
 
 not for me to question the wisdom of either. He knows best, and there can 
 be no wisdom or right which does not submit to His will. 
 
 The slave, then, is property. The title is not made by human law. If I 
 had only human law for my title or right to my human slave, I would loose 
 him before the sun went down. Slave property differs from other property, 
 not in the right, but in its use. He who made the servant, prescribed rules 
 and injunctions for his humane treatment, and for this the master will 
 be responsible, and surely for its abuse he will be punished. I demand of 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 231 
 
 government that which we have a property code for protection of all 
 property, and therefore of slaves. 
 
 But, again, I will not now demand of Congress a slave code, because the laws 
 as they now stand, outside of the Kansas bill, are sufficient for our protec 
 tion. If the government is honestly administered, the citizen has ample 
 protections under the remedies now provided. On a former occasion I ex 
 plained this. It is sufficient at present to state the general fact, that we 
 have sufficient legal remedies for present purposes (outside of Kansas and 
 Nebraska, in which protection to slavery was refused by our organic act). 
 But it may be said if we have sufficient laws already, why now insist on the 
 power and duty of government to protect. 
 
 We must insist upon it : first, because this right and duty have been 
 denied, and they who deny are seeking to get control of the government. 
 Their success is a triumph of the denial. Already has this doctrine of pro 
 tection been denied by actual legislation in one case in the Kansas and 
 Nebraska bill. 
 
 Again, all experience shows that remedies which are sufficient for the 
 present become insufficient under the changes of ever progressing and 
 aggressive events. Why do your legislatures meet annually ? Simply to 
 pass such new laws and to remedy such defects in existing laws as time and 
 experience constantly show to be necessary. Thus, in 1793, Congress en 
 acted a fugitive slave law, to carry out a plain Constitutional provision. 
 For that day, and for years after that day, that act was sufficient. But the 
 ever-growing madness of anti-slavery fanaticism, and the interference of 
 anti-slavery legislatures, rendered utterly nugatory the remedies provided by 
 the act of 1793. Hence, it became just as much a necessity, and just as 
 much a duty, to pass a new and more efficient law, as it was to pass the 
 original act. What would now have been our condition had our fathers 
 agreed to be satisfied forever with the law of 1793, and released Congress 
 from its duty of further protection ? 
 
 So, though the legal remedies are now sufficient, how soon may the per- 
 verseness of the human will, the ingenuity of aspiring demagogues, the 
 invasions of a mad anti-slavery, world-wide sentiment, and the positive 
 intervention of unfriendly Territorial legislatures and people, render present 
 remedies utterly nugatory ? We must insist that government, every depart 
 ment in its appropriate sphere, shall keep our remedies efficient for all time 
 and against all enemies, wherever the authority of that government extends. 
 
 I have given reasons enough to show the correctness of the great leading 
 thought to be insisted on as the true solution of the question in this canvass. 
 
 The next inquiry is, for whom shall we vote in order most effectually to 
 secure the triumph of this principle ? To secure this triumph and make it 
 effectual, we must have a constant and honest eye to two things : 
 
 First. We must indorse the principle by our vote. 
 
 Secondly. We ought to indorse it so as to restore peace to the country, 
 quiet the agitation, and thus preserve the stability of the government. 
 
 It is needless to say we cannot support Mr. Lincoln. But why ? Because 
 he says it is the right and the duty of Congress to prohibit slavery in the 
 Territories. This is a claim of power other than to protect, and, therefore, 
 one which we deny ; and because, also, his election will not restore peace, 
 but increase distraction, and endanger the government. It is idle to debate 
 the propriety, the right, or the wrong of the fact. If the experiment is 
 forced, the fact will turn out to be, in my humble judgment, that this govern- 
 
232 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 ment and black Republicanism cannot live together. If our Northern friends 
 wish to imperil the Union, they can vote for Mr. Lincoln. If they wish to 
 insure the continuance of the first, they must make certain the defeat of the 
 latter. At no period of the world s history have four thousand millions of 
 property debated whether it ought to submit to the rule of an enemy. The 
 South may furnish the first example, but wise men will not precipitate the 
 hazard. 
 
 We cannot support Mr. Douglas. True, he says, Congress shall not pro 
 hibit slavery. But he says the Territorial Legislature, a provisional arm of 
 the Federal Government, may prohibit slavery in two ways by non-action 
 and unfriendly legislation. I have explained his non-action theory and 
 the premise on which it is based. I deny the correctness both of the 
 premise and the conclusion. Unfriendly legislation is not only to deny 
 the duty of protection, and the right to refuse such additional remedies as time 
 and circumstances may show to be necessary, but may also interfere with, 
 and render nugatory, existing remedies. He claims this power under the 
 Kansas bill. It is claimed that the South has agreed to the non-intervention 
 and denial of protection clauses and doctrines as contained in that bill. Here, 
 my brothers of the Constitutional Democracy, is the fight for you to make. 
 It is not for me. All the world knows we never agreed to that. No, 
 thanks to the sweet recollections which struggles for truth always fix in the 
 mind, we were no parties to that agreement, no partners in its spoil. 
 
 We cannot, therefore, support Mr. Douglas. The difference between us 
 is one of principle. It is radical, fundamental, and I fear, incurable cer 
 tainly so, unless he shall change. As I intend this day to speak candidly, 
 and do full justice to even an enemy, I will add that outside of this ques 
 tion I see much in Mr. Douglas to admire. On other questions, and on 
 many occasions, he has been a bold, able, and fearless defender of our rights. 
 He certainly fights the Republican party most manfully, and if there is a 
 man north of Mason and Dixon s line, whom, above all others, I could wish 
 to be, not almost but altogether such as we are, that man is Stephen A. 
 Douglas. But on this question I have always differed with him widely, and 
 must continue to differ. But I will do him the further justice to say, I never 
 mistook him. His friends South have ruined him by denying in 1856 that 
 he held these opinions. He was too honest to affirm their denials, and the 
 truth is now manifest. The masses of the Southern Democracv have been 
 
 y 
 
 deceived, and for that deception they curse Mr. Douglas. The curse should 
 be on those who deceived them, rather than on Mr. Douglas. 
 
 The issue is thus narrowed down to Mr. Bell and Mr. Breckinridge. 
 With a perfect willingness on my part to support the election of whichever of 
 these two would most effectually secure the principle enunciated, and restore 
 peace to the country, I have examined this question, and have arrived at a 
 conclusion to which, I think, unprejudiced investigation will bring every 
 Southern man. In no event will I make voluntary war on Mr. Breckin 
 ridge, but I am fully convinced that the best policy and the safest patriotism 
 require us to support Mr. Bell. I will proceed to give my reasons, and beg 
 you, fellow-citizens, to leave party and prejudice behind while you listen 
 to me. 
 
 I admit, here, that the new platform on which Mr. Breckinridge stands, 
 is, on this subject sound. His record is not sound. This Governor Johnson 
 proved last night and could have proved much more conclusively than he 
 did. But, for myself, if Mr. Breckinridge gets on the platform and thus 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 233 
 
 recants his errors, I will admit him as sound as the platform. No issue 
 with me here. 
 
 Mr. Bell s platform does not define this question. His platform is the 
 Constitution, the Union, and the laws. To know how he interprets the Con 
 stitution, and what laws he will enforce, we must go to his record. If his 
 record fails, then he and his platform must fail. If his record is sound, it 
 gives meaning to his platform and strength to him. To this record he 
 refers us in his letter of acceptance, and to the record let us go. 
 
 My first proposition, and which I shall establish without a doubt, is, that 
 John Bell is as sound as the platform on which Mr. Breckinridge is nomi 
 nated. 
 
 This platform contains three distinct propositions : 
 
 1. That Congress has no power to abolish slavery in the Territories. 
 
 2. That the Territorial Legislature has no such power. 
 
 3. That, on the contrary, it is the duty of the government to protect 
 property (slavery understood) wherever necessary. 
 
 These are three sound propositions, and cover the whole ground of 
 power and duty. 
 
 About the 5th day of June, 1850, Mr. Seward, of New York, offered the 
 following as an amendment to the Compromise measures in the Senate : 
 
 Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, otherwise than by conviction for crime, 
 shall ever be allowed in either of said Territories of Utah and New Mexico. 
 
 This is the Wilmot Proviso. John Bell voted no, and thus indorsed, 
 under oath, the first proposition of the platform. 
 
 On the same day, Mr. Berrien that great man from Georgia offered 
 the following amendment : 
 
 But no law shall be passed interfering with the primary disposal of the soil, nor 
 establishing or prohibiting African slavery. 
 
 This was against squatter sovereignty. John Bell voted yes, and thus 
 indorsed the second proposition of the platform. 
 
 On the 27th of May, of the same year, Mr. Pratt, of Maryland, and Mr. 
 Davis, of Mississippi, agreed upon, and Mr. Davis offered, the following 
 amendment to the same bill : 
 
 Provided, that nothing herein contained shall be construed so as to prevent said Ter 
 ritorial Legislature from passing such laws as may be necessary for the protection of the 
 rights of property of every kind, which may have been or may be hereafter conformable 
 to the Constitution and laws of the United States, held in, or introduced into said Ter 
 ritory. 
 
 Mr. Davis also prefaced this proviso with some remarks, declaring his 
 object to be to assert the duty of the government to protect slavery. 
 
 On this proviso Mr. Bell voted yes, thus asserting under oath, the duty 
 of protection, when necessary, in the very language of the platform. 
 
 For Mr. Davis s proviso, see Congressional Globe, vol. 21, part 2, page 
 1074. For all the votes, see same book, page 1134. Therefore, to an actual 
 demonstration, Mr. Bell is certainly as sound as the Breckinridge plat 
 form. 
 
 The next proposition is, that Mr. Bell is sounder than this platform. 
 Now to the proof. 
 
 This platform, of course, says nothing about slavery as a political, moral, 
 
234 SENATOR . S. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 or social good or evil ; nor does that platform assert any good in slavery to 
 the country, or as contributing to its prosperity. 
 
 But on the 6th day of July, 1850, in his place in the Senate, Mr. Bell 
 made a speech in which, after asserting the right to protection, to be con 
 stitutional and " unquestionable," he proceeds to give his views on slaveiy 
 itself. A better argument has never been made in defense of slavery. He 
 proves it right by the laws of nature, and of God, as a political, moral, social, 
 and religious good ! I beg every man in the South to get away from dema 
 gogues and party sit down with a pure and honest heart, and read that 
 speech before he votes against Mr. Bell, or stultifies himself by calling him un 
 sound. Nothing like it can be found in all the life of John C. Breckinridge. 
 
 Thus Mr. Bell is sounder than the platform, and sounder than Mr. Breck 
 inridge and his platform together. 
 
 Now, fellow-citizens, I will say here in general terms, without taking up 
 your time to read so much, that there is nothing in all Mr. Bell s record in 
 consistent with this. I care not how designing editors and demagogues dis 
 grace themselves with garbling falsehoods, and mean perversions to the 
 contrary, this is true, and their lives riot in all the South a purer, sounder, 
 better statesman for the South and the Union than John Bell. 
 
 But you will say, how is it that Mr. Bell, with such a record, has been 
 declared to be unsound so often at the South. The grounds of this charge 
 have been two his votes against the Kansas bill and the Lecompton Con 
 stitution, and also the general fact that everybody, not a Democrat, is habit 
 ually denounced as unsound by the small men of that party. In 1856 they 
 burnt me in effigy as an ally of the Republicans, and last night they hung 
 Governor Johnson for the same reason I suppose. To the Governor I send 
 greeting, with the hope that four years hence he may stand as fully vindi 
 cated as I do to-day. 
 
 But why should our Breckinridge friends condemn Mr. Bell for voting 
 against the Kansas bill ? He did honestly believe and fully declare that that 
 bill would be evil and only evil to the South and the Union. Do you not 
 all admit it ? When you seceded at Charleston, you put on record the 
 reasons for that secession, and, in looking over your reasons, I find many 
 epithets applied to the Kansas bill and the Cincinnati platform, such as 
 "cheat," "swindle," "humbug," and "deceit upon the South." On this 
 bill, then, why condemn Mr. Bell ! The only difference I can see between 
 you and Mr. Bell on this point is that it required six years of bitter experience 
 and earnest warnings to teach you what Mr. Bell saw from the beginning ! 
 
 Then as to the Lecompton issue. Mr. Bell did not vote against this bill 
 because it contained slavery. He honestly believed it was fraudulent. 
 Whether so or not he believed so, and so believing, was it not his duty to 
 votp against it ? We ought not to require a man to be corrupt, even to 
 gratify our own feelings. Every man who condemns Mr. Bell for this vote, 
 only impeaches his own reliability, doubtless without intending it. How 
 ever we might differ with Mr. Bell as to the fact of frauds, yet the vote itself 
 proves nothing except that Mr. Bell was honest, yes, honest enough to do 
 right against iiis own prejudices. I admit but few politicians will under 
 stand how this is possible ! I know of no greater virtue, nor one more 
 needed at this time in our public men. 
 
 Mr. Hammond, of South Carolina, said this Lecompton bill ought to 
 have been kicked out ! Why not call him unsound, too ? He is a Democrat ! 
 
 There is another reason strongly favoring the claims of Mr. Bell, which 
 
ffTS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 235 
 
 we cannot consider too seriously. Mr. Bell is a national man, and his elec 
 tion will nationalize our principles. But how happens it that he is so sound 
 and yet so national ? The explanation is easy. Mr. Bell has always re 
 garded our Constitutional rights as unquestionable. They were fixed, and 
 above the power of government to destroy. Therefore he has opposed agita 
 tion as unnecessary and unwise. Foolish agitation always stirs up and in 
 vites positive aggression. When issues and votes have been forced by the 
 thoughtless, Mr. Bell has voted right, but he has done so, deprecating the 
 evil to the country of gratuitous agitation. If all our public men had taken 
 John Bell for a model, the rights of the South and the perpetuity of the 
 Union would to-day be unquestionable and unquestioned. 
 
 The election of Mr. Bell will give our principles a peaceful, quiet 
 triumph, and disband the Republican party. The election of Mr. Breckin- 
 ridge will increase the strife and tend to build up the Republican party. 
 
 Again, on the ground where my Breckinridge friends now stand, and 
 claim so much credit for standing, John Bell has been standing for years. 
 Yes, he and we were standing there when you were excited, mad, carried 
 away in the thoughtless adoration of this " cheat " and "swindle," as you 
 now term the Kansas bill ; and abused us, called us traitors and abolitionist. 
 You drove him from his seat in the Senate for his very fidelity. You drove 
 the gallant and noble Crittenden from his seat for the same reason, and 
 have placed Mr. Breckinridge in his place. In this hour of our vindication, 
 must we abandon Mr. Bell ? Honor and a high sense of justice should force 
 you to him. Nothing but ingratitude and the loss of self-respect can drive 
 us from him. We have learned how to forgive enemies, but we have never 
 learned how to abandon friends. 
 
 Again, Mr. Bell was in the field first. The Convention was called while 
 you were still in the National Democracy with your " sound forty-four faith 
 ful." He was nominated while you were trying to get back after once going 
 out. You ought not to have nominated another, and thus .divided those who 
 agree. Besides, we are more national and have greater strength North. 
 Mr. Buchanan was elected by a plurality vote. That minority being again 
 divided, how can you succeed? 
 
 So I will say to our Douglas friends, why not support Bell ? You are 
 national in your wishes, but you cannot succeed. You are dividing our 
 strength and* hazarding the nation. In voting for Bell, you only give up 
 squatter sovereignty. Are you wedded to THAT ? If Mr. Douglas and his 
 friends were to unite on Mr. Bell, the defeat of Lincoln is sure. And by 
 such an exhibition of national patriotism, Mr. Douglas would write his name 
 higher in the temple of Liberty than any living statesman has climbed. 
 
 But if our Breckinridge friends cannot vote for Mr. Bell, there is yet a 
 
 i / 
 
 chance of union. Let us be equals ! I have suggested heretofore an ar 
 rangement of this kind. The responsibility of its rejection and of the con 
 sequent continuance of strife shall be with you, and with you I leave it. 
 
 Why should our Breckinridge friends still cleave to Democracy ? The 
 organization, and the name, belong to Mr. Douglas. It is folly to deny it. 
 People can t be made to say anything, simply because you \vant them to say 
 it. Besides, if Democracy has become so corrupt, and has deceived the 
 country as you say, why should you wish to appropriate its name with such 
 a prestige? More than all, if that party has imposed on the country a 
 * cheat," which has borne no fruit but strife, and blood, and deception, how 
 can you expect us to be counted in its membership ? 
 
236 SENATOR & H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 My countrymen, I appeal from these leaders to you ? How long will you 
 suffer politicians to flatter you as sovereigns and use you as victims, without 
 awaking your resentment ? How often shall they settle and unsettle the 
 slavery question, before you discover that the only meaning they have is to 
 excite your prejudices and get your votes ? For how many years shall 
 changing demagogues shuffle you as the gambler shuffles his cards to win a 
 stake and still find you willing to be shuffled again ? You were told to wor 
 ship the Kansas bill ; with the blind earnest devotion of a Mecca pilgrim 
 you did kneel and kiss ! You were told to abuse your neighbor because he 
 would not worship with you. In all the billingsgate of the demagogue s vo 
 cabulary you did it. Now behold ! They who told you to worship, tell you 
 the thing you worshiped is a cheat, a swindle, a humbug ; yea, a deception to 
 the South ! The neighbor you abused has proven a wise man and a true 
 patriot ! Will you bend again the supple knee, and shout aloud with the 
 tongue, when these same priests shall order you ? Will you ? and so soon ? 
 
 I have spoken to you, friends, in kindness. I have spoken the truth. I 
 do not know that I shall speak again. May you do your duty, save your 
 country, and stand approved at last. 
 
SPEECH DELIVERED IN MILLEDGEVILLE, GA., NOVEMBER 15, 
 
 1860. 
 
 This is the only speech which has been preserved, made by Mr. Hill against seces 
 sion, and it is an unanswerable argument against it as a remedy for Southern wrongs. 
 In the light of subsequent events, its wisdom has been fully demonstrated. In an hour 
 when passion and extreme utterances characterized public speakers both North and 
 South, this address is conspicuous for its calm and statesmanlike discussion of the mo 
 mentous questions then pressing for solution. 
 
 CORRESPONDENCE. 
 
 MILLEDGEVILLE, November 16, 1860. 
 Hon. B. H. Hill : 
 
 DEAR SIR : The undersigned, fully appreciating the questions involved 
 in our present political divisions, and having listened with pleasure to the 
 able address delivered by yourself last evening at the Representatives Hall, 
 believing, as we do, that " \ve should fully understand the issue in order to 
 meet it," and desiring that other citizens of our State should have the grati 
 fication of reading what many of us have heard fall from your own lips, we 
 therefore respectfully solicit a copy of your able, eloquent, and patriotic 
 address, for publication, hoping you will comply. 
 
 We are respectfully yours, 
 
 B. L. McWuoRTER, T. O. WICKER, H. W. HOWELL. 
 W. F. HOLDEX, R. H. WARD, R. C. HUMBER, 
 T. W. ALEXANDER, J. M. BONDS, JAMES PARKS, 
 
 C. C. PATTON, JOHN J. THRASHER, J. F. USRY, 
 
 M. M. MINTZ, < A. J. CLOUD, J. M. BRINSON, 
 
 WM. H. BRANTLY, B. R. REED, NEILL McLEOD, 
 
 A. E. TARVER, T. L. GUERRY, E. C. HOOD, 
 
 W. H. PlLCHER, T. J. HlGHTOWER, S. Y. JAMESON, 
 
 CICERO GIBSON, SAMUEL L. WILLIAMS, F. A. FLEWELLEN, 
 
 JOHN THRASHER, JOHN McRAE, K. H. DAVIS, 
 
 H. L. TAYLOR, W. S. WALLACE, PHIL. COOK, 
 
 ALLEN KELLY, T. J. SMITH, S. F. ALEXANDER, 
 
 J. R. WILSON, A. COLVARD, THOMAS F. WELLS. 
 
 B. J. EVANS, GEORGE T. BARNES, 
 
 Gentlemen : Since the reception of your letter I have hastily written 
 out the speech to which you refer. I could not recall the exact language, 
 but the argument, such as it is, is herewith submitted for your disposal. 
 
 I see nothing in the remarks inconsistent with anything heretofore writ 
 ten by me. There is a prudent and imprudent way of accomplishing the 
 same good. I think some of our friends are hasty. Let us keep right and 
 " make haste slowly." I have discussed a policy of resistance, but I am 
 ready to yield it for a better when I can find it. That policy which can 
 most cordially unite our people, and most effectually redress our grievances, 
 is the one I shall prefer. 
 
 Yours, veiy respectfully, B. H. HILL. 
 
 November 19, 1860. 
 
 9 237 
 
238 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 SPEECH. 
 
 Ladies and Friends : While I am speaking to you to-night I earnestly 
 beg for perfect quietness and order. It seems to be a general idea that pub 
 lic speakers feel highly complimented when their opinions are received with 
 boisterous applause. I do not so feel on any occasion, and certainly would 
 not so regard such a demonstration now. The occasion is a solemn and seri 
 ous one, and let us treat it in no light or trivial manner. One more request. I 
 have invoked good order. I yet more earnestly invoke your kind and consider 
 ate attention. No people ever assembled to deliberate a graver issue. The 
 government is the result of much toil, much blood, much anxiety, and much 
 treasure. For nearly a century we have been accustomed to speak and boast 
 of it as the best on earth. Wrapped up in it are the lives, the happiness, 
 the interests, and the peace of thirty millions of freemen now living, and of 
 unnumbered millions in the future. 
 
 Whether we shall now destroy that government or make another effort 
 to preserve it and reform its abuses, is the question before us. Is that ques 
 tion not entitled to all the wisdom, the moderation, and the prudence we 
 can command ? Were you ever at sea in a storm ? Then you know the 
 sailor often finds it necessary, to enable him to keep his ship above the wave, 
 to throw overboard his freight, even his treasure. But with his chart and 
 his compass he never parts. However dark the heavens or furious the winds, 
 with these he can still point the polar star, and find the port of his safety. 
 Would not that sailor be mad who should throw these overboard ? 
 
 We are at sea, my friends. The skies are fearfully darkened. The bil 
 lows roll threateningly. Dangers are on every side. Let us throw over 
 board our passions, our prejudices, and our party feelings, however long or 
 highly valued. But let us hold on hold on to reason and moderation. 
 These, and these alone, point always to the fixed star of truth, by whose 
 guidance we may yet safely come to shore. 
 
 We must agree. We do agree if we but knew it. Our people must be 
 united to meet this crisis. Divisions now would not only be unfortunate, but 
 exceedingly disastrous. If divisions arise they cannot be based on our 
 interests or our purposes, for these are and must be the same. Divisions 
 must find their origin in our suspicions and jealousies. Let us give these 
 suspicions and jealousies to the winds. Let us assume as the basis of every 
 argument that we are all equally honest, and equally desirous in our various 
 ways of securing one end our equality and rights. There must be one way 
 better than all others. Let our ambition be to find that way, and unite our 
 people in the advocacy of that way. 
 
 I have listened with earnest attention to the eloquent speeches made by 
 all sides, and I believe a common ground of agreement can be found, if not 
 for universal, at least for very general agreement. Those who hold that the 
 Constitution is wrong, and the Union bad per se, of course will agree to 
 nothing but immediate disunion, and such I shall not be able to affect. 
 
 In the first place what are our grievances. All the speakers, thus far, 
 even the most ultra, have admitted that the mere Constitutional election of 
 any man is no ground for resistance. The mere election of Mr. Lincoln is 
 on all sides admitted not to be grievance. Our State would not be thrown 
 on a false issue on this point. 
 
 We complain, in general terms, that the anti-slavery sentiment at the 
 North has been made an element of political power. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 239 
 
 In proof of this we make the following specifications : 
 
 1. That a large political party has been organized in the Northern 
 States, the great common idea of which is to prohibit the extension of slav 
 ery by Congress, and hostility to slavery generally. 
 
 2. That this party has succeeded in getting the control of many of the 
 Northern State Legislatures and have procured the passage of acts nullify 
 ing the fugitive slave law, encouraging the rescue of fugitives, and seeking 
 to punish as felons citizens of our Southern States who pursue their slaves 
 in the assertion of a plain Constitutional right. 
 
 3. That this party has elected governors in Northern States who refuse, 
 some openly and others under frivolous pretexts, to do their plain Constitu 
 tional duties, when these involve the recognition of property in slaves. 
 
 4. That Northern courts, chosen by the same party, have assumed to 
 declare the fugitive slave law unconstitutional in the teeth of the decisions 
 of the United States courts, and of every department of the United States 
 Government. 
 
 5. We complain that the Northern States, thus controlled, are seeking to 
 repudiate every Constitutional duty or provision, in favor or in recognition 
 of slavery to work the extinction of slavery, and to secure to the negro 
 social and political equality with the white race ; and, as far as possible, they 
 disregard and nullify even the laws of the Southern States on these subjects. 
 In proof of this complaint, we show that Northern governors have actually 
 refused to deliver up fugitives from justice, when the crime charged against 
 such fugitives recognized under State law property in slaves. 
 
 Thus, a Northern man married a Southern lady having a separate estate 
 in slaves. He deceived the lady, stole her negroes, sold them, and pocketed 
 the money, and fled to a Northern State. He was charged with larceny 
 under the laws of the State in which the crime was committed. A true bill 
 was obtained and a demand was properly made for his return, and the Gov 
 ernor of the State to which he fled refused to deliver him up on the ground 
 that to commit larceny a man must steal property, and as slaves were not 
 property according to the laws of the Northern State, it could not be prop 
 erty according to the laws of the Southern State ; that therefore the Southern 
 court, jury, and governor were all wrong in obeying the laws of their own 
 State, instead of the laws of the Northern State ; that the defendant was 
 not guilty and could not be guilty, and should not be delivered up. 
 
 The same principle was involved to shield several of the conspirators in 
 the John Brown raid. 
 
 The inexorable logic of this party, on such a premise, must array them 
 against the whole Constitution of the United States ; because that instru 
 ment, in its very frame-work, is a recognition of property in slaves. It was 
 made by slaveholding States. Accordingly we find this party a disunion 
 party, and its leaders those of them who follow their logic to its prac 
 tical consequences disunionists per se. I would not quote from the low 
 and the ignorant of that party, but I will quote from the learned and the 
 honored. 
 
 One of the most learned disciples of this party, says : 
 
 The Constitution is the cause of every division which this vexed question of slavery 
 has ever occasioned in this country. If (the Constitution) has been the fountain and 
 father of our troubles, by attempting to hold together, as reconciled, two opposing prin 
 ciples, which will not harmonize nor agree, the only hope of the slave is over the ruins 
 of the government. The dissolution of the Union is the abolition of slavery. 
 
240 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 One of the ablest, and oldest, and long honored senators of that party 
 a senator even before the existence of the Republican party said to the 
 nominating convention of that party : 
 
 I believe that this is uot so much a convention to change the administration of the 
 government, as to say whether there shall be any government to be administered. You 
 have assembled, not to say whether this Union shall be preserved, but to say whether it 
 shall be a blessing or a scorn and hissing among the nations. 
 
 I could quote all night, my friends, to show that the tendency of the 
 Republican party is to disunion. That to be a Republican is to be logic 
 ally and practically against the Constitution and the Union. And we com 
 plain that this party is warring upon us, and at the same time, and in the 
 same way, and by a necessary consequence, warring upon the Constitution 
 and the Union. 
 
 6. We complain, in the last place, that this party, having thus acquired 
 the control of every department of government legislative, executive, and 
 judicial in several of the Northern States, and having thus used every 
 department of the State government so acquired, in violation of the Con 
 stitution of the United States, in disregard of the laws of the Southern 
 States, and in utter denial of the property and even liberty of the citizens 
 of the Southern States this party, I say, with these principles, and this his 
 tory, has at last secured the executive department of the Federal Govern 
 ment, and are seeking to secure the other two departments the legislative 
 and the judicial. 
 
 Here, then, is a party seeking to administer the government on principles 
 which must destroy the government proposing to preserve the Union upon 
 a basis on which the Union, in the very nature of things, cannot stand ; and 
 offering peace on terms which must produce civil war. 
 
 Now, my friends, the next question is, shall these grievances be resisted ? 
 I know of no man who says they ought not to be resisted. For myself, I 
 say, and say with emphasis, they ought to be resisted resisted effectively 
 and at all hazards. 
 
 What lessons have we here ? We have seen differences running high 
 even apparent bitterness engendered. Passion gets up, debates become jeers 
 and gibes and defiance. One man says he will not resist Lincoln. His 
 adversary pronounces that treason to the South and the man a black Republi 
 can. Another man saj^s he will resist Lincoln and demand immediate seces 
 sion. His adversary pronounces that treason to the Constitution and the 
 man a disunionist. 
 
 What do you mean by Lincoln ? Stop and define. The first means by 
 Lincoln the man elected, the second means by Lincoln the issue on which he 
 is elected. Neither will resist the first, both will resist the latter, and so 
 they agree and did agree all the time they were disputing ! 
 
 These grievances are our real complaint. They have advanced to a point 
 which makes a crisis : and that point is the election of Lincoln. We dare 
 not, we will not let this crisis pass without a settlement. That settlement 
 must wipe out existing grievances, and arrest threatened ones. We owe it 
 to our Constitution, to our country, to our peace, to our posterity, to our 
 dignity, to our self-respect as Union men and Southern men, to have a cessa 
 tion of these aggressions and an end to these disturbances. I do not think we 
 should wait for any further violation of the Constitution. The Constitution 
 has already been violated and even defied. These violations are repeated 
 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 241 
 
 every day. We must resist, and to attempt to resist and not do so effec 
 tively even to the full extent of the evil will be to bring shame on our- 
 
 M 
 
 selves, and our State, and our cause. 
 
 Having agreed on our complaints, and discovered that all our suspicions 
 of each other are unfounded, and that our disputes on this point had their 
 origin in hasty conclusions and thoughtless mistakes, let us, with an encour 
 aged charity and forbearance, advance to the next step in this argument. 
 
 Who shall inaugurate this resistance ? Who shall determine the mode, 
 the measure, and the time of this resistance ? 
 
 My reply is : The people through their delegate convention duly 
 assembled. 
 
 It is not necessary for me now to urge this point. Here again we have 
 had disputes without differences. 
 
 I have the pleasure of announcing to-night that the prominent leaders, of 
 all shades of opinion on this subject, came together this day, and agreed 
 that it was the right and privilege of the people in convention to pass on 
 these questions. On this point we have disputed for a week, and to-day, 
 acting as Georgians should act, we came together in a spirit of kindness, 
 and in fifteen minutes our hearts were all made glad by the discovery that 
 our differences or disputes were founded on groundless suspicions, and we 
 are agreed. We are all for resistance, and we are all for the people in con 
 vention to say how and where and by what means we shall resist. 
 
 I never beheld a scene which made my heart rejoice more sincerely. 
 Oh, that I could see the same spirit of concord on the only remaining ques 
 tion of difference. With my heart full of kindness I beg you, my friends, 
 accompany me now to question. I do believe we can agree again. My 
 solemn conviction is that we differ as little on this as we did on the other 
 point, in every material view. At least, nearly all the quarrels of the world 
 in all ages have been founded more in form than substance. 
 
 Some men are honest, wise, and prudent. Others are equally honest and 
 intelligent, but rash and impetuous. The latter are often to be loved and 
 encouraged ; but the first alone are to be relied on in emergencies. 
 
 We often appeal to the history of our- fathers to urge men to indigna 
 tion and resentment of wrongs. Let us study all that history. Let me 
 show you from that history, an example of metal and over-confidence on 
 the one hand, and of coolness and wisdom on the other. 
 
 During our colonial history, the English government sent General 
 Braddock to America to dislodge and drive back the French and Indians. 
 
 ^j 
 
 The general, in arranging the company, assigned to his ow r n command the 
 duty of recovering the Ohio Valley and the great Northwest. It was 
 necessaiy to capture Fort Duquesne. He never thought of any difficulties 
 in the way of success. He promised Newcastle to be beyond the mountains 
 in a very short period. Duquesne he thought would stop him only three or 
 four da\ r s. and there was no obstruction to his march to Niagara. He de- 
 
 */ 
 
 clared the Indians might frighten the raw American militia, but could make 
 no impression on the British regulars. This was Braddock. 
 
 One of that raw American militia who had joined Braddock s command, 
 was the young Washington, then only about twenty-three years old. He 
 became one of Braddock s aids. Hearing his general s boasts, and seeing his 
 thoughtless courage, Washington quietly said to him, " We shall have more 
 to do than to go up the hills and come down." Speaking of Braddock to 
 another, Washington said, " He was incapable of arguing without warmth, 
 
242 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 or giving up any point he had asserted, be it ever so incompatible with rea 
 
 son or common sense. 
 
 Braddock was considered on all hands to be a brave, gallant, and fearless 
 officer. 
 
 Here, then, are two men, both brave, noble, and jintelligent, engaged to 
 gether to accomplish a common enterprise for the good of their country. 
 The one was rash, thoughtless, never calculating difficulties, nor looking 
 forward to and providing against obstructions. 
 
 He arranged his express and sent forward the news of his victory before 
 hand. But the other was cool, calculating, cautious, wise, and moderate. 
 He was a man who thought before he acted and then he acted the hero. 
 
 Now, for results : Braddock was surprised before he reached the fort. 
 His British regulars fled before the yelling Indians, and the raw American 
 militia were slain by them. Braddock himself fought bravely and he was 
 borne from the field of his shame, leaving more than half his little army 
 dead, and himself senseless with a mortal wound. After the lapse of a day 
 he came to himself, and his first exclamation was, " Who would have thought 
 it ! Again he roused up and said, " We shall better know how to deal 
 with them another time." Poor general, it was too late, for with that sen 
 tence he died ? For more than a century he has slept near Fort Necessity, 
 and his only history might be written for his epitaph : "He was brave but 
 rash, gallant but thoughtless, noble but bigoted. He fought hastily, died 
 early, and here he lies." 
 
 The young Washington was also brave, and in the thickest of the fight. 
 Horse after horse fell from under him. The bullets of the Indians whistled 
 around him and through his clothes, but Providence spared him. Even the 
 Indians declared some God protected him. So cool, so brave, so wise and 
 thoughtful was the conduct of this young officer, before, during, and after 
 the battle that even then a distinguished man " points him out as a youth 
 raised up by Providence for some noble work." Who does not know the 
 history of Washington ; yet who can tell it? Our glorious revolution, that 
 wise Constitution, this happy, widespread, and ever spreading country 
 struggling millions fired on by the example of his success, are some of the 
 chapters already written in that history. Long chapters of yet unrealized 
 glory, and power, and happiness shall be endlessly added, if the wisdom of 
 him who redeemed our country can be continued to those who inherit it. 
 The last hour of constitutional liberty, perpetuated to the glory of the end, 
 or cut short in the frenzy of anarchy, shall wind up the histoiy of Washing 
 ton. Behold here the sudden destructon of the rash man and his followers, 
 and the still unfolding success of the cool and thoughtful man, and then let 
 us go to work to meet this crisis that is upon us. 
 
 Though there are various modifications of opinions, there are really but 
 two modes of resistance proposed. One method is to make no further effort in 
 the Union, but to assume that the Union either cannot or ought not to be 
 preserved, and secede at once and throw ourselves upon the consequences. 
 The other method is to exhaust certain remedies for these grievances in the 
 Union, with the view of preserving our rights and the Union with them, if 
 possible ; looking, however, to and preparing for secession as an ultimate 
 resort, certainly to be had, if those grievances cannot be remedied and com 
 pletely remedied and ended in the Union. 
 
 Irreconcilable as these differences at first view seem to be, I maintain 
 a point of complete reconciliation can be reached. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 243 
 
 Now, let us look to the reason urged by the advocates of these two 
 modes of redress. 
 
 The advocates of the first mode declare that these grievances are the 
 fruits of an original, innate anti-slavery fanaticism. That the history of the 
 w r orld will show that such fanaticism is never convinced, is never satisfied, 
 never reasons, and never ends but in victory or blood. That accordingly this 
 fanaticism in the Northern States has been constantly progressive, always 
 getting stronger and more impudent, defiant, and aggressive ; and that it 
 will never cease except in our subjugation unless we tear loose from it by 
 dissolving the Union. These advocates say they have no faith in any resist 
 ance in the Union, because, in the nature of the evil, none can be effectual. 
 
 The advocates of the second mode of resistance, of whom I am humbly 
 one, reason after another fashion : We say, in the first place, that while it is 
 true that this anti-slavery sentiment has become fanatical with many, yet it 
 is not necessarily so in its nature, nor was it so in its origin. Slavery has 
 always existed in some form. It is an original institution. Besides, we say 
 the agitation now upon us did not originate in fanaticism or philanthropy 
 but in cupidity. 
 
 England owned the West Indies and there she had some slaves. She had 
 possessions in East India which she believed were adapted to the growth of 
 cotton, and which article of produce she desired to monopolize. 
 
 The Southern States were her only dangerous competitors. She desired 
 to cripple or break down the cultivation of the cotton plant in the South. 
 The South could not use her own soil and climate in the successful produc 
 tion of cotton without the African slave. England therefore must manage 
 to set free the slave and turn the South over to some inadequate peasantry 
 system, something like the coolie system. To this end England raised a 
 great cry of philanthropy in behalf of the poor negro. As a show of sincerity 
 she abolished slavery in the West Indies near us, thinking thereby to affect 
 the same institutions in her Southern neighbor. She taught her lessons of 
 false philanthropy to our Northern pulpits and Northern papers, and thus to 
 our Northern people. 
 
 At this time the Northern politicians saw in this inflammable subject 
 fine material for political agitation, party success, and self-promotion. They 
 leaped upon the wave and rode on it. The Southern politicians raised the 
 counter cry, leaped on the counter wave, and met the Northern politicians 
 in office. As long as the people answered the politicians called, and the 
 result is what we now see. The subject is interminable in politics, because 
 utterly illegitimate as a political issue. Thus it has never approached, but 
 receded from a political solution, and increasing in excitement as it has pro 
 gressed ; all statesmanship, North and South, is dwarfed to a mere wrangling 
 about African slavery. Slavery will survive, but the Constitution, the Union, 
 and peace may not. The Southern States will continue to raise cotton, but 
 the hoping subject of tyranny in the earth may not continue to point to the 
 beautiful success of the experiment of self-government in America. 
 
 While the storm which England raised in America has been going on, 
 England has been trying to raise cotton in India. She has failed. Her 
 factories are at home, but her cotton can t come from India. She must have 
 cotton. Four millions of her people can t live without it. The English 
 throne can t stand without it. It must come from the Southern States. It 
 can t be raised in the South without slave labor. And England has become 
 the defender of slavery in the South, 
 
244 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 I will frankly state that this revolution in English sentiment and policy 
 has not yet reached the Northern people. The same causes must slowly 
 produce it. 
 
 But while the anti-slavery sentiment has spread in the North, the pro- 
 slavery sentiment has also strengthened in America. In our early history 
 the Southern statesmen were anti-slavery in feeling. So were Washington, 
 Jefferson, Madison, Randolph, and many of that day, who had never studied 
 the argument of the cotton gin, nor heard the eloquent productions of the 
 great Mississippi Valley. Now our people not only see the justice of slavery, 
 but its providence too. The world can never give up slavery until it is 
 ready to give up clothing and food. The South is a magnificent exemplifica 
 tion of the highest Christian excellence. She is feeding the hungry, cloth 
 ing the naked, blessing them that curse her, and doing good to them that 
 despitefully use and persecute her. 
 
 We say again that even the history of the slavery agitation in this 
 country does not justify the very conclusion that Abolitionism has been always 
 progressive. Whenever popular sentiment in politics has condemned the 
 agitation, Abolitionism has declined. Many instances could be given. In 
 1848 the Abolition candidate for the Presidency received about 300,000 
 votes. At the end of Mr. Fillmore s administration in 1852, the candidate 
 of that party received about half that vote, and a fugitive slave could be re 
 covered almost without opposition in any Northern State. Even the act of 
 Massachusetts, nullifying the fugitive slave law of 1703, had not been applied 
 to the new fugitive slave law of 1850, and was not so applied until 1855, after 
 the agitation had been revived. 
 
 These, and many other similar reasons, we urge for believing that all the 
 enumerated grievances the results of slavery agitation are curable by 
 remedies within the Union. 
 
 But suppose our reasoning all wrong ! How shall we be convinced ? 
 Only by the experiment ; for in the nature of the case, nothing but a trial can 
 test the virtue of the remedies proposed. Let us try these remedies, and if 
 we fail, this failure will establish the truth of the positions of the advocates 
 of immediate secession, and we shall all join in that remedy. 
 
 For let it be understood, we are all agreed that these grievances shall be 
 resisted shall be remedied most effectively remedied; and if this cannot 
 be done in the Union, then the Union must go. And we must not let this 
 crisis pass without forever solving this doubt. If the Union and the peace 
 of slavery cannot exist together, then the Union must go ; for slavery can 
 never go, the necessities of man and the laws of Heaven will never let it go, 
 and it must have peace. And it has been tantalized and meddled with as 
 long as our self-respect can permit. 
 
 But what remedies in the Union do we propose ? I will answer : 
 
 The grievances enumerated are of two kinds existing and threatened. 
 The existing actual grievances are all violations of the Federal Constitution 
 and Federal laws, either by Northern citizens or Northern States. Now, 
 what does good statesmanship, good logic, and common sense naturally sug 
 gest ? Why, that the Federal Government shall enforce its laws. No State 
 can enforce, or punish, for the violation of a Federal law. The power 
 offended must adequately punish the offender. The punishment must be 
 such as to redress the past, and by certainty and terror secure the future. 
 The Federal la\v is offended. The Northern States and people are the 
 offenders. The South is damaged by the offense. This gives her the right 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 245 
 
 to demand the redress at the hands of the Federal Government, and if that 
 government, for want of will or power, shall riot grant the redress, then that 
 government is a demonstrated failure. And when government ends, self- 
 defense begins. We can then take redress in our own way, and to our 
 entire satisfaction. 
 
 Let the Georgia Convention meet. Let her not simply demand but com 
 mand that this war on slavery shall cease that these unconstitutional acts 
 
 / 
 
 and proceedings shall be repealed and abandoned by the States, or repu 
 diated and redressed by the Federal Government. Let her invite all the 
 States to join in this demand. If no others will come to their duty and meet 
 with us, let the fifteen Southern States join in this demand, and let the 
 penalty of refusal, even to the demand of one State, be the abandonment of 
 the Union, and any other, even harsher remedy, each State may think her 
 rights and honor require. 
 
 We have an instance before us, made by the North. When, in 1833, 
 South Carolina was refusing to obey a Federal law, in the execution of which 
 the Northern States had an interest, Congress passed a force bill, and put it 
 in the hands of a Southern President for enforcement, even with the army 
 and the navy and the militia if needed. 
 
 Let us turn this battery against Northern rebels. The constitutionality 
 of the act which South Carolina resisted was doubted. A Southern State 
 never nullified, nor refused to obey, a plain constitutional law. But here 
 are the Northern States, and people nullifying and setting at defiance the 
 plainest Constitutional provisions, and laws passed in pursuance thereof; 
 and, instead of demanding of the Federal Government the enforcement of 
 
 * ^j 
 
 its laws for the protection of our rights, we are spending our breath and 
 wasting our strength, in vain boastings of wrath and hurtful divisions of our 
 own people. 
 
 Some of our wisest Southern statesmen think we have laws already 
 sufficient for this crisis, if enforced. We have an act in 1795, and one in 
 1807, and perhaps others, to execute the laws, to suppress insurrections, and 
 repel invasions. If these and other enactments are sufficient, let us have 
 them enforced. 
 
 A Voice. The presidents we have already had won t enforce that law. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Then you ought to have dissolved long ago. If the grievance 
 has been by men of our own choosing, why have we not complained before. 
 Let us begin now. Let us begin with Mr. Buchanan. A few days ago, 
 and perhaps now, a fugitive is standing protected by a Northern mob in a 
 Northern State, in defiance of the United State Marshal. Let us demand 
 now that Mr. Buchanan enforce the law against that rebel and against that 
 State which protects him, or suffers him to be protected on her soil. Let 
 us have out the army and navy, and if they are not sufficient let there be a 
 call for volunteers. Many of us say we are ready to fight, anxious to fight. 
 Here is a chance. Let us tender our services. 
 
 If the laws now existing are not sufficient, let us have them sufficient. 
 It is our right. We are entitled to a force bill for every clause in the 
 Constitution necessary to our rights. What have our statesmen been after 
 that these laws are not sufficient ? Some of these nullifying grievances have 
 existed since 1843, and is it possible that our statesmen have been all asleep, 
 or lost or forgetful in wrangling about slavery ? Let us begin now and 
 perfect our laws for the enforcement of every Constitutional right, and 
 against every rebel enemy. Let the convention add to the contingencies of 
 
246 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OP GEORGIA. 
 
 disruption in the Georgia platform. Let the refusal to enforce the laws 
 granted for our protection and defense be one contingency, and the refusal 
 to grant the laws needed for that protection and defense be another contin 
 gency. 
 
 A Voice. How long will vou wait ? 
 
 ^J v 
 
 Mr. Hill. Until the experiment is tried and both the demands enumer 
 ated may be tested and the contingencies may transpire before the fourth 
 of March next. If they do not, if a larger time shall be needed, Mr. Lincoln 
 cannot do us damage. As you heard last night, he cannot even form his 
 Cabinet unless he make it acceptable to a Democratic Senate. And I go 
 further and say that he cannot get even his salary not a dime to pay for 
 his breakfast without the consent of Congress. 
 
 Nor would I have the Southern States, nor even Georgia, to hesitate to 
 demand the enforcement of those laws at the hands of Mr. Lincoln, if we 
 cannot test it before. The North demanded of a Southern President the 
 execution of the law against a Southern State in 1833. Now let the South 
 
 ^3 
 
 compel a Northern President to execute the laws against a Northern people ; 
 yea, the very rebels that elected him. 
 
 A Voice. Do you believe Lincoln would issue his proclamation ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. We can make him do it. It is his oath. He will be a traitor 
 to refuse, and we shall have the right to hang him. He dare not refuse. 
 He would be on Southern territory, and for his life he dare not refuse. 
 
 A Voice. The " Wide Awakes " will be there. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Very well, if we are afraid of the " Wide Awakes " we had 
 better surrender without further debate. The " Wide Awakes will be 
 there if we secede, and if they are to be dreaded, our only remedy is to 
 hide. No, my friends, we are not afraid of anybody. Arm us with the 
 laws of our country and the Constitution of our fathers, and we fear no 
 enemy. Let us make war upon that Constitution and against those laws 
 and we will be afraid of every noise in the bushes. He who feels and 
 knows he is right, is afraid of nothing; and he who feels and knows he is 
 wrong, is afraid of nothing, too. 
 
 We were told the other night by a gentleman urging immediate secession 
 that we had never had a member in Congress but who was afraid to demand 
 the laws for the enforcement of these Constitutional rights. And this is 
 true, but whose fault is that ? Shame upon us that we have been afraid to 
 demand our rights at the hands of our own government, administered to 
 this hour by men of our own choice, and yet insist on our courage to sustain 
 us in seceding from that government in defiance of its power. No, we have 
 a right to go out, but let us know we must exercise that right before we go, 
 and how can we know it unless we ask first ? The Declaration of Independ 
 ence, which you invoke for an example, says, a decent respect to the opin 
 ions of mankind requires us to declare the causes which impel us to the sep 
 aration. When we separate and allege our grievances as our causes, and 
 mankind shall ask us if we attempted, even demanded a redress of those 
 grievances and causes before we went out, shall we hang our heads and say 
 no ? A people who are afraid to demand respect for their rights, can have 
 no rights worthy to be respected. Our fathers demanded, yea petitioned, 
 warned, and conjured, and not until the government was deaf to the voice of 
 justice and consanguinity, did they acquiesce in the necessity which an 
 nounced their separation. It is not the cowardice of fear, but the courage 
 of right and duty, to demand redress at the hands of our government. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 247 
 
 I confess I am anxious to see the strength of this government now tested. 
 The crisis is on us ; not of our seeking, but in spite of our opposition, and 
 now let us meet it. 
 
 I believe we can make Lincoln enforce the laws. If fifteen Southern 
 States will take that Constitution and the laws and his oath, and shake 
 them in the face of the President, and demand their observance and enforce 
 ment, he cannot refuse. Better make him do it than any one else. It will 
 be a magnificent vindication of the power and the majesty of the law, to 
 make the President enforce the law, even to hanging, against the very 
 rebels who have chosen him to trample upon it. It will be a vindication 
 that will strike terror to the hearts of the evil-doers for a century to come. 
 Why, Lincoln is not a monarch. He has no power outside of the law, and 
 none inside of the law except to enforce it. The law is our king over all. 
 From the President to the humblest citizen we are the equal subjects of this 
 only ruler. We have no cause for fear except when we offend this only 
 sovereign of the Republican citizen, and have no occasion for despair until 
 his protection is denied us. 
 
 I am also willing, as you heard last night, that our Convention or State 
 should demand of the nullifying States the repeal of their obnoxious laws. 
 I know this idea has been characterized as ridiculous. I cannot see wherein. 
 You would make such demands of any foreign power interfering with your 
 rights, and why do less toward a confederate State ? 
 
 But in my opinion, the wisest policy, the most natural remedy, and 
 the surest way to vindicate our honor and self-respect, is to demand the 
 unconditional observance of the Constitution by every State and people, 
 and to enforce that demand. And if it be necessary, call out for this 
 purpose the whole power of the government even to war on the rebellious 
 State. And when a State shall allow a fugitive to be rescued in her 
 jurisdiction and carried beyond the reach of the owner, require her to 
 indemnify the owner, and make the government compel that indemnity, 
 even to the seizure of the property of the offending State and her 
 people. One such rigid enforcement of the law will secure universal obedi 
 ence. Let the law be executed though the heavens fall, for there can be 
 no government without law, and law is but sand, if not enforced. If 
 need be, let the State continuing in rebellion against the Constitution be 
 driven from the Union. Is this Union a good ? If so, why should we sur 
 render its blessings because Massachusetts violates the laws of that Union ? 
 Punish the guilty. Drive Massachusetts to the duties of the Constitution 
 or from its benefits. Make the general government do this, and abandon 
 the government when it shall take sides with the criminal. It would be a 
 trophy to fanaticism, above all her insolence, to drive the dutiful out of the 
 Union with impunity on its part. Let us defend the Union against its 
 enemies, until that Union shall take sides with the enemy, and then let us 
 defend ourselves against both. 
 
 In the next place let us consider the benefits of this policy. First, let 
 us consider its benefits ifwe succeed ; and then its benefits if we fail. 
 
 If we succeed we shall have brought about a triumph of law over the 
 fell spirit of mobocracy, never surpassed in the world s history, and the 
 reward of that triumph will be the glorious vindication of our equality and 
 honor, and at the same time the establishment of the Union in its integrity 
 forever. And I tell you, my friends, we owe it to our history, ourselves, 
 and our posterity, yea, to constitutional liberty itself, to make this trial. 
 
248 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Can it be possible that we are living under a government that has no power 
 to enforce its laws ? We have boasted of our form of government. We 
 have almost canonized its authors as saints, for their patriotism and wisdom. 
 They have reputations world-wide. They have been, for nearly a century, 
 lauded as far above all antiquity, and all previous statesmen. Their faces 
 and their forms have been perpetuated in brass and marble for the admiring 
 gaze of many generations made happy in the enjoyment of their labors. In 
 verse and song, in history and philosophy, in light literature and graver 
 learning, their names are eulogized, and their deeds commemorated, and 
 their wisdom ennobled. The painter has given us the very faces and posi 
 tions of the great counselors, as they sat together deliberating in the forma 
 tion of this Constitution. The pulpit has placed their virtues next to the 
 purity and inspiration of the early apostles. The Senate Chamber has in 
 voked their sayings as the test of good policy. The fireside has held up to 
 its juvenile circle their manners as the models of good breeding. The 
 demagogue on the hustings has falsely caught at their mantles to hide his 
 own shame. 
 
 All this, because we have been accustomed to believe that they suc 
 ceeded in framing the best Constitution and in organizing the best govern 
 ment the world ever saw. Is that government, after all, a failure ? Who 
 shall give us a better, and how shall we commemorate the worth of such 
 wiser benefactors ? But if this government cannot enforce its laws, then it 
 is a failure. 
 
 We have professed to feel and realize its blessings. Eloquence has por 
 trayed in magic power its progress in all the elements of power, wealth, great 
 ness, and happiness. Not a people on earth, since we achieved our inde 
 pendence, has shown symptoms of a desire to be free, that we have not en 
 couraged by our sympathies, and as the sufficient evidence of all success in 
 self-government, we have pointed them to our example. There is not a 
 people on earth who do not point to America and sigh for a government 
 like that of the United States. Shall we now say to all these : Stop, you 
 are mistaken. Our reputation is not deserved. Be content with your 
 harsher rule. The people are not capable of self-government. This very 
 government, which you admire, and which we have thought was a model, 
 is unable to protect our own people from the robber, the thief, the murderer, 
 and the fanatic ! 
 
 Fellow-citizens, before we settle down in such a conclusion, let us make 
 the effort and put this government to the test. 
 
 Another advantage to be derived from success is, that we shall thus end 
 the agitation of slavery forever. Its agitation in politics was wrong from 
 the beginning. Debate its morality and justice as much as you please. It 
 will stand the argument. But don t drag it down into a party political issue. 
 Show me the man who agitates slavery as a political party question and I 
 will show you the true enemy of slavery and the Union, I care not whether 
 he lives North or South. The safety and peace of the slaveholder and the 
 Union demand that this agitation should not longer be allowed. 
 
 But, in the second place, if we fail, we cannot be damaged, but great ben 
 efits will result from the effort. 
 
 In the next place we shall have time to get ready for secession. If we 
 secede now, in what condition are we ? Our secession will either be peace 
 able or otherwise. If peaceable, we have no ships to take off our produce. 
 We could not get and would not have those of the government from which 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 249 
 
 we had just seceded. We have no treaties, commercial or otherwise, with 
 any other power. We have no postal system among our own people. Nor 
 are we prepared to meet any one of the hundred inconveniences that must 
 follow, and all of which can be avoided by taking time. 
 
 But suppose our secession be not peaceable. In what condition are we 
 for war ? No navy, no forts, no arsenals, no arms but bird guns for low 
 trees. Yet a scattered people, with nothing dividing us from our enemy but 
 an imaginary line, and a long sea and gulf coast extending from the Poto 
 mac to Galveston Bay, if all should secede. In what condition are we to 
 meet the thousand ills that would beset us, and every one of which can be 
 avoided by taking time. " We have more to do than to go up the hills and 
 come down." Secession is no holiday work. 
 
 While we are seeking to redress our wrongs in the Union, we can go 
 forward, making all necessary preparations to go out if it should become 
 necessary. We can have a government system perfect, and prepared, ready 
 for the emergency, when the necessity for separation shall come. 
 
 Again, if we fail to get redress in the Union, that very failure will 
 unite the people of our State. The only real ground of difference now is : 
 some of us think we can get redress in the Union, and others think we can 
 not. Let those of us who still have faith make that effort which has 
 never been made, and if we fail, then we are ready to join you. If you 
 will not help us make that effort, at least do not try to prevent. Let us 
 have a fair trial. Keep cool and keep still. If we cannot save our 
 equality, and rights, and honor in the Union, we shall join you and save 
 them out of it. 
 
 Voice. When you fail to save your rights in the Union, if you refuse 
 to go with us then, what will you do ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. But we will go. We allow not if to our conduct in that con 
 nection. If, when we come to join you, you get stubborn and refuse to go, 
 then we shall go without you. 
 
 Now, my secession friends, I have all confidence in your zeal and patri 
 otism, but simply let us take time and get ready. Let us work for the best, 
 and prepare for the worst. Until an experiment is made, I shall always 
 believe that the Constitution has strength enough to conquer all its enemies 
 even the Northern fanatic. If it proves to have not that strength, I will not 
 trust it another hour. 
 
 A third benefit to be derived from the failure of an honest effort to re 
 dress our grievances in the Union, is the Union of all the Southern States. 
 Some of the States will not secede now. Some of the States who suffer 
 most from the grievances we have enumerated will not secede now. Because 
 they think these grievances can be redressed in the Union. If this idea be 
 a dream, let us wake up to the reality by an actual experiment. 
 
 A further benefit to be desired is, that if all the Southern States get 
 ready and secede together, we shall be allowed to do so peaceably. Cer 
 tainly, it is our right to go peaceably any way. The government, though 
 having the right to enforce its laws against all the world, has no right to 
 coerce back a seceding State. But the attempt might be made and the 
 peace broken, if only one State should secede, or even a few. But let all the 
 Southern States get ready and go together, and no earthly power would 
 interfere or molest. My own opinion is that every Western and North 
 western State, and the Middle States, and perhaps all but the New England 
 States, would go with us. And the glorious result at last might be that we 
 
250 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 should hold the government with all its power, and thrust off only those 
 who have been faithless to it. 
 
 But the Southern States alone, with the territory naturally falling into 
 our hands, would form the greatest government then on earth. The world 
 must have our products ; and after peace was once secured to us, the world 
 would furnish our navies and our army, without the expense to us of a ship 
 or a soldier. 
 
 Finally, my friends, we shall have secured, by this policy, the good 
 opinion of all mankind and of ourselves. We shall have done our duty to 
 history, to our children, and to Constitutional liberty, the great experiment 
 of self-government. We shall have also discerned the defects in our pres 
 ent government, and will be prepared to guard against them in another. 
 Above all we shall have found good consciences, and secured that, either in 
 the Union or out of it, which is dearer to us than any Union, and more to 
 be desired than all constitutions however venerated that which is the end 
 of all our efforts, and the desire of all our hearts, our equality as States, our 
 rights as citizens, and our honor as men. 
 
SPEECH DELIVERED BEFORE THE GEORGIA LEGISLATURE, 
 r: IN MILLEDGEVILLE, DECEMBER 11, 1862. 
 
 CORRESPONDENCE. 
 
 MILLEDGEVILLE, December 12, 1862. 
 
 Hon. B. H. Hill. 
 
 DEAR SIR : The undersigned, members of the General Assembly, take 
 pleasure in expressing their high gratification at the able address delivered 
 by you last night in the Representative Hall, and would respectfully request 
 a copy for publication. 
 
 Very respectfully yours, 
 
 S. F. ALEXANDER, 34th Dist. J. A. L. LEE, 
 
 J. A. SHEWMAKE, 17th Dist. J. H. R. WASHINGTON, 
 
 L. M. HILL, 29th Dist. JOHN FAVER, 
 
 B. T. HARRIS, 20th Dist. JAMES B. KEY, 
 
 D. R. MITCHELL, 42d Dist. JOHN W. McCoRD, 
 
 Jos. A. GASTON, 36th Dist. P. E. LOVE, 
 
 WM. GIBSON, 18th Dist. MILTON A. CANDLER, 
 
 J. H. ECHOLS, 30th Dist. L. N. WHITTLE, 
 
 T. M. FURLOW, 13th Dist. BEN. B. MOORE, 
 
 D. J. BOTH WELL, 14th Dist. ROBT. J. BACON, 
 WM. P. BEASLY, 37th Dist. ROBERT HESTER, 
 WILLIAM M. BROWN, T. M. NORWOOD, 
 
 E. G. CABANISS, J. J. THRASHER. 
 
 LA GRANGE, GA., January 7, 1863. 
 
 Gentlemen : Your letter requesting for publication a copy of the speech 
 I had the honor to deliver before the General Assembly, was handed to me 
 before I left Milledgeville. I made the speech with no thought of publica 
 tion, and therefore was not prepared with a copy. 
 
 Learning that a gentleman had taken tolerably full stenographic notes of 
 the speech, I applied to him to write them out. He kindly promised to 
 furnish them to me. After waiting a considerable time, he wrote me that 
 he had been prevented from complying with the promise. 
 
 In the midst of other engagements I have endeavored to write out the 
 speech. I have not been able to recall the language spoken, but the line of 
 argument is precisely the same. Hoping the views uttered will, at least, do 
 no harm, I place them at your disposal. 
 
 Since the speech was delivered, several splendid victories have crowned 
 our arms with new and, if possible, more glorious triumphs. These give 
 increased confidence to the high and gratifying hopes of final success which 
 I then expressed. 
 
 In the midst of scenes which should excite universal accord and harmony 
 
 251 
 
252 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 in all the measures of the administration, it is painful to Georgians to find 
 only in our State a few who still murmur and seek to divide. What can be 
 the end or the object of strife now ? Rational men must have a distinct 
 purpose in view. Are we so tired of the revolution that we wish to retrace 
 its steps and go back ? Or are we so in love with revolution that we desire 
 another ? Or is it simply an Erostratan ambition for notoriety ? 
 
 Perhaps these differences are inseparable from republican governments. 
 They existed in Washington s day, and charged the Father of his Country 
 with infidelity to the Constitution, and with ambition to wear imperial pur 
 ple. We can then afford to be patient, and the justice that rewarded then, 
 will be meted out again. 
 
 With great regard for you all, personally, gentlemen, I have the honor 
 to be, 
 
 Very truly yours, 
 
 B. H. HILL. 
 Messrs. E. G. Cabaniss, J. A. L. Lee, and others. 
 
 Some discontent existed in Georgia against the policy of the Confederate administra 
 tion. This feeling was inspired by the Governor of the State, who was bitter in his oppo 
 sition to the Conscription Acts of the Confederate Congress, and to the executive policy 
 of President Davis. This attitude of the Governor was causing some dissatisfaction among 
 the soldiers and the people. It was to meet this opposition and to allay this feeling that 
 Senator Hill came to Georgia and delivered this speech to the General Assembly. The 
 speech furnishes a conclusive answer to the charges that have been made against President 
 Davis and the Confederate Congress by the Governor and others, and rallied the people 
 to a united support of the Southern cause. 
 
 SPEECH. 
 
 Ladies , Gentlemen of the General Assembly, and Fellow-citizens : When 
 this revolution began I imposed on myself sternly what I regarded as the 
 virtue of silence. In my opinion success had to be won by active arms, 
 united hearts, liberal sacrifices, and that without which all these might prove 
 unavailing silent tongues. As you have just been informed, a large ma 
 jority of the General Assembly invited me to address them and in deference 
 to their wish I am here to-night for that purpose. I am sure I intend to say 
 nothing but that which will promote the good of the country and the har 
 mony of our people which I consider inseparable. 
 
 I have been an humble and very quiet actor in this revolution from its 
 beginning. I have been a very close and anxious observer of men, of measures, 
 and of things, and it shall be my purpose to-night to give you a brief review 
 in general terms of the embarrassments of the Confederate Government from 
 its organization : the progress that government has made ; the causes of 
 that progress, and the probable result of the revolution, judged by the past 
 and the present. 
 
 Perhaps no assembly of men ever took place under circumstances of 
 greater anxiety and higher responsibilities than those which surrounded and 
 pressed upon the convention which met in Montgomery on the 4th day of 
 February, 1861. For one, I felt most heavily the crisis. There were many 
 troubles on every hand. The present was stormy. The future was dark 
 very dark. When we first assembled we were forty-three delegates, repre 
 senting six States. Texas was soon added. These seven States had sepa 
 rated from and formed a border or fringe of what had been a very powerful 
 republic ; a republic great in every sense ; full of men ; full of resources ; 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 253 
 
 full of genius, and talent, and full of prosperity. We had a large coast, and no 
 navy with which to protect and defend it. We had but a small popula 
 tion less than three millions against more than twenty-five millions. Our 
 resources were exceedingly limited. There was not known to be a saltpetre 
 cave capable of being worked in the Confederacy. We had very few muni 
 tions of war, and still fewer facilities for procuring more. In all the ele 
 ments of power necessary to prosecute the revolution by force, we were weak. 
 
 But all these together constituted not our greatest trouble nor our greatest 
 weakness. The most serious difficulty resting upon that convention was 
 the conviction, very generally if not universally shared by the members, 
 that we were not certain of a constituency. Our people were divided 
 greatly and almost angrily divided. There was not much division as to our 
 abstract right to set up for ourselves, nor in relation to the fact that the sec 
 tional rule asserted by the North was sufficient cause for separation ; but 
 many felt, and felt keenly, that the separation had been hasty, ill-advised, 
 and without that consultation and concert which was due to our sister slave 
 States, and to the crisis. Thus seven States not compactly situated, with 
 one-eighth the population, with a large seacoast exposed, with few supplies, 
 and fewer resources, and with a divided people, dared the wrath of this 
 powerful republic, as full of hate and fanaticism as of men and materials. 
 How could these framers feel otherwise than oppressively anxious ? 
 
 Nor was the prospect of our enlargement in any degree flattering. Soon 
 after the assembling of that convention the border States voted on the 
 proposition to cast in their lot with us. Not only by a large, but by an 
 overwhelming majority, they refused to do so. And we felt and knew that 
 many had cast that vote under the stinging reflection that we had not treated 
 them with due consideration. 
 
 This was the state of things now known to us all, and therefore I speak 
 of it freely. But, fellow-citizens, the skies soon began to change. Light 
 mingled with the darkness. True, it was on the bosom of a war cloud, and 
 just before a deluge of blood, yet the bow of hope was seen and all was not 
 darkness. 
 
 What wrought this change and inspired this hope? The first cause will 
 be found in the prompt and wise labors of that convention. The formation 
 of the new Constitution was a very powerful agency for good. Many of 
 our own people had serious apprehensions that the purpose of the revolution 
 was not simply to get rid of the union with the North. Some anticipated a 
 more radical democracy a fearful anarchy. Others looked for an aristoc 
 racy, or even a limited monarchy. London, Exeter Hall, and Boston Pande 
 monium had horrid images of a slave-trade oligarchy floating before them, 
 and certainly destined to shock the sensibilities of mankind. 
 
 All these were disappointed. The convention, with a promptness and 
 unanimity never surpassed, agreed upon and adopted the old Constitution, 
 with only such changes, well interwoven, as time and discussion had shown 
 to be necessary and proper. Even the candid of our enemies were driven to 
 admit that the new Constitution was an improvement. The world admitted 
 the statesmanship of the convention, and our own people began to acquire 
 confidence. So, also, the great body of the old laws were adopted, and our 
 people found themselves living under their ancient usages and customs, and 
 changed in nothing but their Federal associates. 
 
 In the election of executive officers, also, the convention manifested 
 much wisdom and a liberal spirit. While statesmen of ripe ability were 
 
254 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 selected, both the latest divisions of parties found themselves represented in 
 the persons of leaders having no superiors in their ranks. None felt pro 
 scribed, and if all were not convinced of the wisdom and necessity of sepa 
 ration, all were satisfied that the destruction of constitutional liberty was no 
 part of the design of that convention, and that the shaping of the new 
 government had fallen into safe conservative hands. 
 
 But, much as we owe to the wisdom and moderation of our own states 
 men, we owe much more to the folly of Mr. Lincoln and his advisers. Left 
 to ourselves, we never could have accomplished the great results we so soon 
 witnessed. To secure the confederation of those who had so emphatically 
 refused to join us ; to remove the jealousies and heart-burnings which long 
 party divisions had fostered, and which the last contest for separation had 
 not allayed but increased ; to break the affections of our people at once and 
 forever from a Union which they had always loved, and connected with 
 which were so many delightful memories and historic glories ; these formed 
 a task for which all ordinary means were unequal. If Mr. Lincoln had com 
 prehended the crisis, and had adopted toward the seceded States a pacific, 
 instead of a belligerent policy ; had shown a purpose to administer the 
 government according to the just and equal rule of the Constitution, instead 
 of the hated dogmas of a mad sectional party, the border States w r ould not 
 have left the Union, and it is exceedingly doubtful whether the cotton States 
 would have remained out of the Union. But madness and folly ruled our 
 enemies, and success and power were the results to us. In April, 1861, Mr. 
 Lincoln called for seventy-five thousand men to coerce sovereign States to 
 a loathsome sectional rule, and by this giant effort of imbecility, Virginia 
 glorious old Virginia was thrown into our arms wide open to receive her. 
 Doubts were all removed, weakness was all gone we were confident, strong, 
 and united ; Virginia was with us. Soon the great States of North Carolina, 
 Tennessee, and Arkansas followed, and for the same reasons. At once we 
 had a territory not surpassed by any nation large, compact, and fertile. 
 Our white population was more than doubled, our resources quadrupled. 
 Munitions of war, with facilities for increasing them, were added in great 
 quantities, and though terrible war was the agency by which all this success 
 was acquired, yet with the war came to us the power to meet it. The same 
 policy which added thus to our material greatness, produced perfect unity 
 among our people, removed all jealousies and divisions, and kindled in every 
 bosom a blaze of patriotism, and aroused the high resolve which prepared 
 all for those noble deeds and liberal sacrifices which cannot fail to insure 
 independence and nationality. Missouri and Kentucky, in time, were added 
 to the Confederacy, and though those great States labor under great dis 
 advantages, and have the heel of the oppressor heavily on them, they have 
 furnished many of the noblest heroes and most gallant spirits who have hal 
 lowed our cause and brought glory to our struggle. In heart and interest 
 they are of us, and must be in destiny with us. 
 
 Thus, fellow-citizens, in a few short months we had adopted our Consti 
 tution, framed our laws, healed our divisions, enlarged our borders, multiplied 
 our resources, and exhibited to the world all the elements of an admirable 
 government in successful operation. With equal rapidity did we now pre 
 pare to defend that government from a most powerful and vindictive foe. 
 Our success in this respect has never been equaled by any nation or people in 
 history. The best evidence of this may be found in the confessions of our 
 enemies ; for the greatest tribute ever rendered to any people was rendered 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 255 
 
 to the Confederate array and government by their disappointed and de 
 feated foe. When the hosts of the enemy fled in fright and dismay before 
 our army of heroes on the ever memorable field of Manassas Plains, the only 
 excuse they could find for their discomfiture was in shame and confusion to 
 confess they had fought before they were ready. Think of this, my country 
 men ! An old government, organized for three-fourths of a century ; with 
 a regular army and navy ; with twenty millions of people and countless 
 millions of material resources ; with a general in command who had fought 
 his hundred battles and never known defeat ; with a great army well equipped 
 and full of confidence ; a nation vain and proud, impatient and insolent; 
 apologizing for a most ignominious defeat in sight of its capital, by a 
 despised band of improvised rebels, sent out by a government less than six 
 months old ; and finding no ground of apology save in the humiliating con 
 fession that they fought too soon before they were ready ! Surely, a fact 
 like this should satisfy the most exacting that this young republic had been 
 most vigorous and active, most vigilant and faithful. 
 
 With the history of the struggle since this first great trial of arms you 
 are ail familiar. It is not my purpose now to deal with incidents, but to 
 state results, and show the way to correct conclusions. We have had 
 disasters, at which none can wonder. But we have had successes, many and 
 great successes, at which all the world do wonder ; at which posterity will 
 never cease to wonder. We have had defeats and losses. Considered in 
 themselves, they have been sore and depressing. The good and the noble 
 have fallen, and the dark shadows of sorrow have passed over the door sills 
 and rest by the hearthstones of almost every home in the land. But con 
 sidered in the light of the circumstances which surrounded us and in view 
 of the effects upon our national success, I affirm that all our disasters are as 
 nothing. Indeed, when impartial history shall weigh this struggle in the 
 balances of unerring philosophy, it will be doubtful whether Manassas and 
 Leesburg, or Fishing Creek and Donelson will press down the scales. 
 Failures are not always losses, and blessings sometimes chastise. But in the 
 cabinet and in the field the rule has been success, and defeat the exception. 
 In every respect we have steadily progressed. I have watched this revolu 
 tion anxiously ; I have scanned the chief actors critically ; my own, and my 
 children s, and my country s all, are wrapped up in it ; and in full view of 
 all my responsibilities, and before you who have honored me, I assert this 
 night, most confidently, that the Confederate States have strengthened with 
 every day of their existence ; yea, though it be early morning with us, every 
 hour is brightening into day. There is no apology for discouragement, and 
 no propriety in grumbling. 
 
 This success, this progress, is not the glory of any one man, nor of any 
 one agency, but is the work of many men and the result of several causes. 
 No government was ever defended by a more heroic army. From the 
 humblest private to the general in command, they are above praise. Nor 
 can history furnish a parallel for the active, demonstrative patriotism of our 
 people. I doubt whether either the government or the army could have 
 been sustained without the voluntary and most liberal contributions of the 
 people. It was not possible for any government in so short a time to have 
 provided for so large an army. It required the most marvelous energy to 
 pass the necessary laws, provide appropriate means, and to organize the 
 volunteering multitudes and discipline them for the fight. Every man, every 
 woman, and every child in the land became an assistant commissary, an 
 
256 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 assistant quartermaster and a volunteer aid in every part of the glorious 
 work. These are facts which all admit, and which our children shall cele 
 brate in song and story as long as liberty is prized or patriotism is honored. 
 Without this heroism of our army and generous support of our people we 
 never could have succeeded ; but with these alone, great as they were, failure 
 would necessarily have ensued. Laws, order, system, wise policies, skillful 
 plans, and vigorous and judicious administration were indispensable to 
 success. Without these, the first would have produced but anarchy, waste, 
 and ruin. For these laws, this system, and this vigorous and judicious 
 administration, the legislative and executive departments of the government 
 were responsible. Both were equal to the demands of the fearful occasion. 
 Neither the provisional nor the permanent Congress ever failed to provide 
 every necessary law and all proper means to meet the growing and ever- 
 pressing calls of the contest. The only serious charges of want of foresight 
 and promptness of action which have been made against the Congress, I will 
 presently show, were made without a knowledge of the facts, and by the 
 answer to these charges I hope minor accusations will be judged. 
 
 In republics, the disaffected and the dissatisfied generally level their 
 shafts against him who may for the time be the Chief Executive. Different 
 conclusions, which are always formed when free discussions are universal; 
 private griefs, which must exist when all cannot be gratified ; personal 
 jealousies, which will arise when many aspire and few can be chosen, must 
 be expected to do their usual share of fault-finding in the new Confederacy. 
 In addition to these sources of discord, inseparable from all free government, 
 there are others growing out of our anomalous form of double governments. 
 In the nature of things the State governments will be jealous. This jealousy 
 is often legitimate. In the old Union there were many occasions when the 
 Southern States were justly resentful, and State complaints became popular 
 to the Southern mind. It is not strange, therefore, that the earnest and the 
 ambitious indeed all the classes first mentioned should seek to invoke the 
 force of this popular feeling in their behalf, and in all their clamors against 
 the Confederate Government and the Confederate Executive, in season and 
 out of season, to cry "State Rights." Now, gentlemen, I will give you 
 frankly my opinion of our first President Mr. Davis. In the old Union 
 he and I always thought differently and acted with different political parties. 
 I was not prepossessed in his favor. He was not originally my first choice 
 for his present high position. Furthermore, since his election, if a single 
 old political friend of mine, in this State, has received a civil commission at 
 his hands, I am to this hour not aware of the fact. These things are not 
 calculated to win a favorable judgment ; but I experience a sense of self- 
 respect when I realize as I do the fact that I am capable of lifting myself 
 above all these petty, but too often popular considerations, and can judge 
 the President by the merit of his ability and patriotic motives, and by the 
 principles of his administration. Thus judging him, I declare to you that if 
 I had now to select a chief magistrate for this trying crisis, I should feel it 
 a duty to select Jefferson Davis. I concede the charge, sneeringly made, 
 that he is neither a Caesar, nor a Cromwell, nor a Napoleon. He is nobler 
 than either and greater than all, because he has respect unto the laws of the 
 land, and seeks to establish and not- to distroy constitutional government. 
 In my opinion, his great desire, to which all earthly desires are subordinate, 
 is our final and complete success in this revolution. Mr. Lincoln, with all the 
 advantages of a long organized, powerful, and well supplied government-; 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 257 
 
 State Executives, even in the Confederate States not having upon their 
 shoulders the conduct of this gigantic war have pleaded necessity as an 
 excuse for exercising extraordinary powers, and have trampled upon consti 
 tutional restrictions and individual rights. But Mr. Davis, with all the 
 disadvantages of a new and weak government to which I have alluded, and 
 
 ^J C7^ 
 
 with the fearful doom of the chief of traitors full before him in case of 
 failure, has never yet found it necessary to violate the Constitution of his 
 country, nor to trample upon the rights of the humblest citizen. Within 
 the boundaries of law, by the provisions of legislative grant, and according 
 to the high and ancient privileges of Anglo-American freemen, he has 
 used the sword to the shame and discomfiture of a million of enemies in 
 arms. By a vigorous policy he has led a new-born nation from weakness to 
 power. By a firm but humane adherence to the great principles of nations 
 into whose familv we had been refused admittance, he has degraded the 
 
 / 
 
 faithless excesses of our adversary to universal notoriety and perpetual 
 infamy. And by the wisdom of an accomplished statesmanship, and the 
 pure rhetoric of an elegant pen, he has secured admiration and esteem for 
 himself and his countrymen in the highest Cabinets and most refined Courts 
 of the civilized world. Even our enemies, usually so bigoted and selfish, 
 are driven in shame to apply every epithet of ridicule to the awkward 
 blunders of their President, and to admit the ability, the tact, and the states 
 manship of the " rebel chief." 
 
 A wise government, then, a gallant army, and a liberal, cordial, and united 
 people, constitute together the cause of our progress, the assurance of our 
 success, and our title to admiration and renown. 
 
 In a republic of free opinions, where the minds of men are as variant as the 
 leaves on the trees, and as unrestrained as the zephyrs that fan them, we 
 have much cause to be gratified that so few issues have been made with the 
 administration, and that the issues made have found so few advocates. On 
 almost all questions our people are unanimous. Politicians have prepared 
 a few issues. None, thus far, have been accepted or taken up by the people. 
 Complaints are few, and some of the few may be traced to causes outside of 
 the merits of the questions involved. 
 
 It has been said that the Navy Department has not done its duty. In my 
 opinion, no portion of our people are more patriotic than the navy, and no 
 portion of the government has been managed with more industry, under the 
 disadvantages to which it has been subjected, than the naval. Much of the 
 work and policy of this department is necessarily kept from the public. The 
 people, or rather some persons, condemn because they do not know, and the 
 Secretary must submit in silence, because to defend would be to expose and 
 damage the public service. But it does seem to me the people have seen 
 enough to satisfy them even to excite their gratitude and pride. 
 
 When this revolution began, all said we could expect nothing from the 
 navy. We had no navy. We had neither time nor materials to build one, 
 
 \> f 
 
 nor means to purchase one. But while the whole country was resting satis 
 fied that we could do but little on the water, the navy was at work, and all at 
 once the country was waked up, the world was waked up, by the grandest 
 naval achievement in all history. Like Minerva, full grown and full armed 
 at her birth, the iron-clad Virginia leaped into life, and in a day taught the 
 world a lesson in naval warfare, the wonder of which mythology had never 
 imagined nor centuries of science discovered. At once hundreds of sea 
 monsters, long terrible on the water, were shown to be worthless. Nautical 
 
258 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 science is conning her rules anew, and to remodel, rearrange, and build 
 again condemned war vessels, engages the energies of every nation which 
 aspires to dominion on the seas. The necessities which required the de 
 struction of such vessels as the Virginia and the Mississippi were great mis 
 fortunes to us ; but the misfortunes were great in precise proportion as the 
 works were powerful. If the Virginia and the Mississippi had not been con 
 structed we should not have known how great was their loss. Those who 
 produced them could not have been dull or idle. Regrets for losses caused 
 by the necessities of our condition as a naval power, cannot justify us in 
 blaming those who have done so much to improve that condition. The mag 
 nitude of our losses is known only by the splendor of our successes. Impar 
 tial history will do justice to this department of our government, and contem 
 poraneous history is never impartial and rarely truthful. While in this re 
 spect, we have not done what all desired, yet all candid minds must confess 
 we have done far more than any in the beginning anticipated. 
 
 The military appointments of the administration also, at one time, excited 
 some dissatisfaction. Lee, and Johnston, and Jackson, and Longstreet, and 
 the two Hills, and many others have silenced these complaints. Natural en 
 dowments are great helps in all the positions of life, but education improves 
 all talents including the military. Upon this idea I presume the President 
 acted in making appointments, and in a great majority of cases results have 
 vindicated the wisdom of the rule. 
 
 For several months there was a zealous clamor for an invasion of the North. 
 The administration was censured, in some quarters acrimoniously censured, 
 for not at once invading the enemy s territory. Wonderful campaigns were 
 planned, armies vanquished, States humbled, cities destroyed, and the ene 
 my forced to sue for peace, by generals who remained at home, and by 
 statesmen who wrote much, thought little, and knew less. Upon this sub 
 ject, I confess to you, I once felt much anxiety. The appeal was plausible 
 to the passion and vengeance of our people, who had so much cause for pas 
 sion and revenge. All the impulses of resentment were aroused, and pru 
 dence and wise counsel were in danger of being overwhelmed. By invasion, 
 under the disadvantages which surrounded us, we should have been ruined 
 speedily and forever. On our own soil and in defense, we have ever been 
 and will ever be invincible. Recent events have satisfied all of this truth, 
 and on this subject there is no longer any danger of divisions among our 
 people. 
 
 I can now remember but one more issue upon which an attempt has been 
 made to excite an opposition to the administration of the government. The 
 occasion for this attempt is found in the acts of Congress known as the con 
 scription laws. This disaffection has proven to be limited in extent, and 
 must soon pass away, and, like the other attempts to which I have alluded, 
 will be remembered only to be regretted. The relation which I bear to this 
 legislation and to this State, in which the greatest clamor (indeed, the only 
 real clamor) has been made against the legislation, requires that I present my 
 own views upon the questions made. 
 
 Before entering upon the argument, I desire to rehearse some facts which 
 will most effectually expose the fallacy of some charges which have been 
 made and often repeated against the President and the Congress in relation 
 to the necessities which produced the resort to conscription to maintain our 
 armies. 
 
 It has been said that there was no occasion for the passage of these laws 5 
 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 259 
 
 that the spirit of volunteering was ample to keep up the army ; that calls on 
 the States would have secured all the troops needed ; and that, if at the time 
 these laws were adopted the necessity did exist, that necessity was brought 
 about by the negligence and want of foresight in the Provisional Congress, 
 and from a desire on the part of the government to have an excuse to resort 
 to conscription. These charges are so utterly untrue so utterly at variance 
 with the very records of the government, that I must presume the authors 
 were entirely ignorant of the legislation of Congress and the acts of the gov 
 ernment. I am not willing to believe that men in position would originate 
 or repeat such grave charges with a knowledge of the facts. As I was the 
 humblest of the actors, it is becoming in me to invite your attention to a 
 simple recital of history. 
 
 As early as the 28th day of February, 1861, an act was passed " to raise 
 provisional forces for the Confederate States of America, and for other pur 
 poses," and by this act the President was authorized to -receive into the ser 
 vice of the government such forces in the service of the States as may be 
 tendered, or who may volunteer, by consent of their State, in such numbers 
 as he may require, for any time not less than twelve months, unless sooner 
 discharged." The troops raised by the States and turned over, were to be 
 received " according to the terms of their enlistment." 
 
 ^j 
 
 On the 6th day of March, 1861, an act was passed " to provide for the 
 public defense," and by the act the President was " authorized to ask for 
 and accept the services of any number of volunteers, not exceeding one hun 
 dred thousand, to serve for twelve months, unless sooner discharged." 
 
 On the 8th of May an act was passed " to raise an additional military force 
 to serve during the war," and under this act the President was authorized to 
 accept volunteers without limit and for every arm of the service. 
 
 But very many complaints came up to Congress that some of the State 
 governors were exceedingly partial in the tender and organization of the 
 regiments under former acts that they were using their powers to put for 
 ward their friends and promote themselves and that many who offered regi 
 ments and companies to the governors were either rejected or discriminated 
 against in some odious manner, and that arms, then scarce, were furnished 
 only to favorites. To remedy these complaints, and secure the services of 
 all these gallant men, Congress, on the llth day of May, 1861, passed an act 
 " to make further provision for the public defense," and authorized the 
 President to receive such volunteers as may tender themselves, and he may 
 require, " without the delay of a formal call upon the respective States, to 
 serve for such time as he may prescribe." 
 
 It was under one of these last acts the first for the war that the gal 
 lant Bartow tendered his company of Oglethorpes and was accepted. I 
 believe his was the first company enlisted for the war. 
 
 On the 8th of August, 1861, an act was passed "further to provide 
 for the public defense," by which the President was authorized to accept 
 four hundred thousand volunteers for not less than twelve months nor more 
 than three years, unless sooner discharged. 
 
 There was a clamor from some quarters that certain localities were not 
 defended, and that many persons would enlist for the defense of particular 
 localities, who would not volunteer in the general service ; and that many 
 persons would be useful on special service, who would not enlist to be sent 
 off to unknown and discretionary service. Therefore, on the 21st of 
 August, 1861, an act was passed " to provide for local defense and special 
 
260 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 service," by which the President was authorized " to accept the services of 
 volunteers, of such kind and in such proportion as he may deem expedient, 
 to serve for such time as he may prescribe, for the defense of exposed places 
 or localities, or such special service as he may deem expedient." Such 
 forces were to be mustered into the service of the Confederate States, " for 
 such local defense or special service, the muster-roll setting forth distinctly 
 the services to be formed." Under this act, I affirm with knowledge, that 
 the Confederate Government was always willing and desirous of employing 
 all necessary troops for all local defense of each State to incur all the 
 expenses of such defense, and relieve the separate States of all necessity to 
 incur such enormous expenses. 
 
 Again, on the 22d January, 1862, an act was passed authorizing the 
 President to accept volunteers " singly^ as well as in companies, squadrons, 
 battalions, or regiments." 
 
 "Thus, gentlemen and fellow-citizens, you will perceive that Congress 
 adopted every conceivable mode of getting volunteers. Even the humors 
 of States and the caprices of individuals were all consulted. If men wished 
 to come by tender through the States, there was the law. If directly, by 
 offer to the President, there was the law. If as cavalry, artillery, infantry, 
 or mixture of all, or even as independent partisans, there was the law. If 
 they wished to volunteer for three, six, or twelve months, for three years, 
 for the war, or for any other time, there was the law. If they wished to 
 enter the general service, or to be enlisted to defend a particular State, or 
 county, or city, or town, or farm, or fireside, there was the law. If they 
 wished to come in legions, or regiments, or battalions, or squadrons, or com 
 panies, or even singly all alone and all ablaze with patriotism there was 
 the law precisely fitting the case, and made to fit the case. Come ! it mat 
 ters not how, it matters not from where, it matters not with whom, it mat 
 ters not for how long corne, come, and come quickly, and defend our 
 invaded country was, and is, and has ever been the earnest appeal of the 
 government the President and the Congress to all our people ! Will any 
 complaining, far-seeing assailant tell me what other form of tender or 
 acceptance Congress could have adopted to encourage men to volunteer ? 
 
 Tinder these various acts of Congress we raised in the aggregate about 
 four hundred regiments ; very few, if any, however, filled to the maximum 
 number. We could raise no more without other and extraordinary means. 
 It is a glorious tribute to the patriotism of our people that we raised so many 
 and so speedily by voluntary enlistment. It was certainly sufficient for any 
 other war of modern times, if not for any age of the world. But our 
 enemy was growing stronger. A million, full of rage and hate, were flying 
 to arms to enslave us. Our own ranks began to grow thin. Skeleton regi 
 ments were seen in every direction, and about half of them were soon to 
 disband by reason of the expiration of their term of service. 
 
 Something must, therefore, be done to give new life to these modes of 
 securing volunteers which I have recited, and to retain those already in ser 
 vice. Very early the Congress entered on this work. To this end on the 
 llth day of December, 1861, an act was passed known as the Bounty and 
 Furlough act. By this act fifty dollars was paid to every private and non 
 commissioned officer in service, who would remain in service for three years 
 from the original enlistment, or for the war ; and to every man who would 
 volunteer or enlist in the service for three years or for the war. Also, each 
 twelve months soldier re-en.ljsting was to have a furlough for sixty days, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 261 
 
 with transportation home and back. Such as did not wish to go home were 
 to have the commutation value of the transportation in money ; and even 
 those who had been in separate State service were included in the provis 
 ions of the law. On the 19th day of December, 1861, an act was passed 
 which authorized the Secretary of War "to adopt measures for recruiting 
 and enlisting men for companies in service for the war, or for three years, 
 which by the casualties of the service have been reduced by death and dis 
 charges." 
 
 But it was said that many would not join existing organizations, who 
 would, if encouraged, volunteer in new ones, and thus have an opportunity 
 either to be chosen or to choose officers, etc. 
 
 So, on the 22d day of January, 1862, Congress passed an act authorizing 
 the President " to appoint and commission persons as field officers or cap 
 tains to raise regiments, squadrons, battalions or companies," and all persons 
 thus enlisted by them were to have, in addition to bounty, "pay, transpor 
 tation and subsistence from the date of the organization of the company." 
 
 Again, a general authority to organize a recruiting s} T stem not proving 
 sufficient, Congress by the last act also authorized one commissioned and 
 one non-commissioned officer, and one or more privates from each company 
 for three years or the war, to be detailed for the express purpose of going 
 home to recruit men for the company. And on the 27th of January, 1862, 
 an act was passed authorizing three details of an officer and two privates to 
 recruit for the companies originally enlisted for twelve months. 
 
 So, we not only provided every mode for volunteering which even ca 
 price could surest, but also offered everv inducement and stimulant that 
 
 I ^3 < / 
 
 ability would allow, or ingenuity could devise. Men were not only received, 
 Mud received in their own way, but they were sent for and begged to come. 
 Tried veterans filled the country urging those at home to join their glorious 
 ranks. Money was freely offered, and ambition was commissioned to 
 employ all its energies in raising regiments, battalions, squadrons, and com 
 panies to secure command. All failed. Our army was still thinning and 
 the enemy still increasing. 
 
 Even yet the government was not willing to give up the favorite popu 
 lar system of raising and keeping an army by voluntary enlistment. 
 
 One more method was resorted to the one about which we hear so much 
 from men who do not seem to know what has been done. 
 
 On the 23d of January, 1862, an act was passed authorizing the Presi 
 dent " to call on the several States for troops to serve for three years or 
 during the war." This is the plan which we are flippantly told would 
 accomplish everything. And the Congress and the President are abused 
 for not adopting this plan. Well, Congress did pass the act, and the Presi 
 dent did make the call, and let us see what was accomplished and how it 
 was done. 
 
 The quota required of Georgia, I believe, was twelve thousand, and as 
 our State seems to have made as much effort and as much noise about her 
 efforts as any other State, I will take Georgia as the test. The quota for 
 Georgia was filled, and we are told there was a large excess. If this were 
 all, the argument might be worth something. But how were these troops 
 raised? 
 
 In the first place I state a fact of which you are not probably aware. 
 Soon after this call was made the Governor sent a request, or perhaps a pro 
 test to the Secretary of War that no more troops should be raised in Georgia 
 
262 SENATOR R B. HILL, OP GEORGIA. 
 
 by persons having commissions for that purpose, under the act to which I 
 have referred, until this requisition was filled ; and a number of regiments 
 partially raised were only saved from being disbanded by the Secretary, 
 agreeing that they should be credited to Georgia as part of the quota re 
 quired under the call. I do not state this to blame the Governor, but it is a 
 fact, which shows that he thought he would be unable to raise the quota if 
 these commissions were continued, and that there would be difficulty in fill 
 ing the requisition. But even with this help, how did the Governor pro 
 ceed. I have not the proclamation before me, but I cannot mistake or for 
 get its character. He allotted a proportion to each county, and designated 
 a day when all, I believe, of the militia age, should be called out, arid the 
 offer should be made for volunteers. If they volunteered, all well ; if not, 
 they were to be drafted conseribed, and this is the first instance of practi 
 cal conscription during this revolution in the Confederate States known to 
 me. The system proposed by the Governor in one feature is similar to the 
 conscription acts, for those acts give every man an opportunity to avoid 
 conscription by volunteering. But in all other respects the conscription 
 acts are far preferable and more in accordance with the genius of our insti 
 tutions. Mr. Davis would never think of ordering a draft or conscription 
 without legislative authority. The Governor had no authority of law for 
 his order. Nothing was ever more illegal. Again, his draft classified very 
 arbitrarily, if not worse, and by executive order limited the right of suf 
 frage thus making a refusal voluntarily to respond to an executive call an 
 occasion for forcible seizure of the person a discriminating seizure of per 
 sons, and an excuse for depriving the persons so seized of the right to vote 
 all, I repeat, without legislative authority ! I refer to these facts, not to 
 make a charge against the Governor, but to show how these troops were 
 raised, and how little of the volunteer spirit was manifested. Other States, 
 I am informed, never did fill the requisitions of the President. How many 
 I do not know. 
 
 Do you suppose your members of Congress did not observe the illegal 
 process adopted in Georgia for filling this requisition? And would they 
 have been wise to have supposed another requisition could be filled by vol 
 unteering ? They would have merited and would have received universal 
 execration, and those who now condemn for what was done would have 
 taken the lead in the execration. 
 
 Again, it has been charged that Congress, showed a great want of fore 
 sight in receiving so many men for twelve months, and that from the begin 
 ning they ought to have received volunteers only for the war, and this 
 would have saved the trouble about the twelve months regiments. 
 
 By reference to the acts of Congress, as I have enumerated them, you 
 will see that the two acts under which twelve months troops were accepted 
 were passed, one on the 28th of February and the other one on the 6th of 
 March, 1861. The first simply authorized the troops to be accepted by the 
 President which had been raised by, and were in the service of the States, 
 and they were to be received on the terms of their enlistment of course 
 by the State laws before the confederation. Thus, most of these men were 
 raised by the States those governments that always do right ; and tho 
 want of foresight is charged on the Congress by State rights men. 
 
 Again, both these acts were passed before there was any war, and at a 
 time when most of our statesmen, and especially those who charge the Co^ 
 gress with a want of foresight, were telling us there would be no war. They 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 263 
 
 abuse the Congress for not raising troops to serve during the war, when 
 there was no war and they were telling us there would be no war ! Yet, 
 ridiculous as it is, this is about the fairest charge made against the govern 
 ment. As I think we ought to have known that there would be a war a 
 bloody war and we ought to have raised troops accordingly. Neverthe 
 less, we have done well and all ought to be satisfied. 
 
 Thus, every plan for authorizing volunteers had been tried ; every in 
 ducement had been offered which the government was able to offer ; every 
 appeal had been made, and still our regiments were but skeletons. Still, 
 half those regiments were going out of the service. Roanoke and Fishing 
 Creek, and Donelson and Nashville had covered the land like so many thick 
 palls of darkness. On every side the enemy was gathering, boasting, press 
 ing, robbing, and destroying. A mighty army, which no man could num 
 ber, was rushing to our classic Peninsular, and wild with the thought of 
 sacking our capital, and destroying our people, as the hungry locusts devour 
 the grass blades in their pathway. Still, still, the heavy heart-crushing fact 
 came back to your Congress and to your President, that our regiments were 
 but skeletons ; half of these would soon go home, and none were coming to 
 take their places. The people did not and could not see and feel these 
 facts as did those in authority who were intrusted by the people to keep 
 faithful watch in that dark and stormy hour. 
 
 There was no remedy left but to keep all the regiments and organiza 
 tions we had, and fill them up by a system of compulsory enlistment; and 
 that remedy, to be effective, must be speedy and thorough. 
 
 But it is said this legislation is unconstitutional. That Congress had no 
 power to raise an army by compulsion. Well, if this be true, then the gov 
 ernment was a failure. We had no government no Confederate Govern 
 ment. And what a spectacle would we thus have presented to the nations 
 of the earth. We were asking them to recognize us as a nation to receive 
 us into their famil} T as an independent member. To entitle us to be so rec 
 ognized and received, it is necessary by the established laws of nations, 
 that we show to the nations that we have a government capable of com 
 manding the obedience of our own citizens, and capable of repelling the as 
 saults of foreign foes. That foreign foe was assaulting us most heavily. We 
 had defended nobly defended by voluntary enlistment, until that system had 
 exhausted its strength. We must command to the fight or fail. If we had 
 no right to command, the Confederated States was a demonstrated failure, 
 both as to internal government and external power. 
 
 But w r hy, upon what ground is this legislation unconstitutional? 
 
 First, because it is said to be contrary to individual liberty, and oppres 
 sive upon individual rights. Government, it is said, has no right to force 
 men from their homes and business, and compel them to defend their coun 
 try. This is a strange notion of liberty. Men owe obligations as well ag 
 possess rights. The performance of obligation is the preservation of rights, 
 and the only security to liberty. Government is formed for mutual defense, 
 and every member of government is under a paramount obligation to defend 
 it as a very condition to his right to protection by the government. He 
 who will not defend, has no claim to protection. To require a citizen to 
 defend his government from hostile attack is not to deprive him of his lib 
 erty, but to require him to perform his obligation, and to defend liberty and 
 all the rights of society. But it is flippantly said, that governments derive 
 their just powers from the consent of the governed, and, therefore, there 
 
264 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 can be no power where there is no consent. What an argument for a states 
 man ! Governments do derive their just powers from the consent of the 
 governed, but do they exercise their derived powers only by the consent of 
 the governed ? When you call a man from his home and business, and 
 make him a juror to settle other men s disputes, and line and imprison him 
 if he does not obey, do you ask him if he consented to the law under which 
 he is summoned and compelled to attend ? When you require a citizen to 
 work the highway and public roads, do you ask him if he consented to the 
 road laws ? Yet military duty is far higher than these, for if the country 
 is not defended, all other rights are destroyed and all duties consequently 
 discharged. 
 
 Thus, it is a well-established principle, which you will find in every 
 standard author on government, that the obligation is on every man equally 
 with his neighbor to render military service. No man is exempt except by 
 law. Can a man be discharged from his obligation simply because he is 
 unwilling to perform, it ? Are they willing to bear all the burden of defend 
 ing the country ? Can no man be a soldier but a volunteer ? Is want of 
 will, or withholding of consent, to relieve from duty ? When people form 
 a government, they may say whether that government shall be democratic, 
 aristocratic, or monarchical. They may say, as their theory, that all power 
 is derived from the people, or resides in a crown. But when the govern 
 ment is formed, when the powers are conferred, it is the duty of those 
 intrusted with the powers to exercise them, and it is the duty, the virtue, 
 and the patriotism of the citizen to obey. A citizen is under as much 
 obligation to defend a republic as a subject a crown, and the greater, since 
 the republic is formed by his consent. Originally, when government de 
 clared war, the very declaration of war made every man a soldier. No 
 special act was required to make him a soldier. The act of war ipso facto 
 made, him a soldier. None but \vomen, children, and invalids are natural 
 exempts. But all were not needed for the army ; and besides it was im 
 portant that some should produce provisions. Now, who shall say that this 
 man must be a soldier and another must remain at home ? In other words 
 who shall raise the army ? You cannot leave it to the individuals the 
 consent of the governed. Who can determine this but the government 
 the power that declares the war ? Thus has sprung up the necessity for legis 
 lation to declare who shall be a soldier, to fix exemptions, and to ascertain the 
 non-combatants. For under the laws of nations these non-combatants are 
 entitled to many privileges, even to non-interference by the enemy with 
 their persons and property. These principles are so familiar to students on 
 government that I am amazed that any one should assert a theory directly 
 in the face of them. 
 
 No, my countrymen, it is every man s duty, and should be his pleasure, 
 to defend the government of his choice. No man has a right to say, "You 
 shall go, because you are willing, and I will stay because I am unwilling to 
 go." Willing or unwilling the duty is the same, and the government alone 
 can systematize and enforce the obligation. 
 
 But it is objected, secondly, that the States alone can exercise this 
 power of compelling military service, and that the exercise by the Confed 
 erate Government is a violation of the rights of the States. 
 
 <2 
 
 There is certainly a plain and easy method of settling this question, 
 Is this power delegated or reserved ? If delegated, it belongs to the Con 
 federate Government ; if reserved, it belongs to the States. The Constitu- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WHITINGS. 265 
 
 tion the grant is the only test. That most explicitly declares that Con 
 gress shall have power " to declare war," and " to raise and support armies." 
 Here ends the argument, but, strange to say, not the controversy. Men 
 who claim to favor strict construction, to oppose interpolation, now begin 
 to construe and to interpolate. They say the Constitution means that Con 
 gress shall have power " to raise armies by voluntary enlistment. By 
 what authority of fact or logic are these words added ? Again, men who 
 love controversy, say the Constitution means that Congress shall have 
 power "to raise armies " by calls on the States. By what authority are these 
 words added ? These broad and destructive interpolations upon the Con 
 stitution are not only without excuse, but in the very teeth of history. 
 Under the articles of Confederation, the general government was depend 
 ent on the will of the States for troops, and the system worked so badly, 
 even during the revolutionary war, that the framers of the Constitution 
 determined to get rid of it, and did get rid of it in the most clear, intelli 
 gent, and emphatic manner. 
 
 When the convention were engaged in framing the Constitution, the 
 very question of what powers should be limited and what not limited, was 
 before them. Every power delegated was considered separately, and the 
 necessary limitations were also considered, and the intention was to leave no 
 words out which it was proper to insert : Hence, eight of the eighteen 
 powers are restricted and qualified in the very terms of the grant. The 
 power to raise and support armies is limited as to the latter branch sup 
 port. " No appropriation of money for that purpose shall be for a longer 
 period than twx) years." Now, the power to raise armies is the major propo 
 sition, and either of the limitations now proposed to be inserted is greater 
 than the limitation upon the power to support. Did the clumsy framers in 
 sert the minor qualification and leave out the greater? 
 
 But it is again said that this power to " raise armies " is limited by the 
 power to call out the militia. With all due deference, I must say this con 
 founding the army with the militia is trifling with the question. The mili 
 tia is a peace establishment exists always in all the Stat.es. The States do 
 keep the militia, but not troops of war in time of peace. When the Consti 
 tution was framed the States had a large frontier exposed to sudden invasions 
 by hostile Indian tribes. History had also shown that republics were sub 
 ject to insurrections and resistance to the process of law. The desire was 
 to provide a power ample to protect this large frontier from Indian in 
 cursions, to preserve internal peace and security, and to do all this without 
 a large standing army. This was the very purpose of the militia. It was 
 not to prosecute war, but to preserve the peace to be used in sudden emer 
 gencies and to this end it was organized to be kept always trained, always 
 officered, and in every locality. And as the militia embraced the great body 
 of the people whose business was not war, but agriculture, commerce, and 
 all the industrial pursuits, and ought not, therefore, to be called away for a 
 long period from their pursuits, the power of Congress is expressly limited 
 to call forth the militia only to suppress insurrections, repel invasions, and 
 execute the laws. The militia may sometimes aid the army ; but always 
 for short periods ; and, therefore, the militia, as such, has never been called 
 out for a longer period than six months in this country. A proposition by 
 Mr. Giles to call out the militia for two years, was denounced by the very 
 men who opposed conscription, as an unconstitutional attempt to convert 
 the militia into an army ! And in this they were right. But " to declare 
 
L>66 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GtiOttGlA. 
 
 war " is a wholly different power. To declare war is not to suppress insur 
 rections, repel invasions, or execute the laws. It is broader and greater. 
 It may require us to invade to resent insult and revenge injuries, and to 
 accomplish this great work the most terrible necessity of a fallen nature 
 ( -digress had to have distinct and efficient means. And for this purpose 
 Congress was invested with the power to raise and support armies. And 
 this is right. If the thirteen States had remained separate, it would have 
 required as large an army to wage war by, or in defense of one, as all. The 
 expense of each would also be as great. Indeed, each State would have re 
 quired a larger army than all would require, for with so many rival and 
 conflicting powers so contiguous to each other, wars and collisions would 
 have been frequent. To avoid these very evils to provide a common 
 defense to make that common defense easy, and light, was one of the very 
 objects of the Confederation ; and to make that common defense equal and a 
 unit, the power to raise the army and to support the army was given to the 
 common government. To have left the execution of this power dependent 
 on the will of the States would have been ruinous. For one State might be 
 willing to furnish its quota of men and money, and another unwilling, as 
 was soon the case, and this state of things would have produced not only 
 weakness and injustice, but disagreements, criminations, and collisions 
 the very evils which w r ere intended to be remedied. In the war now pend 
 ing, Congress did not want a militia to repel an invasion. Invasion, it is 
 true, was one feature of the war ; but it was only one feature. Congress 
 wanted an army to prosecute war to conquer a peace and win independ 
 ence. 
 
 I will not offend your intelligence by pursuing so palpable an argument. 
 I have thought this much was due from me because of my relation to this 
 legislation. I was never more troubled than when this necessity for con 
 scription, in some form, became manifest. The country at the time was 
 filled with gloom. It was the dark hour of the revolution. I had no doubt 
 even in that dark hour that some of the State authorities would resist the 
 law as then proposed. I said as much in the Senate, not by way of ap 
 proval, but in shame and sorrow. I feared the disaffection thus began by 
 politicians and local authorities might extend to the army. The law was 
 harsh on the twelve months men. I feared they might be reached by such 
 untimely appeals and hurtful controversy. This would have wrecked us 
 forever. The cause had already as much as it could bear in the common 
 enemy, and the struggle was fearful. Whatever might be my opinion of 
 the patriotism or wisdom of a controversy at that hour of darkness and 
 gloom, I did desire, if possible, to avoid it ; and to avoid it I was willing to 
 leave no room for the prejudices of the reckless or the whims of the capri 
 cious. Pending the subject, therefore, I preferred another proposition or 
 bill, a milder form of conscription, which I thought might accomplish the 
 good and avoid the controversy. With the lights now before me, I doubt 
 whether the milder form of conscription for which I voted would have been 
 sufficient for the crisis. At all events, the present proposition became the 
 law of my country, and I shall, as a good citizen, support it ; and with 
 equal cheerfulness whether I voted for or against it. I will not countenance 
 that sickly patriotism, nor render commendation to that higher law fanati 
 cism which cannot support as law, that which, as a proposition of expediency, 
 did not meet the approval of individual preference. 
 
 Failing in the argument, the opponents of the law seek to provoke the 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 267 
 
 jealousies, and to alarm the fears of the people. Why, say they, if this 
 power to raise armies by compulsion is conceded to the Confederate Gov 
 ernment, that government could destroy the people and the States. Thus 
 they pass away from the Constitution to the motives of those who happen 
 to administer it, to ascertain the powers of the government ! Until the 
 advent, in political logic, of these new lights, whose theory seems to be that 
 nothing was ever before understood, and whose practice seems to be that 
 nothing shall ever be considered as settled, it had been conceded by 
 
 O * 
 
 reasoners of supposed ability, that to prove a power could be abused was no 
 argument to show the power did not exist. Existence itself may be abused, 
 and, unfortunately, all existing things are liable to be abused. Still, all 
 things do exist. By this method of reasoning you could soon prove that 
 Congress had no power whatever, for what power in the whole enumerated 
 catalogue might not be abused to the injury, if not the destruction, of the 
 people and States? Congress would have no power "to provide and main 
 tain a navy"; for they might blockade and destroy all the ports of the 
 States. Congress would have no power to "regulate commerce"; for they 
 might destroy all the commerce of the States. And it would never do to 
 permit the Confederate States to build forts and ironclad vessels for the 
 protection of our cities, and man them with Confederate troops, for they 
 might turn the guns on the cities and destroy them ! The truth is, my 
 friends, when men or rulers wish to destroy, they do not wait for authority 
 to do so. The best evidence of a willingness to assault right and liberty is 
 the exercise of powers not granted, or of functions not conferred. Revolu 
 tions neither make nor justify tyrants, but they do develop them. Place 
 no power in the hands of those who betray a love for the exercise of power 
 who plead necessity as the excuse for usurpation, and revolution as the 
 occasion for oppression. The crowning grandeur of Washington s character 
 was, that in the midst of revolution he obeyed the laws ; and the highest 
 claim which Mr. Davis presents for your confidence is, that with examples 
 to the contrary all around him, he has, thus far, strictly refused to exercise 
 any power not expressly authorized by law. It is a fact well attested by all 
 history, that they find most fault with power in others, who themselves 
 exercise ungranted powers most freely. This is the sure unerring ear-mark 
 of that ambition which made Caesar and Cromwell and Bonaparte trample 
 upon the liberty they swore to defend, and grasp empire. 
 
 Was the conscript law intended to destroy the States ? Did it destroy 
 the States ? On the contrary, history will record the fact, that it saved the 
 States and saved the country. Yea, it drove back the foreign invader and 
 secures to its domestic foes the privilege of sitting here in peace, to defame 
 the law as an usurpation, the government that enacted it as oppressors, and 
 the heroic army that obeyed it as slaves ! 
 
 Nor will I omit this occasion to enter my protest against that folly, now 
 so common, of attempting to excite jealousies, controversies, and conflicts 
 between the States and their own common government. To hear these ill- 
 timed philippics against that government, a stranger would suppose that the 
 Confederate States was a government foreign to the States, and the neces 
 sary and unyielding enemy of the States. The people are constantly warned 
 not to trust, not to help, not to sustain, but to distrust and to resist their 
 own government as some insidious monster always stretching for power to 
 destroy the States. Now, my friends, who are they that administer the 
 Confederate States ? Are they not citizens of the States, delegates from 
 
268 SENATOR R II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 the States ? Are not their interests all in the States ? Have I lost my 
 affection for my State because you have honored me as her delegate in that 
 government which was created by the States and whose business is to pro 
 tect the States ? Is not my family, my property, my home, my every 
 interest, and every hope still in my State ? Why have I less interest in, 
 or less affection for Georgia than I had when I occupied one of your seats 
 in the State Assembly ? We have gotten rid of those whose interests and 
 sympathies were different from our own. Let us also get vid of the exces 
 sive jealousies which those differences furnished politicians with an excuse 
 to inflame. 
 
 The government is your own. The agents who administer it are of 
 your own choosing from your own citizenship. Choose wise men, good 
 men ; then give them your confidence and support. And when they become 
 unworthy, return them to private life. 
 
 Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty ! I grant it. But I deny that 
 eternal vigilance means perpetual snarling, snapping, fault finding, and 
 complaining. I den} - that vigilance means resistance to the government, 
 disaffection to the law^s, contumely to authority, or the disorganizing free 
 dom of individual opinion to set itself up against legal enactments and 
 judicial decisions. 
 
 No, there is no foundation for these constant jealousies and threatened 
 conflicts between the State and Confederate governments. Nine of every 
 ten of these issues spring, not from any real well-grounded differences, but 
 from passion, personal ambition, and party maneuver. There is little diffi 
 culty in understanding the respective rights and powers of the two govern 
 ments where the desire is sincerely and only to understand them. The 
 powers of the Confederate Government are plainly and specifically dele 
 gated. The rights of the States are covered by two propositions : first, to 
 exercise the powers reserved or not prohibited ; and, second, to have the 
 powers delegated exercised according to the purposes of the grant. The 
 great business of the Confederate Government is to manage the interests 
 common to the States, and especially to conduct the relations with foreign 
 governments. There is two much quibbling about terms. I sometimes 
 speak of the Confederate Government as a nation. What is meant by this? 
 When applied to the Confederacy it has no territorial reference. Are we 
 not struggling for admission into the family of nations ? Are we not 
 claiming and demanding recognition by other nations ? As what will we 
 ask them to recognize us ? By what name will we be called ? Agency ? 
 Created by a revocable power of attorney, which experiment entered into 
 to-day and which caprice may recall to-morrow? Partnership? A society 
 of convenience, without rank or national dignity? A standard writer, con 
 curred in by all standard writers, tells us, " that the independent States 
 entitled to rank in the great family of nations, are those powers to whom 
 belongs the right of embassy; the right to receive and to send public 
 ministers." Will not this be the great the peculiar the appropriate prov 
 ince of the Confederate States? Who shall conclude our treaties of peace 
 and of commerce ; form alliances ; receive ministers of foreign nations ; 
 resent insults and demand reparation for injuries? Who shall float the 
 flag, and protect the citizen over all waters and in all lands? Who, but the 
 Confederate States ? And shall we say they shall enter this great family with 
 less rank, less dignity, and less power for success than other nations ? Less 
 than England, or France, or Russia ; yea, less than Turkey, Brazil, or Mexico ? 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 269 
 
 Away with this perpetual effort to belittle and paralyze our own govern 
 ment. We have prescribed its boundaries, beyond which it cannot pass, 
 and within those boundaries let us not quarrel over forms nor quibble about 
 terms, but render that confidence and co-operation so essential to efficiency. 
 Let each government State and Confederate move in its own sphere, 
 neither interfering with, abusing, nor exciting jealousies against the 
 other, for both are seeking the one great end the happiness of the same 
 people. 
 
 Too many persons will not interpret the Constitution according to its 
 plain language, and clear intent and meaning. Adherence to some precon 
 ceived theory ; the prejudices of education ; the bias of association ; the 
 desire to accomplish some given object ; even passion, impulse, personal 
 disappointment, or a dislike of those who, for the time, administer the 
 government ; ambition, interest, or caprice often shape the judgment and 
 form the opinion of men. Every law which does not conform to their 
 theories is at once declared an usurpation and void, and the Constitution 
 itself is unconstitutional when it does not suit their views or promote their 
 wishes. It is according to the philosophy of the human mind that those 
 who are thus influenced rarely see the right and as rarely admit an error. 
 Such minds are always extreme, sometimes fanatical. There is no rule of 
 
 J 
 
 logic which they will not violate, no perversion of fact which they will not 
 commit, and no elevation of character which they will not assail. They 
 rarely yield an opinion, yet are never consistent. They admit no wisdom 
 in precedent, no respect for authority, and nothing binding upon conscience 
 but their own abstract individual opinion. It was precisely this spirit, 
 which, in the old Union, inaugurated the crusade against the South. The 
 laws of Congress, though based upon a plain grant in the Constitution, were 
 nullified by State Legislatures, set aside by circuit judges, and made odious 
 by the official harangues of State governors. The decisions of the highest 
 courts in the land fixed no obligation upon individual opinion to conform, 
 settled no disputes ; and judges, distinguished for learning, patriotism, and 
 every virtue, were openly assailed as governed by outside influences ! Read 
 the records of Northern fanaticism and find the verification of all these 
 statements. Then turn your eyes to the fields of blood, and wail, and ruin 
 all over the continent, and you will see the only legitimate results of such 
 an insatiate spirit of discord. It is not the subject which this spirit may 
 agitate that works the mischief ; it is the spirit itself, which will always find 
 a subject and make an occasion. 
 
 Why, gentlemen, if the people were to select a thousand times, they 
 could not find persons into whose hands they could more safely intrust the 
 rights and honor of the States than those who now administer the Con 
 federate Government. The President, from his youth up, has been dis 
 tinguished for his devotion to the States. If you enter the Senate Chamber 
 you find there the well-balanced Clay of Alabama ; his colleague, the elo 
 quent Yancey ; that able, experienced, and renowned statesman, Mr. 
 Hunter, of Virginia ; Mr. Barn well, of South Carolina, than whom no better 
 man nor purer statesman ever blessed his country or adorned a Senate ; and 
 many more well deserving of mention ; all of whom have ever been 
 champions of the rights of the States, and all of whom voted for and advo 
 cated the conscription laws. Yet the men of yesterday tell us that these 
 
 v v 
 
 men are usurping power which may crush the States ! Has absurdity no 
 limit ; effrontery no blush ? Has statesmanship no avocation but fault- 
 
270 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 finding ; patriotism no end but power ; ambition no satiety even in blood, 
 I and the country no destiny but dissension and endless divisions? 
 
 But, if these high Confederate characters merit not your confidence, will 
 not the decision of your own highest State court a court composed of 
 judges than whom none are more eminent as jurists nor more worthy as 
 men appease your wrath and convince your judgments? Is your own 
 highest court engaged, also, in the terrible work of destroying the States 
 and enslaving the people ? Can none be right but those who condemn the 
 law ? Can none be trustworthy but those who persist in discord ? Has it 
 come to this, that statesmanship can settle no principle ; character excite no 
 confidence ; and the courts end no controversy ? Does freedom of speech 
 consist in assailing the constituted authorities of the land, and freedom of 
 opinion confer the right to disregard adjudicated law? Beware, my coun 
 trymen, lest with such wild, unbridled theories, you mistake licentiousness 
 for freedom, and enthrone bloody anarchy in the seat of law-restraining 
 libertv ! Casuists have written, and cabinets have debated, to ascertain the 
 
 * ^^_ 
 
 best form of government and the true philosophy of governing. Every 
 form has had its advocates, and every people their experiments, and the 
 bloody arbitrament of war has shed its crimson tides in the ever-recurring 
 controversy. But to one great conclusion casuists and cabinets, people and 
 armies must agree. All government is vanity where the laws are not 
 respected. Vain, vain indeed, will all your sacrifices be ; your sons will fall 
 in vain, and in vain will your heroes roll back the red wave of battle and 
 vanquish the countless hosts of the invader, if, when peace returns, the law 
 be not the rule of every man s life, and the guide of every man s opinions. 
 This is the rock on which we have split. This is the rock toward which we 
 are steering again : the growing, spreading disregard of law and disrespect 
 for authority. The philosophy of government is law. The stability of 
 government is law. The glory of government is law. And oh, that I could 
 catch the emphasis which would force universal conviction when I say, the 
 FREEDOM OF GOVERNMENT is LAW ! Where shall conflicting opinions har 
 monize, save in the decisions of legal authority ; and how can we agree 
 except on the basis of well-considered law ? 
 
 These, my friends, are no new thoughts with me. I utter them with 
 earnestness, because I have felt them for years. Lawlessness is the power 
 I never cease to dread ; and I warn you this night, that it will require all 
 your vigilance to prevent it from enslaving yourselves, and establishing its 
 throne of ruined hopes in this land we leave for our children, and all in the 
 name of liberty. 
 
 But there is another state of things which transpired in the history of 
 those conscription laws which is the reverse of that against which I have 
 been speaking, and which is well calculated to gladden our confidence and 
 inspire our hope. 
 
 I have said that I predicted resistance by some in authority to these 
 laws, and that under the circumstances then existing this disaffection might 
 extend to the army, and we should be undone. My judgment was not at 
 fault in its conclusions as to what politicians would do ; but the apprehen 
 sion that their teachings might possibly affect the conduct of the troops was 
 groundless. I know of no incident of the kind in all history more beautiful 
 and touching than the self-denying patriotism with which the troops who 
 originally enlisted for twelve months, obeyed the first conscription act. 
 
 In ancient Sparta the evidence of all worth, the test of all courage, and 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 271 
 
 the sum of all virtue, was obedience to the laws. And Socrates, the Athe 
 nian, has been consecrated to immortality for more than twenty centuries as 
 
 */ 
 
 the greatest and wisest of ancient philosophers, because he submitted him 
 self to the law of his country, though that law was procured by false accusa 
 tion and doomed him to the death of a felon. 
 
 For a short period in the beginning of the revolution, the government 
 asked for volunteers to serve for twelve months. 
 
 In a very little time more than one hundred thousand enlisted. They 
 came from every rank and condition in society. They came the tender 
 son of fortune, the hardy mechanic from his shop, the student from his 
 lamp, the laborer from his plow, the bridegroom from his chamber, and the 
 old man from his household all peers and comrades rushing to the front 
 in this dawning struggle for imperiled liberty. They braved the scorching 
 heats and life-destroying miasmas of the tropical South. They endured the 
 frozen snows and icy winds of the chilly North. Amid the flowing gardens 
 of beautiful Pensacola ; by the wave-washed shore of surf -beaten Hatteras ; 
 on the banks of the classic James and York ; and over the dreary summits 
 and through the rugged gorges of the mountains of Virginia, these first 
 enlisted bands of Confederate braves, marched and camped and fought and 
 suffered for their beleagured country. By the deeds which heroes love, 
 and the pains which martyrs only feel, they have made the names of 
 Bethel and Manassas, Leesburg and Belmont, Laurel Hill and Sewell Moun 
 tain, as familiar as Marathon, sacred as Bunker Hill, and immortal as York- 
 town. 
 
 The months rolled by and the end of enlistment drew near. Fatigue to 
 the extent of physical strength had been borne, and glory enough even for 
 the spirit of the cavalier had been won. It was natural that the heart should 
 turn its longings from the strife, and the tired soldier, "foot-sore and 
 weary," should desire to go home and rest. The sweet thought made the 
 laugh ring merry around the camp-fires, and was whispered in earnest hope 
 from comrade to comrade along the line of battle. In the quiet night the 
 sleeping veteran, all fitful in dreams, would start and mutter in half -uttered 
 accents the names of the loved ones rushing to the gate to meet him ; and 
 the faithful sentinel, wide awake with the joyous anticipation, would count 
 by his steps, as he paced his rounds, the days and the hours that lingered, 
 ere yet that he should receive the heart-warm welcome of wife and family. 
 Alas ! for the cruel, heartless demands of relentless war. The foe still gath 
 ered along our borders. These very homes were yet threatened with deso 
 lation and ruin by as piratical an invader as ever cursed the innocent of the 
 earth. Therefore, the reluctant but stern enactment came, and said to these 
 earliest patriots, " This return must not be yet ! The march must still be 
 made ; the watch must still be kept, and for two long years more you must 
 endure the hardships of camp and dare the dangers of the fight ! What a 
 test of patriotism was this ! No wonder that statesmen felt anxious for the 
 effect of this trying announcement. No wonder the enemy expected our 
 :irmy to disband. And just at this moment this critical moment the 
 voice of the politician was heard, in accents as un suited to the camp as the 
 whispers which seduced from allegiance in Eden, saying to these troubled 
 and disappointed spirits : The law is unconstitutional unjust unnecessary, 
 and binding on no one ! Yet, not one of that hundred thousand listened to 
 the voice of the charmer, or questioned the duty of obedience. No, no, 
 they clinched anew the rifle and started afresh for the battle. Their ven- 
 
272 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 geance was against the foe that made the law a necessity. And by that 
 triumph our independence was won. 
 
 All along from Malvern Hill to Sharpsburg, and from the Potomac to the 
 Mississippi, these heroes are sleeping in glory to-night. To these, that 
 happy return will never come, but they have furnished an example of duty 
 and sacrifice which all nations shall praise, and their children shall bless for 
 ever. Others, more fortunate, have returned, and many of them with one 
 limb, or one eye, and with scars of honor such as Trojan never wore and 
 Grecian never won, are everywhere urging obedience to the laws of the 
 country they defended. If chivalry obeyed, what excuse has ambition to re 
 sist ? If the army is satisfied, why should politicians and people complain ? 
 Here let the gown and the ermine learn of the sword and the bayonet a les 
 son of obedience and submission. Let the sublime examples speaking in the 
 rattling musketry and deep-mouthed cannon along the Chickahominy and the 
 Shenandoah silence your cavils ye. of easy seats and safe positions ! For 
 shame, let demagogism slink away in silence, and cease forever to disturb 
 a people so worthy to dwell in peace ; and with one voice and one heart let 
 us consecrate to immortality, and to the perpetual emulation of our children 
 the memory of these Confederate heroes of more than Spartan courage, and 
 greater than Socratic virtue. 
 
 Thus, gentlemen and fellow-citizens, in feebleness but in candor, have I 
 given you my views of the condition and prospects of our country. We be 
 gan in divisions and doubts. These divisions are healed and these doubts are 
 gone. We began in weakness. In the very struggle for life we are grow 
 ing strong. We began without arms, without munitions of war, and with 
 out known resources. We have procured, and are daily making plenty of 
 arms of most excellent quality, from the pistol to the heaviest ordnance. We 
 have no lack of the munitions of war ; and our mountains and our caves, 
 our fields and our looms, are furnishing resources and supplies abundant for 
 every purpose and for all our people. Providence seems to have hid away 
 in our earth every good and desirable thing, and when the hour of our need 
 arrived, kindty guided us to them. We have suffered disasters, and in the 
 nature of war must suffer them again. But we have had four-fold triumphs, 
 and shall have final success. But few differences and dissensions have 
 arisen, and time and patience have soon shown them to be unfounded and 
 unnecessary. The only remaining difference the conscription laws was 
 never extensive, is narrowing daily, and must soon pass away witn the others. 
 They are founded on a specific grant, were obeyed by the army, and saved 
 the country. In the shadow of these great facts opposition must sicken and 
 die. We have a better army than we have ever had, and are stronger in 
 every element of power. We have already won success, and patience will 
 bring the full fruition of our hopes. No other nation will molest us. No 
 outside power, nor combination of outside powers, can subjugate us. We 
 can never be subdued until we ourselves shall will it. All the civilized na 
 tions commend our devotion and admit our wisdom. Our enemies, in fear 
 and trembling, concede our power. The darkest day of the crisis is behind 
 us: and as surely as the natural sun shall rise on the early morning, and 
 brush away the mists and darkness which surround us to-night, so surely 
 will the sun of our independence arise on an early morrow, and driving 
 away these murky clouds of war, give splendor to the earth, and light and 
 life and happiness to our children; 
 
SPEECH DELIVERED IN LA GRANGE, GA., MARCH 11, 1865. 
 
 Speech on the means of success, the sources of danger, and the consequences of fail 
 ure in the Confederate struggle for independence, delivered in Sterling Hall, La Grange, 
 Gn., on the llth day of March, 1865. 
 
 "It is greatness of soul alone that never grows old ; nor is it wealth that delights in 
 the latter stage of life, as some give out, so much as honor." Pericles. 
 
 Mr. Hill had left his seat in the Senate at Richmond for the purpose of coming to 
 Georgia to rally the people to the waning cause of the South. This speech was the last 
 one delivered by any Southern man in behalf of the Confederacy. I venture to express 
 the opinion, that for eloquence, classic diction, and learning, it has few equals. With the 
 elegant rhetoric of Burke, it combines the logic of Fox, with the ornate style of Cicero 
 the rugged power of Demosthenes, and it will live in the literature of the country as an 
 oration of rare eloquence and beauty. Mr. Hill revised and republished it in 1874 with the 
 following reasons for his doing so. 
 
 I republish this speech for two reasons : 
 
 1. Some of those who heard it delivered have requested its republication. 
 
 2. I desire its preservation as the best expression I can now give of the 
 moral causes which compelled surrender, as well as of the horrors consequent 
 upon surrender. 
 
 With immaterial variances in details, nearly all the predictions, in this 
 speech, of the consequences of subjugation, have become already historical 
 facts. The predictions not yet fulfilled, I leave to that inexorable future 
 which shapes human destinies in logical consistency with human nature and 
 God s laws, despite the follies of human wisdom, and the crimes of human 
 legislation. 
 
 The reader will see, in this speech, the reasons which prompted me so 
 earnestly to standby the Confederate struggle to the last hour; and to seek, 
 by every means in my power, to avert from the Southern people that greatest 
 of human calamities the subjugation of one section by another section of a 
 common country. 
 
 I regret nothing but the FAILURE, and my inability to do more to pre 
 vent it. 
 
 BENJ. H. HILL. 
 
 May 22, 1874. 
 
 SPEECH. 
 
 From my youth, most of you now before me have been accustomed to 
 honor me with a willingness to hear my opinions upon questions of public- 
 interest. This large assemblage to-day manifests that, through all our 
 sufferings and vicissitudes, your confidence remains steadfast ; and most 
 sincerely I thank you. 
 
 At no previous period have I addressed you with so thorough a convic 
 tion of the magnitude of the interests involved, nor with so deep a sense of 
 my utter incapacity to discuss the issues upon which those interests depend, 
 satisfactorily to myself. I do not come to tell you your property is secure, 
 or your liberties are unthreatened, or your lives are safe. I come to tell 
 
 273 
 
274 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 you that the greatest trial which can befall a people is now upon you. Are 
 you willing are you ready, to sacrifice property, liberty, and life, to defend, 
 to preserve, to establish that national honor, national integrity, and national 
 independence, without which neither property, liberty, or life, could be 
 either valuable or desirable? If so, you will enjoy all property, liberty, 
 and life, and enjoy them more abundantly. If not, then you lose all ; 
 and with them you throw away national honor, integrity, and inde 
 pendence, forever. Nations, like individuals, must have character ; and 
 nations, like individuals, must have that character tested proven by 
 trial. Trial is to the national character what the sculptor s chisel is to 
 the marble ; it cuts away much of its substance, but leaves it in shape, 
 comeliness, and value. And this lean speak for our encouragement, that no 
 nation has ever yet died, or been destroyed, while the people held every 
 other interest subordinate to the preservation of national honor, virtue, and 
 independence. While this I must say for our admonition : that no nation 
 has ever yet survived, whose people became willing to sacrifice honor, virtue, 
 or independence tor individual ease, or any material prosperity. 
 
 As, therefore, no man can enjoy life, liberty, or property, except the 
 national integrity be preserved, it follows, that it is every man s duty to 
 sacrifice all these, when necessary, to preserve that national integrity ; and 
 he who refuses to make the sacrifice, becomes an enemy to that nation, and 
 the personal enemy of every other individual of that nation, and of every 
 individual to be born in that nation. 
 
 I speak to you, my friends and neighbors, to-day, but I speak of interests 
 that must affect our whole country, and our whole country s posterity. We 
 can have no divided interests, and no separate deliverance. I plead the 
 cause of twelve millions, living, and of twelve millions, many times multi 
 plied, yet to live. And what a patrimony to preserve, what a heritage to 
 transmit, are involved in this cause ! 
 
 Since our beneficent Father made the heavens and the earth, He has 
 parceled out to His children no better portion than that which we of the 
 Confederate States possess. We have an area broader than the five great 
 powers of Europe. We have a sky as bright, and a climate as balmy, as the 
 poet s " loved Italia." We have a soil more fruitful than that of the land 
 selected by the Father Himself for His own chosen people, and which is 
 described as " flowing with milk and with honey." And we have rivers 
 which can float to the sea ten thousand cargoes, each richer than the fabled 
 golden fleece ! And yet, since God cursed man and drove him from Para 
 dise, thenceforth to be the victim of hatred and revenge, and of every pas 
 sion, no people have been threatened with evils so dire, and a fate so terrible, 
 as those with which we, of the Confederate States, are now threatened ! 
 For, what to us will be our widespreading lands, if they are to be divided 
 by the hands of an enemv ? What will it be to us that our skies are bright 
 
 V 
 
 and our climate balmy, if the spirits of our people are bowed and broken ? 
 What will it be to us that our productions are rich and varied, if while we 
 may reap another shall enjoy? What, oh, what will it be to us that the 
 sails of white-winged commerce shall gather in our waters and along our 
 streams, as the fleecy clouds sometimes gather on our horizon and through 
 our heavens, if they come to bear away our riches to fill the coffers of a 
 conqueror? I would not be sacrilegious; I would not be ungrateful; I 
 would not throw away, foolishly, the bounties of Heaven, but rather than 
 these evils should be fixed upon us, I could pray that God would curse 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 275 
 
 these lands until not a seed could vegetate, and darken these skies until 
 not a ray of light could penetrate the blackness ! 
 
 In view, then, of the great interests involved, let us proceed to examine 
 the issue, as that issue is now presented between us and our enemies ; how 
 that issue is to be solved ; our resources ; the difficulties which obstruct us ; 
 the method of overcoming those difficulties, and our prospects for final success. 
 
 There can be no two honest opinions as to the character of the issue. 
 Our enemy, proverbial for deception, is candid with us, on this subject, 
 now. If we be deceived here, we must deceive ourselves. Indeed, so dis 
 tinct is the issue, that, in my opinion, this very distinctness, combined witli 
 the character of the demands which make the issue, will, in history, make 
 this the beginning of the second epoch in this revolution. Four years ago, 
 our people were divided in opinion as to what our enemies proposed to do; 
 and, therefore, were divided in opinion, as to what we ought to do. Then, 
 there was ground for debate; room for doubt ; tolerance for differences, 
 and patriots on both sides. Now, our enemies declare distinctly what they 
 propose to do, and equally distinct becomes our duty. There is no ground 
 for debate ; no room for doubt ; and there ought to be no tolerance for 
 difference, for patriots cannot longer divide. He that is not for us, is, by 
 the very nature of the issue, compelled to be against us. This issue, I 
 repeat, is formed, made up, by the demands of the enemy, officially an 
 nounced by Mr. Lincoln to our own appointed commissioners. 
 
 The first demand is "a complete restoration of the authority of the Con 
 stitution and laws of the United States over all places within the States of 
 the Confederacy." What Constitution ? Ah, my friends, not the Consti 
 tution which our common fathers made ! Not that Constitution in which 
 conflicting interests and opinions made mutual concessions for the general 
 good ; in which the South agreed to contribute to the commercial and 
 manufacturing greatness of the North, and the North, in consideration 
 therefore, agreed not to interfere with, but to respect, the industrial pur 
 suits and domestic labor of the South ; and without which mutual conces 
 sions our fathers distinctly declared they would never agree to any union at 
 all. That old Constitution, the Northern people did not like. Many of 
 them hated it. They called it "a covenant with hell, and a league with the 
 devil."* They refused to obey it. They openly, repeatedly, grossly vio 
 lated it ; and, because of that bad faith, we were compelled to abandon the 
 Jnion formed by that Constitution. Since we left them, they have made a 
 Constitution to suit themselves. They have annulled all the concessions 
 their fathers made to us ; but have retained all the concessions our fathers, 
 in return therefore, made to them ; and have added new exactions of us, 
 which their own fathers, in the Convention, disclaimed, and which those 
 fathers would have considered themselves disgraced in exacting ; and which 
 the most fanatical enemy of the South, in New England, would not have 
 
 a/ 
 
 exacted before our separation. They have repealed the old laws, made for 
 our benefit, in pursuance of the old Constitution ; and have made new laws, 
 in accordance with the spirit and purposes of this new Constitution. And 
 now, they take this new Constitution and these new laws spawns of the 
 most wicked fanaticism, conceived and perfected in the most bitter hatred 
 to us, even while they were invading our soil, burning our homes, and shed 
 ding our blood and tell us we must consent to have their authority restored 
 over us as the first condition of peace with them ! Did these people forget 
 who our fathers were, or did they think we were degenerate ? 
 
276 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 The next demand is, that we must agree in advance " to accept what 
 ever consequences may follow from the restoration of this authority." It 
 matters not how hard our lot may be ; how degrading to our honor ; how 
 ruinous to interests ; how hopeless for our children ; we must agree, in ad 
 vance, not to complain ; not to plead surprise ; not to resist again ; not to 
 ask for a change. We must accept whatever consequences may follow ! 
 Our enemies are wiser, in their exactions, than the Venetian Jew. We 
 must pay the pound of flesh, whatever blood shall flow, and it must be so 
 written in the bond. If we sign that bond, no fair Portia will give judg 
 ment for us, and no honorable woman can ever bear children to a people so 
 bankrupt in manliness ! 
 
 But what are the changes made in the Constitution and laws, and what 
 are the consequences to flow from these changes? for Mr. Lincoln is candid 
 enough to give us notice of a sufficient number of them to enable even a 
 stupid man to see that others must follow. 
 
 In the first place, our slaves are emancipated by our enemies, and we 
 must consent to that emancipation. What need for " courts and votes," 
 after this consent? Well, this change alone, is a great one. Slavery was 
 not the cause, but it was the occasion of our secession. We voluntarily 
 left a Union under a Constitution which our fathers did help to make ; in 
 which slavery was recognized ; in which, even the Abolitionists admitted 
 it was recognized in the States, to secure greater and more quiet protection 
 for that property. It is now proposed, demanded that we be carried back, 
 by force, to a union under a Constitution which our fathers refused to 
 make ; which our enemies alone have made ; in which our property is taken 
 from us without compensation, and all at the bidding of an enemy who have 
 been murdering our children while making this change to destroy our prop 
 erty, and who tell us they will continue to murder until we accept the 
 change, and consent to the destruction. I say, to yield slavery at all, is to 
 show a great change in our people. To yield it thus to the enemy, is singu 
 lar, unusual humiliation for the Southern people. But to yield as a privi 
 lege as a condition of reunion with that very enemy ; and to be required, 
 in the new Union, to pay a full proportion of the debt incurred by the 
 enemy while murdering our people to force them to the surrender, is a sub 
 jugation which no people fit to live with would exact, and to which no 
 people fit to live at all would ever submit. 
 
 But I am speaking to-day of questions whose solution must affect all the 
 world, and all the world s posterity. By what I this day utter, I am willing 
 to go before my country, before posterity, and before my Heavenly Father 
 for judgment. And so speaking I declare to you, I think the preservation 
 of property in slaves, great as it is, is yet the very smallest interest involved 
 in this contest. I believe slavery is God s own decree. If I did not believe 
 so, no earthly power could make me hold my slaves until the going down 
 of this day s sun. In God s hands I am willing to leave the negro s 
 condition and destiny. " Best are all things as the will of God ordained 
 them." But as far as property in that negro is the creature of human con 
 sent, I am willing to say I would freely, cheerfully, gladly, if necessary, 
 give up slavery for independence ; but I will never consent to give up slavery 
 and independence, for any price which human coffers can pay, nor on any 
 terms which human ingenuity can devise, nor under any torture which human 
 power can inflict. 
 
 But I say, emancipation simply, is the smallest question involved, If this 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 277 
 
 were the only danger ; if we, the white race, were still permitted to regulate 
 the new relations by our own State laws, we might be able to protect our 
 selves in our political, civil, and social supremacy ; and though in a different 
 way, and on different terms, we should still be able, in a great measure, to 
 control the labor of the negro, both for his good and our own. Our enemies 
 have seen this result, and they have provided against it. 
 
 Therefore, in the next place, under this new Constitution, Congress the 
 Federal Congress we are notified, " reserves the power to enforce this eman 
 cipation, by such legislation as that Congress shall deem appropriate" That 
 is to say, the people who emancipate the slave reserve the power to say how 
 that slave shall enjoy his freedom ; what shall be his political, civil, and 
 social status ; and what relations shall exist between the freed slave and his 
 former master. The people who hate you, who have murdered your sons to 
 free the negro, who impoverish and degrade you to enrich and elevate the 
 negro, is to be the sole judge of what is appropriate in the future relations 
 between you and that negro. Do you imagine such a people will judge it 
 appropriate that you should be above the negro ? Will it not be marvelous 
 if they even judge it appropriate that you should be his equal ? 
 
 Let us glance a moment at some of the measures which this Federal 
 Congress must deem not only appropriate, but as absolutely necessary, to 
 enforce this emancipation of the slaves ; without which, indeed, the eman 
 cipation would be idle and cruel. 
 
 In the first place, of course, the freed negro must have a country to live in. 
 Now, it has never been known that the white and black races could inhabit 
 the same country, in any large proportions, without the one race being sub 
 ject to the other. The contrary is the experience of mankind. In former 
 times, even Abolitionists shuddered at the idea of turning loose four millions 
 of blacks to live in the South. What to do with the negro after freeing him 
 was the hardest problem for the world s fanaticism to solve. For the pur 
 pose of solving this problem, the "Colonization Society " was formed. The 
 object was to cany the freed negroes back to their own land, Liberia, and 
 aid and encourage them to pursue and progress in the civilization and 
 Christianity they had acquired here, and extend both to their race still in 
 barbarism. Great intellects helped the scheme. Wealth, philanthropy, 
 and fanaticism all combined, from the North and from the South, to give it 
 success. It failed. The negro preferred slavery here to freedom there. 
 Many in this very State, freed by their masters to be carried to Liberia, re 
 fused to go. Some did go. Teachers with books, and preachers with the 
 Bible, went with them. But even with these helps, the freed negro went 
 back to the barbarism of his race with more rapidity than he recovered his 
 race from barbarism. Slavery is the only civilizer of the negro. Early in Mr. 
 Lincoln s first term, we heard much of his efforts to get some Southern 
 country in which to colonize the nesrroes. He failed. The necrro would 
 
 / ^D ci? 
 
 not go. He preferred to stay here even if compelled to shoot his master; 
 and Mr. Lincoln, it seems, has concluded that it is a more Christian work. 
 The truth is, the negro will never voluntarily leave this country. He much 
 prefers slavery. And the Yankee has concluded he shall neither leave the 
 country nor remain a slave in it, whatever consequences may result. 
 
 But why give the negro his freedom and a country to live in and not the 
 means of making a living ? He must have lands to work and the means to 
 work them. Therefore, as another result, our lands must be parceled out 
 
 with the neero. Gen. Sherman has already commenced the work. He has 
 
 < 
 
278 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 already set apart certain lands in Georgia and South Carolina, and the islands 
 adjacent, for the poor, starving negroes who followed him, and has forbid 
 any white person going within their limits except by military order. 
 
 In the next place, the negro, being a free landed proprietor, must have 
 civil rights, and civil rights are but a mockery without civil power ; and all 
 these will be futile without social equality. I tell you as sure as there is rea 
 son in logic, or revenge in hate, these consequences will all follow. They 
 cannot follow naturally. The negro, of himself, can never make, administer, 
 or execute laws for the white man. His intellect is not equal to the task of 
 either supremacy or equality. His taste, his habits, his nature can never, by 
 any innate charm or power, rise to social equality with the white race. And 
 I repeat, these ends will not be reached as results naturally arising from his 
 state of freedom. But they will be provided for by law. His friend and 
 your enemy, his liberator and your tyrant, will have the sole right to judge 
 of the measures appropriate to enforce the negro s emancipation ; and by 
 virtue of laws thus provided, the negro will be entitled to hold your lands, 
 to sit in your legislative halls, to adjudge your rights, to be the witness be 
 tween you and his race, to pass sentence upon your acts, to eat at your tables, 
 to associate with your families, and to intermarry with your children. 
 
 Nor is the worst yet told. It will be in vain to give the negro all these 
 rights, and establish them by law, and stop there. All the laws the Federal 
 Congress could devise, could not by their simple enactment lift the negro to ac 
 tual equality with the white man. His nature and his habit is to fear and obey 
 his master. The nature and the habit of the white man is to command and 
 govern the negro. This normal relation must be overcome by something 
 stronger than laws, or it will practically prevail. Therefore, power force 
 must be provided to secure to the negro the actual enjoyment of these rights. 
 The Yankee will not sacrifice a million of lives, and billions of money to ob 
 tain these rights for the negro, and then hesitate to adopt whatever means 
 may be necessary to secure their enjoyment, as far as that enjoyment can be 
 secured. 
 
 This force must come from without, or be found within the 
 country. To be furnished from without will prove too expensive. 
 It will require three hundred thousand soldiers to garrison this vast 
 territory. It would doubtless be deemed appropriate to collect the ex 
 pense of maintaining this force from us, especially as we would be 
 considered the cause of the necessity for such force. But, impoverished 
 and enervated, and manacled in all our energies, we should never be 
 able to provide the means for such payment. The Yankees would not 
 long agree to pay such expenses from their own treasury, and the force from 
 without would be chiefly withdrawn. Only one resource to accomplish the 
 end would remain, and this would be adopted. The black race the eman 
 cipated slave would be armed ; and the white race the dominating 
 offended master would be disarmed ! Do not tell me this result is too hor 
 rid, too demoniac. You will have no right to judge. That right is re 
 served, by the terms proposed, to the Federal Congress. Your enemy is to 
 be the only judge. You are to agree in advance he shall be the only judge. 
 That enemy is fanatical ; that enemy is mad ; that enemy is blind ! That 
 madness has been restrained hitherto by your power, but, even now, is there 
 any cruelty which that enemy has not delighted to inflict upon us where 
 opportunity presented? Let Atlanta, with her exiled people and heaps of 
 ashes, answer ! Let Columbia, given to a soldiery licensed to sack, to 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 279 
 
 riot, and to burn, close up the argument. I tell you, Atlanta depopulated 
 and destroyed ; Columbia sacked and in smoking ruins, are happy places, 
 where the weary and pursued may well fly for rest and safety, compared to 
 the fate which will await this whole land, when the white race conquered 
 and hopeless shall lay down their arms and submit to be the negro s fellow 
 on the Yankee s terms. I will not detain you longer with details of the con 
 sequences that must result from an acceptance by us of the terms proposed 
 by Mr. Lincoln to our commissioners in Hampton Roads. I have shown 
 you that he requires us : 
 
 1. To accept a new Constitution and new laws made by our enemies 
 made in the midst of inflamed hatred to us ; made while invading our coun 
 try, burning our homes, and shedding our blood ! 
 
 2. To accept this new Constitution, and these laws, without reservation 
 or qualification as to the consequences that may follow. 
 
 3. That we must agree in advance, that our slaves are emancipated ; and 
 that the Federal Congress shall, in future, exercise the power to enforc that 
 emancipation by such laws as they may deem appropriate. 
 
 4. I have shown you that to enforce this emancipation, it must neces 
 sarily be deemed appropriate : 1. That the freed negro shall have this coun 
 try to inhabit. 2. That he must be furnished with lands to cultivate, and 
 with means to cultivate them. 3. That he must have civil rights ; civil and 
 political power, and social equality with us. 4. That he must have power 
 to protect himself in the enjoyment of all these rights against an old domi 
 neering master, and that, too, to this end : the negro will be armed, and the 
 former master the white race will be disarmed ! 
 
 I need scarcely add, that in order to carry out this policy it will become 
 necessary to obliterate all State lines, and have all the States of the Con 
 federacy reduced to one vast territory. For this territory there will be but 
 one law-making power the Federal Congress ; and from this territory, in 
 that Congress, the negro, or the white man willing to be his equal, will be 
 the only tit and accepted representative. 
 
 As an inducement and the only inducement offered to accept these 
 terms, Mr. Lincoln promises us a liberal exercise of the pardoning power ! 
 And, doubtless, those at the North who support him, will consider this 
 indeed a liberal offer, since they claim the right to exterminate us for the 
 sins already committed ! 
 
 The very terms of the issue, as tendered by Mr. Lincoln, must preclude 
 any division of opinion as to the manner of meeting that issue. Diplomacy, 
 on its own terms, by its own champions, has made an effort and failed at the 
 threshold. Statesmanship has been given its day, and not only failed, but 
 was humiliated before one day ended. How could it have been otherwise 
 when Mr. Lincoln had previously plainly said : "It is an issue which can 
 only be tried by war, and decided by victory." The day for diplomacy and 
 statesmanship will certainly come ; and it will come early, or delay long, 
 just in proportion to the earnestness and unanimity with which we, on our 
 side, now wage the war. Wooing will drive it away. Universal defiance 
 will bring it on. If our enemy could have heard from our people but one 
 harmonious determined voice of resistance to death after the Hampton 
 Roads conference, that day would have come upon us ere the springing 
 grain could yellow for the harvest. Oh ! dastardly is the cowardice of that 
 trooper who lingers from the battle now ; hopelessly suicidal is that avarice 
 which can withhold its offering now ; and hateful, hateful, hateful far be- 
 
280 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 yond the darkest thought of the traitor s mind, is that ambition which can 
 not forget its personal griefs and personal scheming and cease to divide our 
 people now ! 
 
 If we were base enough to desire to submit, we could not for all induce 
 ments to such submission are destroyed by the terms proposed. We could 
 not get back the old Union, for that has been more effectually destroyed by 
 the enemy than by secession. We could not save our property, for its surren 
 der is the very first condition of submission. We give up property in slaves 
 in advance. We throw away all the debt we have incurred, and which is 
 due to our own people. The remainder of our property, if sold in the most 
 favorable market, would not pay our proportion of the enemy s debt incurred 
 in our subjugation ! 
 
 We would not secure peace. I do not speak to you with threats ; but I 
 do speak in frankness. And I tell you, if you, at home, are willing to sub 
 mit to terms so degrading, the army will not! The soldiers can give up 
 property ; they HAVE given it up. They can leave home, and wife, and 
 children ; they have left them. They can endure cold, and heat, and hun 
 ger, and nakedness. They have endured all these for four long years. 
 They can climb mountains, wade rivers, make long inarches, walk without 
 shoes, sleep without tents, fight without trembling, and die without fear ! 
 All these things have been done from Texas to Maryland. They can listen 
 to the bursting shells without quaking knees, and watch the flashing guns 
 without blinking eyes. They have heard and seen them in a hundred 
 battles. You cannot startle them with the enemy s numbers ; they have 
 met that enemy on a hundred fields without a count, save of the slain and 
 captured ! They can bury their fallen comrades, and still press on. Ah ! 
 ten times ten thousand quick-shoveled mounds hide the still clenched teeth 
 and fearless miens of sleeping braves from Oak Hills to Gettysburg. They 
 are in the valley of the Mississippi, and, to their memories, the great father 
 of waters will mingle a hoarse, deep dirge with the tolling bells of floating 
 steamers, while commerce shall gather the rich fruits of their labors. They 
 are among the hills of Georgia, and the sweet, winding Etowah shall hymn 
 their requiem, as long as the iron mountain, around whose base she pours 
 her waters, shall remain. And Virginia unrivaled old mother holds 
 them, to-day, all over her great, wide bosom ; and there she will ever hold 
 them, richer, in them alone, than India with her treasures, and prouder than 
 Egypt lifting her changeless pyramids to the skies ! 
 
 And what is it, so richer than wealth ; so dearer than home, and wife, 
 and children ; and so more valued than ease, and health, and life, that for it, 
 the true, brave soldier, is willing to lose all, and endure, and suffer, and toil, 
 and fight, and die, and never falter ? It is that without which there can be 
 no enjoyment in wealth, no home for family, no safety in ease, and no pleas 
 ure in life. It is the honor and independence of our country ! And do you 
 suppose that these gallant heroes, who have lost so much, who have endured 
 so much, who have suffered so much, and who have buried so many, and all 
 to defend and maintain that honor and independence, will tamely agree, that 
 you, who have never felt the sirocco touch of this war s wild blast, shall now 
 surrender all national honor and independence forever ? Will they agree 
 that you shall say all their privations have been endured in the cause of 
 treason ? Will they, at your bidding, lay down their arms, and, like peni 
 tent felons, trust the enemy they have been fighting, for pardon ? Will they 
 ever consent that you, taking the friendly hand of the enemy who slew them, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 281 
 
 shall go over the fields of Manassas and Fredericksburg, Shiloh and Chicka- 
 mauga, and write above the graves of their comrades who are resting there, 
 that^blackest of libels " Traitors lie here " ? Will Georgia write that epi 
 taph for Bartow, and Cobb, and her thousands of sons who have fought 
 and died to illustrate her honor? Will Virginians write it for Jackson? 
 Whose hand shall write it, and not be paralyzed? Whose tongue shall 
 utter it and not grow speechless ? Who will bear the message to those 
 foreign nations who are carving statues and erecting monuments to his 
 memory, to forbear the unholy work of perpetuating the name and features 
 of a traitor? But even if the army could endure all this, and lay down 
 their arms, think you they would not grasp them again when they should 
 see that nobler than Brutus, that purer than Cromwell, and that greater than 
 Washington, the glorious Lee, led up to the prison stand to receive the sen 
 tence of an inveterate, or the pardon of a penitent culprit, from the mouth 
 of such a jester as Lincoln ? Enough ! enough ! Away with the thought 
 of peace on such terms. "Pis the wildest dream that restless ambition, or 
 selfish avarice, or slinking cowardice could conjure in the highest flight of 
 the most anguished imaginings ! The day you make friends with the 
 enemy on any such terms, you will make eternal enemies of your own brave 
 sons and brothers who have been defending you against the malice of that 
 enemy. You will have an enemy in every household, a battle by every 
 fireside, and a war that shall blight your fields, and curse the land with hor 
 ror forever ! 
 
 For glory is the soldier s prize. 
 
 The soldier s wealth is HONOR. 
 
 But even if our people and army were all to agree to submit to Mr. Lin 
 coln s terms, we should not have peace. No, not even if our negroes should 
 not be armed, or even the emancipation proclamation should be abandoned. 
 Policy, safety, and passion would all combine to drive our enemies into a 
 foreign war, and every man in the Southern army would be at once ordered 
 to the conflict. Our sons, husbands, and brothers would be marched from the 
 Mississippi into Mexico, or from the James into Canada, or, perhaps, into 
 both! Let us not .deceive ourselves! The day of compromise did exist. 
 It lingered long. It has gone forever ! There is now for us no safety, no 
 property, no honor, no peace, no hope, save in independence. 
 
 The next question, therefore, becomes an important one : What are our 
 resources for prosecuting a defensive war ? 
 
 These resources are of two kinds, physical and moral. Physical 
 resources consist in men, in supplies, and in arms and munitions of war, and 
 in the means of producing and procuring them. 
 
 It was my fortune to be one of a joint committee, recently appointed by 
 the two houses of Congress, and charged with the duty of inquiring into the 
 condition of our resources, present and prospective, for the maintenance of 
 the public defense. After a lenthy examination, the committee had the 
 happiness to conclude and to report, unanimously, that our resources were 
 sufficient, and, with energy and vigilance, were available for the prosecution 
 of the war until independence was won. 
 
 It may not be improper to state to you some facts on this branch of the 
 subject : 
 
 We have more than half a million of white men within the military age, 
 east of the Mississippi River. 
 
 Taking the whole country together, east of that river, and we find pro- 
 
SENATOR B. It. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 visions though scarce in some places were never more abundant. We 
 have supplies in North Carolina and Virginia sufficient to sustain General 
 Lee s armies until harvest. 
 
 Notwithstanding recent losses, we have an abundant supply of heavy 
 ordnance and field artillery. We have more small arms than men on duty 
 to hold them. We have machinery now on hand sufficient to manufacture 
 fifty-five thousand rifles and muskets (not counting pistols and carbines) 
 ptr annum. This is more than twice the number manufactured in the 
 whole United States before the war. What will critics who can find nothing 
 efficient in our new government say to this fact alone ? We need mechan 
 ics in this department. 
 
 We have, and can manufacture within ourselves, powder enough to 
 carry on the war indefinite!} 7 ". Lead is not so abundant as powder, but suffi 
 cient. 
 
 Thus, you see, God has not left us without all the physical means neces 
 sary for our defense in this trying struggle. Truly, it seems He hid away 
 in our earth all things needful for us, and at the critical hour of want he 
 uncovers them for our use. 
 
 The moral resources of a nation consist in the will the spirit the 
 determined and united purpose of the people. These resources are devel 
 oped in the highest strength, when all the people determine to use all 
 the physical resources to the one great end of defending, protecting, or 
 establishing their national integrity and independence. This will must be 
 manifested by faith faith in God, in our cause, in ourselves, in our gov 
 ernment, and in our army. This faith is manifested by a readiness a 
 cheerfulness to do, to suffer, and to sacrifice. It is the province of the 
 clergy to teach you faith in God. I trust no man now needs to be taught 
 faith in our cause. The exactions of the enemy have made that cause 
 righteous far above all precedent. When this war began, no people ever 
 exhibited a sublirner faith in themselves, their government, and their army. 
 None will admit they have lost faith in the army or in the people. But, 
 in this struggle, the army, the people, and the government are almost the 
 same. Certainly neither can be strong, when either is weak ; neither can 
 survive, when either shall fail. And the cause, which all are required to 
 defend, cannot succeed when these shall give way. Now, the skill of a 
 commander is generally exhibited by finding out and attacking his adver 
 sary s weakest point. Our enemy have not been stupid or blundering on 
 this point. 
 
 From the beginning, Mr. Lincoln and his followers have desired to 
 weaken and destroy our government, well knowing that whenever the people 
 of the army should abandon the government, we should be effectually 
 destroyed in all respects. 
 
 Indeed, they believe, that if they can disaffect our people to any one 
 branch of the governnient, especially to the President, we shall necessarily 
 fail. This great fact is made very distinct by Mr. Lincoln s last message. 
 He says : " On careful consideration of all the evidence accessible, it seems 
 to me that no attempt at negotiation with the insurgent leader could result 
 in any good. He would accept of nothing short of the severance of the 
 Union. His declarations to this effect are explicit, and oft repeated. He 
 does not attempt to deceive us. He offers us no excuse to deceive ourselves. 
 We cannot voluntarily yield it. Between him and us the issue is distinct, 
 simple, and inflexible. It is an issue which can only be tried by war and 
 
fflS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 283 
 
 decided by victory. If we yield, we are beaten. If the Southern people 
 fail him, he is beaten." Here Mr. Lincoln puts the whole issue of the 
 struggle on one single point. He does not say, if our army fails ; if our 
 munitions of war fail ; if our supplies fail ; if our cities fall ; if our States 
 are overrun, or if our currency becomes worthless, we are beaten. No. 
 Mark his words : " If the Southern people fail." Fail what ? Fail the 
 cause ? No. Fail the Congress ? No. Fail the President ! " If the South 
 ern people fail him, he is beaten ! 
 
 I repeat, from the beginning, our enemies have never expected to subdue 
 us by the failure or exhaustion of our physical resources. They have 
 expected us to fail in our moral resources. They have relied upon disaffec 
 tion among our people to our government, and chiefly to the President. 
 And in this fatal work we have had enemies within as well as without. 
 " Why," said the greatest of Roman orators and the purest of Roman states 
 men, " why are we speaking so long about one enemy ; and about that 
 enemy who avows that he is one ; and are saying nothing about those who 
 dissemble, who remain at Rome, who are among us ? Whom, indeed, if it 
 were by any means possible, I should be anxious not so much to chastise as 
 to cure, and to make friendly to the republic; nor, if they will listen to me, 
 do I quite know why that may not be." 
 
 Never were words more applicable. That enemy who avows he is one, 
 who bears arms in his hand, who meets us in battle, is not our worst, our 
 most dangerous enemv. We have enemies who deceive themselves ; who 
 
 / 
 
 dissemble ; who are here among us. And if we are conquered, subjugated, 
 disgraced, ruined, it will all be the work of those enemies among us ; and 
 they will accomplish that work by destroying the faith of our people in their 
 own government. Oh, if I had a voice to-day which could reach every man, 
 woman, and child in the Confederacy, and could open their eyes to this one 
 ffreat truth, our independence would be secured beyond the possibility of 
 failure. 
 
 There are many among us engaged in promoting this work of disaffection. 
 They act from different motives, and are in different degrees of guilt. Many 
 are uninformed and thoughtless, and do not really design to do mischief. 
 Some are misguided ; some are deceived ; some are designing, and some 
 are employed by the enemy. To most of these I allude "not so much to 
 chastise as to cure, and to make friendly to the republic." 
 
 Many of our people were opposed to secession as a remedy for our 
 grievances. They regarded it as revolution, and believed it would bring, in 
 its train, the evils of revolution. Most of them are earnest and devoted 
 supporters of our government. This government has been regularly adopted 
 by the people is a living entity by the " consent of the governed," and 
 cannot be abandoned, except by another revolution. And another revolu 
 tion now, can never lead us back to the old Union, but would lead, with 
 multiplied horrors, inevitably to subjugation. It is natural, therefore ; it is 
 consistent, that these men should give all their energies to sustain the 
 government, and should deprecate the spirit of disaffection as the wiliest 
 serpent of the crisis. Occasionally, however, we find some of these, who are 
 unable to follow principle above prejudices, who still dream of the " leeks 
 and the onions," and who, deprecating one revolution, would insanely rush 
 us into another, whose losses, sufferings, and evils would be tenfold those of 
 
 _ 7 ^j 7 
 
 the present. I trust not one of them will linger in his regrets and prejudice, 
 after hearing of the Hampton Roads conference. For one, I buried the 
 
284 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OP GEORGIA. 
 
 Union as I buried my father from necessity, and in sorrow of heart. I 
 would not, I could not, unbury it now ; for, decayed and fetid, it would 
 stench the earth. A fanatical abolition despotism has been erected on the 
 ruins of the old Union, and Southern honor could not live in its Upas 
 shadow. 
 
 Many of our people went early and earnestly into the secession move 
 ment, from the highest motives that can actuate patriots. Many of them 
 failed in their judgment of results ; doubtless looking more to the right 
 than the questions of the hour. These have vindicated their faith with the 
 highest proofs which the noblest heroism can offer. Some have endured 
 every privation of the camp ; some have been lifting their voices urging the 
 people to sustain the government ; some have practiced self-denial, and 
 held their substance for the common cause: some have given their lives, 
 and passed away. These all let us honor as countrymen, and love as brethren. 
 Almost before the bill became a law, the gallant Bartow tendered his 
 Oglethorpes eager to be the first to enlist to serve during the war. I 
 suggested to him, that the position he then held chairman of the committee 
 on military affairs was an important one. "No, no," he said, "I cannot 
 stay here. Remembering my advice to the people, I feel that the front of 
 the fight is the only post of honor for me." On his last trip from home to 
 the army, the lamented Cobb called to see me. During our conversation, he 
 said : " I do not like war ; it is shocking to me. I desire to live a Christian, 
 and do only the peaceful work of a Christian. But I urged the people of 
 Georgia to secede. I did not think war would result, but it has resulted, 
 and I cannot remain out of the service and look honest people in the face ! : 
 
 Noble Georgians ! The State, the people, posterity, will honor your 
 memories and commemorate your virtues ! 
 
 But all our secession friends were not Bartows and Cobbs, nor Bennings 
 and Colquitts. Many of them were very brave when no battles were to be 
 fought, and very liberal when no burdens were to be borne. These " had 
 not much earth," and under the first rays of scorching war they " withered 
 away." They may be found in shady places ; many of them protected by 
 militia or other commissions, which they would have scorned before the war ; 
 and their chief business is to abuse the government they are unworthy to 
 serve. 
 
 Some men, as bankrupt in honor as in fortune, hurried into the revolution 
 to make money. They early sought the positions suited to their purposes, 
 and, regardless of oaths as of duties, have violated the laws, abused their 
 powers, levied contributions upon the patriotism of the country, and demor 
 alized the people. 
 
 In all countries, some people are naturally timid, and others are made so 
 by circumstances. Some are fearful of losing life, and some are fearful of 
 losing property ; and prematurely concluding that, because the vessel of war 
 is rocking in the storm, it must necessarily sink, they tie their gold about 
 them, and leap into the shoreless sea of subjugation. 
 
 Others, again, went into the revolution with sonorous voice and lofty 
 stride, to reap the honors in liberty s new struggle. They will curse any 
 government they cannot rule ; and will be a curse to any people who will 
 follow them. Desperate gamblers ! Mad for losses, they would stake their 
 country in another game of revolution, only for one more chance to win 
 honors. 
 
 Lastly, we have some peculiar characters among us, more fully developed 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS: 285 
 
 by this revolution than in any previous one. These are men, who, adding 
 to a natural vanity a long domination in party tactics, have become absolute 
 in their opinions, and are unable to see how those who differ with them can 
 possibly be right or wise ; or why their counsel should be sought and not 
 followed. These find the conduct of the war is not precisely according to 
 the policy they may have deemed best. Therefore, fealty to the sovereignty 
 of their opinions requires them to believe we shall fail. They, accordingly, 
 prophesy we will fail ; they find reasons for proving we will fail, and never 
 seem to suspect that the very course they are pursuing is helping to failure. 
 
 Out of these various classes that triune curse of all revolutions the 
 croaker, the critic, and the traitor is formed. Add to these the spies sent in 
 or brought up among us by the enemy, and you have the different materials 
 which, though immalleable in themselves, form the solid column which, day 
 and night, is assaulting the government, and striving to batter it down in 
 the confidence of the people. Having nothing to keep them together but a 
 common hatred to the government, it is the testimony of all history that 
 whenever they succeed in destroying the government, they invariably fall to 
 fighting each other, and the people who are deluded to follow them divide 
 into factions, and rush headlong into anarchy. 
 
 The two characters which furnish the most dangerous materials for this 
 work of disaffection and demoralization are the avaricious and the 
 ambitious. 
 
 I have nothing to say against legitimate trade. The man who made his 
 living by honest trade before the war, if not called into military service, may 
 properly continue his calling. The honest middle man is necessary to the 
 non-producing class of society. Nor will I stop now to develop the sin of 
 the unofficial citizen who takes advantage of political, social, and commercial 
 disruptions to gather fortunes. It would be expecting too much of our 
 people to look for the sublime spectacle of universal self-denial. Neverthe 
 less, if it could have been so, this stream of blood would long since have 
 ceased. 
 
 But I cannot pass by the office-holding speculator, without leaving on 
 record my opinion of the unpatriotic and ruinous nature and effect of his 
 dealing. I deny that office-holders have the right to speculate at any time. 
 All history shows it is corrupting ; and no government ever remained faith 
 ful to itself, or to the people, whose administrators became traffickers. But 
 in times like these, the error becomes a crime a crime against the public 
 faith and the public weal. 
 
 It was very clear from the beginning, that this war could only be con 
 ducted on the public credit. The note of the government was certainly to 
 become the only currency with the army and the people. It, therefore, be 
 came the solemn official duty of every man in office, State and Confederate, 
 to make, to administer, arid to execute the laws with special reference to the 
 protection and preservation of this credit. It is another fact, equally clear 
 in reason, and beyond doubt in the history of the times, that the amount of 
 profits in trade has been measured by the amount of depreciation of this 
 public credit. Here, then, is the dilemma : It is the office-holder s duty to 
 
 */ 
 
 preserve the public credit ; it is the speculator s interest to depreciate that 
 credit. If the office-holder and the speculator be one, which feeling will con- 
 trol duty or interest ? I deny that any man has the right to make the con 
 flict or that any people ought to risk the hazard. 
 
 Nor can the subject matter of the trade change or lessen the guilt. It is 
 
286 SENATOR JS. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 the speculation, not the thing speculated in, that depreciates the credit. In 
 fact, large dealings in property, stocks, bonds, and foreign commerce, are 
 the more culpable because they do more to depreciate the credit, and furnish 
 a more unrestrained field for the elasticity of conscience, than dealing in 
 provisions. And provision dealers only hoard their supplies, because they 
 know property dealers will certainly carry up the price by depreciating the 
 currency. 
 
 r 
 
 Speculations are, besides, exciting and absorbing to the mind, and no man 
 so habitually engaged can be fit for the grave and heavy duties of official 
 station in times like these. 
 
 The example, also, is disastrous. When people see those whose duty it is 
 to represent the public interest, and preserve the public credit, engaged in 
 trafficking, they engage themselves more readily in the business ; and sub 
 ordinate officers throughout the country are glad to cover their sins with the 
 example of those in higher station ; and thus the contagion permeates all 
 degrees of office and all ranks of society. The public credit rapidly depre 
 ciates ; the public debt, and the public burdens, rapidly increase ; demoral 
 ization spreads ; the guilty become corrupt and careless ; the honest become 
 troubled and discouraged ; the critics find grounds for cavil ; and the gov 
 ernment is weakened in all its sinews. 
 
 Plato had a maxim, that " when officials bought and sold, the State 
 became corrupt." 
 
 It was forbidden in Sparta, and by positive laws in Rome. Yerres, as 
 Governor of Sicily, violated this law, and went back to Rome, at the close of 
 his service, immensely rich. But the eloquence of the great and pure Cicero 
 has made him infamous to this day. 
 
 " Whence comes it," said Demosthenes, in one of his patriotic appeals to 
 arouse the Athenians, " that all the Greeks once panted so strongly after 
 liberty, and now run so eagerly in servitude ? The reason is, because there 
 prevailed, at that time, among the people, what prevails no longer among us, 
 that which triumphed over the riches of the Persians ; which maintained the 
 freedom of Greece. Neither their orators nor their generals exercised the 
 
 O 
 
 scandalous traffic now become so common in Athens, where a price is set 
 upon everything, and where all things are sold to the highest bidder." 
 
 History is full of examples, from Demosthenes to Washington, that true 
 statesmen have always declaimed against official traffic ; and that a people 
 who tolerated it have always suffered heavy penalties. It is gratifying to 
 know, that among the highest officers of our Confederate government this 
 sin does not prevail. 
 
 Those men among us, who became disaffected because of disappointed or 
 ungratified ambition, are by far the most dangerous. They are often men 
 of ability and experience, and generally furnish the arguments for all, who, 
 from any cause, oppose the government. They exhibit a "devilish malice r 
 in the adroitness by which they clothe falsehoods in the garb of truth. 
 They profess great love for the Constitution, the rights of States, and the 
 liberties of the people generally ; and manifest that love by denouncing all 
 the strong measures of the government, adopted to carry on the war, as un 
 constitutional, oppressive, and subversive of civil liberty. All governments, 
 in revolutions of half the magnitude of this, have found it necessary to sus 
 pend the privileges of the writ of habeas corpus. All history shows this is 
 necessary to restrain treason and secret schemings to undermine and destroy 
 the government, It is necessary to protect the patriotic and the faithful. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 287 
 
 It is aimed to weaken the arm of disaffection. It is natural that all those 
 who work disaffection should oppose the suspension, and very many good 
 men become alarmed by their earnest appeals, lest the government is seek 
 ing to become a military despotism. 
 
 Again : It is not possible to conduct a struggle of such proportion 
 without employing many agents throughout this vast country. It is 
 equally impossible always to secure intelligent, upright, and faithful 
 agents, and many of them violate the laws and deal oppressively with the 
 people. All these acts of faithless agents are ascribed to the government 
 and the laws by the designing and disaffected critics. 
 
 There are many hardships incident to the war. Burdens are necessarily 
 heavy. Marauders rob the people and defy the laws. Disasters will happen 
 to our arms. The stronger power will overrun the country and commit 
 desolations. Strong measures are absolutely necessary to compel men to 
 discharge dangerous and unpleasant duties, and make sacrifices. All these 
 things are inseparable from war. Yet critics and designing men never lose 
 an opportunity to ascribe all these hardships and misfortunes to the blun 
 ders or incompetency of those who administer the government and conduct 
 the war. This is a favorite species of argument not only with critics, but 
 also with spies and traitors. It is easily made plausible. It comes home to 
 the feeling of the people, and it requires intelligence and patriotism to 
 detect the miserable sophistry. It seems to exhibit also a sympathy with 
 the people, and thus secures their confidence, and thus prepare the way 
 to misrepresent the acts and malign the motives of those in power, and thus 
 to disaffect the people. 
 
 The Southern people are naturally confiding, and designing men always 
 profess good motives. The serpent professed a great regard for mother 
 Eve when he sought to disaffect her to the Ruler of Heaven. He made her 
 believe that God was a despot and dealt untruly with her. And from that 
 day to this, that has been a favorite argument and a favorite manner of 
 using the argument, to disaffect a people to constituted authority. Cati 
 line used it in Rome. Arnold used it in the first revolution. And, though 
 I will not say, for I do not believe, all who are using it now are Catilines 
 and Arnolds, yet I will say that every Catiline and Arnold, every spy and 
 traitor in the land, are using all these very arguments this very day, and 
 for the one great purpose of disaffecting the people to the government. If 
 the curtain which conceals men s hearts could be lifted, I have no doubt 
 there are men now in this country in the employ of the enemy, editing 
 papers, and in various ways, and from many positions, instructing the pub 
 lic mind. Remember, " twas not Philip, but Philip s gold, that took the 
 cities of Greece ! " 
 
 If a man desires only to do justice and circulate the truth, why should 
 he misrepresent facts, pervert the laws, and attribute false motives to the 
 government? Why is it that neither the Congress, nor the President, can 
 do anything to please them ? Why do they use arguments which justify 
 desertions from the army, and then attribute these desertions to the policy 
 and laws of the land ? 
 
 It has been found necessary, in all revolutions like this, for the govern 
 ment to keep its secrets. There are many facts and reasons entering into 
 the making of the laws, and in conducting the war. which the enemy ought 
 not to know. The Congress of the first revolution sat in secret. Our Con 
 gress has found it necessary to do the same. Now, how can he be honest, 
 
288 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 or true, or patriotic, who represents to the people that the object of 
 the Congress is to conceal the votes, and hide the reasons of the mem 
 bers ? 
 
 Of all the assaults that are made upon the President, and the Cabinet, 
 and the Congress, I regard none as so manifestly dishonorable, as the advan 
 tage which is taken of this very necessity of secrecy. The heaviest assaults 
 are made on these very measures and operations, the reasons for which are 
 often most necessary to be concealed from the public enemy. It matters 
 not how many misstatements are made, how many false motives are charged, 
 there can be no defense, for defense would require the truth to be told, and 
 this would damage the public interests. This is taking advantage of the 
 patriotism of those in authority, to destroy the public confidence. Can 
 anything in treason itself be more dishonorable? 
 
 I have heard the President say, on several occasions, " If my enemies 
 would tell falsehoods which injured only me, it would be a matter of small 
 moment. But they make statements, utterly perverting the truth, which 
 damage the public interests, and which cannot be corrected without expos 
 ing facts which would damage the public interest still more greatly." 
 
 Washington often made similar complaints. In one of his letters to Mr. 
 Laurens, he uses this strong language : 
 
 My enemies take an ungenerous advantage of me. They know the delicacy of my 
 situation, and that motives of policy deprive me of the defense I might otherwise make 
 against their insidious attacks. They know I cannot combat their insinuations, however 
 injurious, without disclosing facts which it is of the utmost importance to conceal. 
 
 How is it possible that men who will take such a dishonorable advan- 
 tagecan be patriots ? And how can those who are patriots believe anything 
 such men say ? 
 
 The greatest generals cannot escape the criticisms of these designing 
 "sappers and miners" of the public confidence. They assume to know 
 more about military campaigns and military strategy than the best com 
 manders. 
 
 In one of the most trying periods of Roman history, Paul us Emilius a 
 great and good man was called by the unanimous voice of the people a sec 
 ond time to the consulship. He determined to take command of the army, 
 then engaged in a hard struggle in Macedonia. Before leaving Rome, he 
 called the people together, and made them a speech, which was so full of 
 wisdom that it has been preserved to this day. Allow me to read you a 
 portion of that speech. He said : 
 
 There are those who, in company, and even at tables, command armies, regulate the 
 disposition of the forces, and prescribe all the operations of the campaign. They know 
 better than we, where we should encamp, and what posts it is necessary for us to seize ; 
 at what time, and by what defile, we ought to enter Macedonia ; where it, is proper to 
 establis hour magazines ; from whence, either by sea or land, we are to bring provisions ; 
 when we are to fight the enemy, and when to lie still. They not only prescribe what is 
 best to be done, but, for deviating ever so little from their plans, they make it a crime in 
 their Consul, and cite him before their tribunal. [In this day, they would call a 
 convention, to amend the Constitution, to get rid of him.] But know, Romans, this is a 
 great Impediment with your generals. All have not the resolution and constancy, like 
 Fabius, to despise impertinent critics. He could choose rather to suffer the people, upon 
 such rumors, to invade his authority, than to ruin the business of the State, in order to se 
 cure to himself their good opinion, and an empty name. If there be any one who con 
 ceives himself capable of assisting me with his counsels, in the war you have charged me 
 with, let him not refuse to do the republic that service, but let him go with me into Mace- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 289 
 
 donia ; a ship, horses, tents, provisions, shall all be supplied at my charge. But, if he 
 will not take so much trouble, and prefers the tranquillity of the city to the dangers ami 
 fatigues of the field, let him not take upon him to hold the helm and continue idle in port. 
 \Ve~shall pay no regard to any counsels, but such as shall be given us in the camp itself. 
 
 The learned historian who reports this speech, makes the following 
 pointed comment : 
 
 This discourse of Paulus Emilius, which abounds with reason and good sense, shows 
 that men are the same in all ages of the world. People have an incredible itch for exam 
 ining, criticising, and condemning the conduct of generals, and do not observe that by so 
 doing, they act in manifest contradiction to reason and justice ; for, what can be more 
 absurd and ridiculous than to see persons, without any knowledge or experience in war, 
 set themselves up for censors of the most able generals, and pronounce with a magiste 
 rial air upon their actions ! But we must not expect to see a failing reformed that has its 
 source in the curiosity and vanity of human nature ; and generals would do wisely, after 
 the example of Paulus Emilius, to despise these city reports and crude opinions of idle 
 people, who have nothing else to do, and have generally as little judgment as business. 
 
 Meeting with General Lee, soon after General Bragg was relieved of the 
 command of the Army of the Tennessee, and feeling great interest in the 
 question, I asked him to suggest to the President the most proper general to 
 take command of that army. He promptly said he knew of no better officer 
 in the service than General Bragg. I told him I certainly pronounced no 
 opinion against General Bragg, but right or wrong, critics, or subordinate 
 officers, or both, had destroyed his usefulness with that army, and some one 
 else would now have to command it. 
 
 "This is true unfortunately true," said the great man, and then, with a 
 dignified sarcasm I shall never forget, he made the following speech : " We 
 made one great mistake, Mr. Hill, in the beginning of this revolution, and 
 I fear we shall never get rid of the blunders that follow from it. We put 
 all our worst generals to commanding our armies, and all our best generals 
 to editing newspapers ! These editing generals alone can see beforehand 
 everything that ought to be done in a campaign, and how a battle ought to 
 be fought, and never make mistakes. I have planned several campaigns and 
 battles and have taken great pains and -flfct my best, and sometimes I have 
 thought they could not be improved ; but when I had gone through with 
 the campaign or fought the battles, I have seen where they could have been 
 better, and have had to regret I could not foresee and avoid some of the 
 errors. Afterward, on reading some paper, I found those best generals 
 saw all the mistakes from the beginning, but were not kind enough to point 
 them out until it was too late. And now," added the patriot, " I desire to 
 serve my country in this struggle in any position in which I can be useful. 
 [ think we ought to have our best military talent in the field. I have done 
 the best I could commanding the army, and I know I have committed errors 
 and made failures ; and if some of these better generals will come and 
 take my place, I am willing to do my best to serve my country editing a 
 newspaper." 
 
 I have endeavored to be explicit in explaining the causes which impair 
 our moral resources, and thereby prevent the efficient use of our physical 
 resources, because I know they constitute the greatest obstacle in the way 
 of our success. The enemy may overrun our country, but they can never 
 hold it without the consent of our people. They conceded this much when 
 they abandoned Atlanta. Our people will never consent to subjugation, 
 unless their minds are first disaffected to our own government, " If the 
 
290 SENATOR B. R. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Southern people fail the insurgent leader," said Mr. Lincoln, " he is beaten." 
 Mr. Lincoln knows he can never be beaten in any other way. The critics, 
 the spies, and the traitors among us know it. These are our most danger 
 ous enemies, because they alone can assault and destroy this fidelity of the 
 people. Mr. Lincoln confesses his hopes lie in this infidelity. He says, 
 " Some of them we know, already desire peace and reunion. The number 
 of such may increase." Yes, they are among us, and they will increase. 
 We had but few of these critics and destroyers of the public confidence in 
 the beginning. As the war has progressed, and its burdens increased, and 
 its hardships multiplied, they have increased. They thrive on their coun 
 try s disasters. We shall have other disasters, and they will grow in bold 
 ness and numbers. They have always done so. They strengthen on the 
 misfortunes that befall our cause and oppress our people, as the vultures 
 fatten on the torn flesh of their prey. 
 
 They have already done much to produce and justify desertions from the 
 army. They have done much to dissatisfy the people, and induce them 
 to hold back their supplies. They have done much to prevent our recogni 
 tion by foreign powers. They have done much to encourage Mr. Lincoln 
 in the hope that the " Southern people would yet fail their leader, and cause 
 him to be beaten." They have done much to break down every movement 
 at the North calculated to stop the shedding of blood, and to inaugurate the 
 peaceful councils of negotiation; for the North will never negotiate while 
 they are made to believe they can conquer. They have done much to pro 
 long this war, and to murder our people in battle. I know the time has 
 come when these enemies within will make fresh assaults, with greater bold 
 ness ; and therefore it is I have come home to raise my voice of warning 
 against them. I know the grievances, all petty and imaginary, that redden 
 the eyes with vengeance and make the words drop oily from the tongue, 
 while the purpose grows dark in the heart ; and I dread this day the subtle 
 power of the serpent that coils within the garden, far more than I do a mil 
 lion of bayonets bristling without the walls ! 
 
 There is but one way to fight these enemies among us. The people must 
 support the government which Mr. Lincoln, and these, his co-workers, fight. 
 It is your government, my countrymen. It is fighting your battles, and toil 
 ing, day and night, to establish your rights and liberties. Support the 
 President; support the laws ; support the generals ; supply the army ; drive 
 off the traitors ; confound the critics ; and then you will be able to defy 
 the enemy ; arrest disasters, and win independence. There are many roads 
 to failure and bondage. You may drift there by lethargy ; you may wind 
 there by treason ; you may rush there by faction. There is but one road to 
 success and freedom, It may be narrow, and require toil and patience and 
 sacrifice, but you are certainly traveling that road, when you support your 
 own regular Confederate Government. Every man who teaches you other 
 wise is your enemy. 
 
 And never had any people a government which they could more safely 
 trust. You may summon a thousand conventions ; you may let every 
 carping factionist be tried in his turn ; you may cross your lines, and select 
 from all the cabinets of the world, and you will get no better chief execu 
 tive than him whom God and your own votes have given you. 
 
 You may resurrect all the Alexanders, and Napoleons, and Washingtons, 
 of all ages of the world, and you will never get a better general than your 
 own unrivaled Lee. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 291 
 
 And, if you could combine in one, the power of the Macedonian Phalanx, 
 the fidelity of the Roman Legion, and the earnest fire of the French Guards, 
 you could not get a better army than that composed of your own sons, 
 brothers, and husbands, who have fought on an hundred fields ; who have 
 endured untold privations, and who still, unmurmuring, unfaltering, and 
 unflinching, face the mongrel invaders of our homes. 
 
 My faith has grown with every year of the struggle. That faith rests 
 on the known patriotism of our leaders ; the tried courage of our army ; 
 the virtue and intelligence of the people, and the justice of a chastising and i 
 mercy of a not always offended God. The campaign of 1864 has taught 
 me to know what I always believed that this vast country cannot be held 
 by an enemy against the will of our people. I dread no enemy, therefore, 
 as I do the factionist. But I know the same enemy helped the hosts of 
 Persia against the Greeks, and was overcome. This enemy helped the 
 power of the conquering Hannibal against the yet feeble Romans, and was 
 overcome. This enemy helped the haughty and cruel Spaniard against the 
 Netherlands, and was overcome. This enemy joined the ranks of the 
 British and Indians and Tories against our fathers under Washington, and 
 was overcome. And I believe the Confederates are as brave as the Greeks, 
 patriotic as the Romans, determined as the Dutch, and as true as even their 
 fathers. And neither of these were ever threatened with such a fate as 
 that with which our enemies threaten us. When every other resource shall 
 fail, the cruelty of our enemy s terms of peace will still drive us to resist 
 ance. It is natural we should be punished severely, because our sins have 
 been many. For many years, in the old government, wrangling aspirants 
 for place, losing sight of the great duties of statesmanship, were solely 
 engaged in heating the furnace of passion and hate. In the beginning of 
 this revolution there were deceptions and frauds and errors on all sides ; 
 but the Abolitionists alone moved to their work with deliberate, calculating 
 malice against the rights of man and the decrees of God. Therefore, while 
 all of us must suffer, the enemy must finally fail. 
 
 We are able to come out of this struggle with constitutional govern 
 ment retained, with liberty enjoyed, and with slavery preserved. The first 
 two are our rights, and so dear, that war with them is better than peace 
 without them. The last is God s law, and He is stronger than any arm of 
 flesh. 
 
 If a man shall stand on the banks of the Mississippi, and watch the mis 
 fortunes that occur upon, and by reason of the waters of the mighty river, 
 he will see much to sadden and discomfort him. He will see that when a 
 man falls in the middle of the stream, he can swim to neither shore, but 
 must go to the bottom. He will see floating palaces striking snags, or meet 
 ing with other accidents, and going beneath the mocking waves with all on 
 board. And, anon, he will see the flood swell high and break from its 
 bounds ; and now he will see beautiful homes swept away ; and man and 
 beast alike perishing in the deluge. And then, if he will close his eyes, and 
 not see that for one man who perishes in that river a thousand live from it ; 
 that for one steamer that sinks, a thousand ride safely, with wealth, and life, 
 and joy, over its surface ; if he will not survey the wide alluvion spreading 
 from either bank, gathering richness from the swelling flood, and producing 
 food and raiment for millions of people throughout the earth, he would 
 naturally conclude that philanthropy required the waters should be stopped, 
 and the long, deep channel dried. And then, with vivid pictures of drown- 
 
292 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 ing men, and sinking steamers, and submerging homes ; with song and 
 story, in pulpit and council chamber, he might excite the imaginations of a 
 fanatical people, and arouse them to the expenditure of labor, and money, 
 and life, to stop the flow of that river. And when the high, long obstruc 
 tion should be completed, and the triumphing dreamer should leap to the 
 summit, and command the waters back ; the dancing, rushing, laughing 
 floods, breaking away on every side, and mocking the puny creature, would 
 cry with ten thousand voices : God bid us go to the Gulf, and thither we 
 are going, though we deluge a continent on the way ! 
 
 So the foolish Abolitionist looks upon slavery, and can see nothing but 
 its stripes, its labors, and its bondage. He will not see that for every stripe 
 there are a thousand blessings. He will not see that no pauper population 
 of any age, in any country, was ever so well fed, so well clothed, so lightly 
 worked, so cornfotred with home, and so instructed in religion. He will not 
 see that this disciplined labor, while it protects society, and keeps the negro 
 in contented, happy subjection, is furnishing food and raiment to millions all 
 over the world even to the Abolitionist himself and to his children. 
 Therefore he magnifies the evils of slavery. He arouses the imaginations 
 and passions of an uninformed and fanatical people. He sets at defiance the 
 solemn covenant of a well-considered and time-honored compact of govern 
 ment. He disrupts society, desecrates the pulpit, defames the Senate hall, 
 and prostitutes learning and science. He gathers millions of men for 
 slaughter, and billions of treasures to be wasted. All, all that an easy bond 
 age may be broken, and a happy slave turned loose ! And suppose, like the 
 dreamer with the floods, he shall seem for a time to succeed. Suppose that 
 the restraints, which bind four millions of these people to duty, shall be with 
 drawn. Who that knows the negro, or has faith in God, does not see the 
 result? Bright homes will be destroyed, rich fields will cease to bear, 
 millions will become hungry and naked, society will rush toward barbarism, 
 and government to anarchy and despotism. The continent will be deluged 
 in blood ; and, after all, the poor scattering negroes, like the uncontrolled 
 and uncontrollable waters driven from their natural course, will wander in 
 unknown ways, weakening the more, the farther and longer they wander ; 
 caring for none, and shunned by all ; destroying and destroyed wherever 
 they go ; until at last, they will return to the channel of servitude which 
 God marked out for them to follow, and will bear, in happy usefulness again, 
 the burden of their destiny. For He who bid the waters go to the sea, said 
 also, by His servant, that Canaan should serve his brethren. 
 
 Man s impious devices can no more annul God s moral decrees than his 
 puny arm can subvert God s physical laws. He may pervert and obstruct 
 both for a time, but always with confusion and punishment to himself. It 
 was such transgression that put death in nature, doomed the Ethiopian to 
 bondage, and filled the human heart with sorrows. But He who hath the 
 power will also show the mercy. And as long as the Mississippi shall roll 
 Ids floods to the Gulf, roaring, in eternal thunders, praises to Him by whose 
 command the waters come and go, so long will the serving children of 
 Canaan sow and reap in the valley made rich by this coming and going ; 
 and, happy with food and raiment, home and family, faith and hope, shall 
 hymn in daily thanksgivings praises to Him whose goodness also made this 
 land of the Confederate the African s paradise ! 
 
 Contending, then, only for what God has approved, and contending, also, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECIIES, AND WRITINGS. 293 
 
 for all that rewarded the toils of our fathers, and all that can give us hope 
 for our children, let us dedicate all that we are and have, anew to the con 
 test. Let us, from this day, think no thought, speak no word, do no deed, 
 but for our country, until that country shall be free. Let us hare no 
 friends but the friends of our country ; let us have no enemies, but the 
 enemies of our country. 
 
 Who can fall, if his country shall rise? Who would rise, if his country 
 shall fall? Friends, neighbors, countrymen ! we all, all shall rise if we will 
 only 
 
 Onward in faith ! and leave the rest to Heaven. 
 
SPEECH DELIVERED IN ATLANTA, GA., ON THE NIGHT OF 
 
 JULY 16, 1867. 
 
 This is known as the " Davis Hall " speech, so called from the name of the hall in 
 which it was delivered. 
 
 It was the first speech made in the South against the Reconstruction measures of Con 
 gress, and was the beginning of Southern rehabilitation, the inspiration to united effort 
 that had glorious fruitage in the redemption of the State from the rule of ignorance and 
 corruption. It was a time of great danger and required courage of a high order to speak. 
 One who was present described the scene as follows : 
 
 " The hall was insufficiently lighted, and the pallor of men s faces in the pit almost 
 put to shame the lamps that flickered here and there. Mr. Hill appeared in a full dress 
 suit of black. His superb figure showed to best advantage, his gray eyes flashed, 
 and his face pallied into dead white with earnestness. Just before he began the Federal 
 generals, in full uniform, with glittering staff officers, entered the hall and marched to the 
 front, their showy uniforms and flushed faces making sharp contrast with the ill dressed 
 crowd of rebels through which they pushed their way, and sat in plain censorship over 
 the orator and his utterances. With incomparable unconcern Mr. Hill arose. The 
 threatening presence of the soldiers, the jails that yawned behind them, the dangers that 
 their slightest nod would bring, had no effect on him. Without hesitation he launched 
 his denunciations on their heads and on the power they represented . For two hours he 
 spoke as mortal man seldom spoke before, and when he had done Georgia was once 
 more on her feet, and Georgians were organized for the protest of 1868 and the victories of 
 1870. " It is to be regretted that this speech was not stenographically reported, and Mr. 
 Hill never revised it, and we can only present a synopsis. 
 
 Ladies and Fellow-citizens : Human governments, like everything else 
 human, naturally tend to decay. They can only be preserved by constant 
 watchfulness, courage, and adherence to correct principles. These remarks 
 apply with unusual force to free governments, which are the most difficult 
 of all to maintain. If we, the people of the United States, were the first in 
 history who had attempted the experiment of living under a democratic or 
 republican form of government, we might be excused if we failed to dis 
 cover the symptoms of approaching death, and to apply the remedies to 
 preserve our liberty and the blessings we have heretofore enjoyed. But we 
 are not the first who have made this experiment. Other peoples and nations, 
 for thousands of years, have had commonwealths, republics, and democra 
 cies, which have risen and fallen times almost without number. I but assert 
 a great truth one which finds no contradiction or exception in all history 
 when I say that the great leading and substantial causes of the decay of 
 freedom in all countries, have ever been the same. How inexcusable must 
 we be if we fail to discover the symptoms, and how cowardly and recreant 
 if we fail to apply the proper remedy to prevent so foul a death ! 
 
 No people ever commenced to build up a free government under such 
 favorable auspices as we. What a climate, soil, variety of productions, and 
 material resources do we possess ; and what an ancestiy and what a common 
 struggle for liberty did our fathers pass through ! Did any people ever 
 before commence with such advantages ? Rome commenced as a small 
 city, and was despised by the barbarians around it. She extended her 
 power by her arms and increased till at last she became mistress of the 
 world. We commenced with such a people, country, and productions as no 
 
 294 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WAITINGS. 295 
 
 people ever had before, and we had fewer dissensions and elements of dis 
 cord than any people ever suffered from ; and Providence, as if to separate 
 us from the crimes and corrupting influences of the old world, spread out 
 this great continent before us, with the wide sea to separate us from them, 
 with no influence of monarchy and oppressive systems to threaten or make 
 war upon us. If we fail, it will be by our own folly. What excuse can we 
 render to our posterity and to the world if we, in this day, with the lessons 
 of history before us, allow free institutions to perish on this continent ? 
 And our race will have been the soonest run. We have not yet lived a 
 century. It is but seventy-eight years since the Constitution was framed, 
 and but ninety-one years since independence was declared by our fathers, 
 while the commonwealth of Rome lived four hundred years before the 
 measures which produced her decay were proposed. What a spectacle ! 
 The best people, the richest soil, the most valuable productions, established 
 as if by the Providence of God, as a new era in the history of the world and 
 bidding fair to be the shortest lived of any free government in the history 
 of nations ! 
 
 There is no difficulty whatever and I assert it without fear of contradiction 
 in discovering when and how a nation is dying. I cannot now go into an 
 a,natysis of all the symptoms of national decay and death. It is only important 
 to present the leading one,which controls all others which existing, produces 
 all others, and which, being remedied, cures all others. Then hearit : thegreat 
 symptom of the decay and death of a government is the disregard of the 
 fundamental law of that government. Whenever a people come to treat 
 lightly their own fundamental law, they have arrived at the most dangerous 
 point that is possible short of entire destruction. Republics above all other 
 kind of governments are maintained by respect for law. If the people of 
 the United States fail to have a sacred regard for their own law, which is 
 not, like that of other nations, to be ascertained by argument, by decisions, or by 
 searching, but is a plain and wisely written Constitution, they will deserve 
 that awful fate that awaits them ; and he who disregards its plain language 
 has no excuse to shield himself from the infamy of a traitor. Old as it is 
 trampled upon, torn, and tattered as it is, it is still the Constitution of our 
 country and the law of our country. I charge before Heaven and the 
 American people this day, that every evil by which we have been afflicted is 
 attributable directly to the violation of the Constitution. Tinkers may 
 work, quacks may prescribe, and demagogues may deceive, but I declare to 
 you that there is no remedy for us, and no hope to escape the threatened evils, 
 but in adhering to the Constitution. 
 
 Fellow-citizens, pardon me while I say that in presenting my views, I 
 think of no living man, individually, to whom my remarks are to apply. I 
 have come to talk freely to you about the dangers of the country. Little 
 minds ascribe little objects to those whose views they do not agree with, and he 
 has attained an unenviable reputation whose friends say, " You mean him," 
 when I am speaking of treachery and showing the evil consequences of a 
 certain line of policy. I have no personal attacks to make on an enemy, even 
 if I have one. God knows, if I could, with my own hands, I would gladly 
 place a crown of imperishable honor on the brow of my most bitter foe, 
 if I could thereby rescue my country from the perils that environ it ! But 
 if I have an enemy, and have a vindictive spirit^ and desired him to become for 
 ever infamous, I could ask no more of him than that he should support the 
 liellish schemes of those who are now seeking to subvert the Constitution and 
 
296 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 destroy our liberty. He is digging a grave for himself which posterity will 
 never water with a tear. Let him alone. I have come to discuss the present 
 phase of the revolution. 
 
 We have had a war which raged furiously for four years. It originated 
 simply in a difference of opinion as to our rights under the Constitution. 
 This difference existed from the first. It existed among the framers of the 
 Constitution. It could not be settled by argument, and an appeal was made 
 to the sword. In was an open, manly fight. There was nothing secret or 
 ambiguous in the issue. It was waged by men influenced, in the masses, by 
 patriotic emotions on both sides ; and it was not to destroy the Constitution, 
 but to assert on each side their different views. On our side it was asserted 
 that the States were separate and independent sovereignties, and that the 
 Constitution was a compact, which each party was at liberty to dissolve at 
 will, and so we seceded and declared ourselves out of the Union. On the 
 other hand, it was contended that we were not out of the Union notwith 
 standing our secession acts ; and that the Constitution was not a compact, 
 but a binding law upon the States resulting from a compact, and therefore 
 no one of the number could dissolve the connection at will. Upon this issue 
 we went to war. The war was fought till we laid down our arms and agreed 
 to what our enemies said that we were in the Union. + 
 
 But there is now another question to settle. It is still within the range 
 of argument. Its proportions are huge. The issues are startling. It is not 
 a difference of opinion as to what the Constitution means, and what are our 
 rights under it ; but its object is plainly, unmistakably, to set aside the Con 
 stitution and provide something else. I have never doubted that we were 
 coming to this issue. In speeches made by me, five, six, eight, and ten 
 years ago, I predicted this, and every page of our history since that time 
 has verified the correctness of the prediction. The people of the North 
 honestly love the Constitution, but the leaders there hate it and intend to 
 destroy it, and the convulsion through which we have passed has thrown 
 the opportunity of making the effort into their hands, and the present mili 
 tary bills, and the one which is not yet promulgated as law, are the means 
 adopted to accomplish their design. These bills are proposed for our accept 
 ance. There is a remarkable feature in these measures, that while force is 
 employed to execute them, they are yet nominally submitted to us for our 
 acceptance or rejection. 
 
 I object to the whole scheme, because it is unconstitutional. A distin 
 guished man pardon me, I ought to say a notorious individual said to me 
 a few days ago, that I ought not to waste time to prove the unconstitution 
 ally of these measures a thing which every man, woman, and child in the 
 country knew and yet he was for accepting ! He spoke truthfully. That 
 tottering, gray-haired candidate in Pennsylvania for perpetual infamy, who 
 is building for himself a monument of malignity that will overtop the pyra 
 mids of Egypt, said the Constitution had nothing to do with it. I shall 
 never get done shuddering, and horrors will never cease to rise up in my 
 mind, when I see men taking an oath to support the Constitution, and then 
 legislating to put in force measures which are outside of it. A great many 
 of our own people flippantly say the Constitution is dead. Then your 
 rights and hopes for the future, and all hope for your children are dead. I 
 ask every man, if the Constitution is dead, why are we al \vays, every day, 
 and at every new step, required to take an oath to support it? 
 
 Now, I affirm that these military bills are not only contrary to the Con- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 297 
 
 etitution, but directly in the face of the amnesty oath you were required to 
 take after the surrender. The government thought proper, in accepting 
 your submission, to take your oath to support the Constitution of the United 
 States and the Union of the States. Why was that oath required if the 
 Constitution was dead ? 
 
 But it is said the Constitution does not apply to us. Then don t swear 
 to support it. 
 
 But it is said again that we are not in the Union. Then why swear to 
 support the Union of these States ? What " Union does that mean ? 
 When you took that oath, was it the Union of the Northern States alone 
 that you swore to support ? What business have you with that Union ? 
 No, it is the Union of all the States known to the Constitution that you^have 
 sworn to support. 
 
 But they say that oath was prescribed by the President, and that he is not , 
 loyal. Then I must answer a fool according to his folly, and a traitor ac- 
 co*rding to his treason. What do they require who passed these bills this 
 military Juggernaut ? They require every man who registers his name to 
 vote, to swear to support the Constitution, and counsel and persuade others 
 to do so and still it is said the Constitution has nothing to do with it ! 
 They say the scheme is outside of the Constitution, and yet, in the process of 
 carrying it out, they require an oath to support the Constitution and to 
 counsel and persuade others to do so ! That is more than Mr. Johnson ever 
 required in the oath which he prescribed. 
 
 It is my business to support the Constitution, and my duty and pleasure 
 to persuade others to do so. Some of you who favor the acceptance of the 
 military bills take an oath to this effect, and still intend to vote for a con 
 vention which you admit to be ordered contrary to the Constitution ! How 
 is this ? If you have a conscience, I have said enough. If you vote for the 
 convention you are perjured ! Oh ! I pity the race of colored people who 
 have never been taught what an oath is nor what the Constitution means. 
 They are drawn up by a selfish conclave of traitors to inflict a death-blow 
 upon the life of the republic by swearing them into a falsehood ! They are 
 to begin their political life Jby penury to accomplish treason ! I would not 
 visit the penalty upon them. They are neither legally nor morally respon 
 sible, but it is you educated, designing white men who thus devote your 
 selves to the unholy work who are the guilty parties ? You prate about 
 your loyalty ! I look you in the eye and denounce .you ! You are morally 
 and legally perjured traitors ! You perjure yourselves and perjure the poor 
 negro to help your treason ! You can t escape it ! You may boast of it 
 now, while passion is ripe, but the time will come when the very thought 
 will wither your soul and make you hide from the face of mankind. 
 
 I shall discharge the obligation of the amnesty oath. It required me to 
 support the Constitution and the emancipation of the negro, and I do. I 
 will not bind my soul to a new slavery, to hell, by violating it. I talk 
 plainly, but I simply want to strike through the incrustation of the hardened 
 conscience, and make men feel and realize their true situation. 
 
 I have proved that these military bills violate the Constitution, and that 
 you, in carrying them out, violate it and your amnesty oath and your 
 registry oath. And what is your purpose ? It must be a great good you 
 seek to induce you to commit so much crime and folly. 
 
 Sometimes men wink at what is, by strict technicalities, wrong in the 
 individual, to accomplish some great good to the public. I do not recognize 
 
298 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 the correctness of such action ; but what do you propose by trampling upon 
 the Constitution and violating your own solemn oaths ? Is it to save the 
 State and preserve liberty ? This is not the object, but the purpose is as 
 infamous as the measure resorted to to effect it. You first propose to abro 
 gate your State governments by authority of the so-called Congress a mere 
 conclave of a portion of the members of that body. By whom is this 
 dictated ? The principle that whoever forms a government should form it 
 for themselves as well as for others, is a correct one ; but the men who pro 
 pose this for us do not live in any of the ten States to be affected by their 
 legislation. It is not made to suit either black or white, or any other class 
 of our people, but to suit themselves, while they are not affected by it ; and 
 if you act upon their proposition, in a manner to suit yourselves, you will 
 not be accepted by them ; nay, you violate the Constitution to subvert the 
 government. And by carrying out these measures you disfranchise your 
 own people. Suppose we concede, for argument, that it is right to enfran 
 chise all the negroes ; if this be right, by what principle of law or morals 
 do we disfranchise the white people ? " Oh, but," you say, " the whites have 
 been rebels. Then they should all be disfranchised, and not a part of them. 
 Besides, the government you are to frame is to be a civil government and 
 last for all time and for peace, when there can be no rebels. I see it stated 
 that General Sickles has advised that the disfranchising feature be repealed 
 or modified, and for the reason that the enfranchised class are not fit to fill 
 the offices. Well, if he has done so, he has acted wisely, and has shown 
 himself capable of appreciating one truth. And it is a great truth one 
 that will hide a multitude of sins ; and it might be well for his fame if this 
 recommendation alone could be remembered of his administration. In the 
 face of the fact that a republican government can rest upon and be per 
 petuated only by the virtue and intelligence of the people, you propose to 
 exclude the most intelligent from participating in the government forever ! 
 
 You will by these measures inaugurate a war of races. A people who 
 will abrogate their own government and disfranchise the most intelligent of 
 them at the dictation of those who are not to be affected thereby, and live 
 under the dictation of a foreign power, have no conscience ; but if you have 
 a conscience I hope to reach it. By all you hold dear I warn you that by 
 accepting these military bills you inaugurate a measure that will exterminate 
 the African race. Some of you who have come among us are taking the 
 negro by the arm telling him that you are his friend, and that you gave 
 him his liberty ! Ye hypocrites ! Ye whited sepulchers ! ! Ye mean in 
 your hearts to deceive and buy up the negro vote for your own benefit. 
 The negroes know no better ; but I would ask them : If these men are faith 
 less to the Constitution of the country, how can they be faithful to you ? 
 
 Yet these men admit in the very act that they are disregarding the Con 
 stitution ! They take an oath to support it with the purpose and intent 
 formed beforehand to violate it, and vote for measures contrary to it ! They 
 are not fit to be trusted by any animal, dog or man ! Such a man would be 
 tray his pointer, and such a woman sell her poodle ! They are not capable 
 of being the friends of anybody but themselves. I don t pity the whites so 
 much who are to suffer by these measures. " You knew your duty and did 
 it not," and if you are beaten with many stripes we have the authority of 
 Scripture for saying that your punishment is just ; but to see the Africans 
 led off by a claptrap which they don t understand, and used because they 
 don t understand it, and thus led to the slaughter by men who are faithless 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 299 
 
 to every principle under the belief that they are being elevated and exer 
 cising God-given rights is enough to make any man feel sick at heart and 
 experience the deepest pity for the unfortunate race. 
 
 This is not the first time that such things have been attempted. Unfor 
 tunately, there have before been both fools and knaves in the world, and 
 some of you, it would seem, will not learn wisdom from the lessons of the 
 past. If the Constitution is dead, we are outside of it, and, pray, what gov 
 ernment have we ? We,have nothing, in that case, but the will of an un 
 lawful conclave, and don t you know this means only anarchy, and then des 
 potism and tyranny ? What inducement is held oufr to you to accept their 
 propositions ? You say it is to get back into the Union ! And for this you 
 are willing to submit to disfranchisement and the inauguration of a policy that 
 tends to a war of races ! all to get back into the Union just where you are 
 already, and always were ! 
 
 What do you want to get back into that sort of a Union for ? If you 
 are not now in it, what can you expect by getting in such as they present to 
 you ? You say it is to get representation in the Union ! Is not Kentucky 
 in the Union ? Has she any representation ? The telegraph informs us 
 that a resolution has been introduced into the so-called Congress making in 
 quiries whether Maryland, Delaware, and Kentucky have State governments 
 or not ! Are you so stupid as not to see what all this means ? The result 
 will be the substitution of the Radical party for all governments, both State 
 and Federal ; and the substitution of Radical will for all law ! Take that 
 home with you and digest it. That s where you are going ! Kentucky is 
 excluded from representation because it is alleged her representatives were 
 voted for by disloyal men. What is meant by disloyal? Every man who 
 does not support the Radical party will soon be declared disloyal, and every 
 State which does not vote the Radical ticket will be disloyal, and her govern 
 ment illegal. I tell you, unless patriotism shall wake up from the stun which 
 the horrid confusion of war has given it, the Radical party will be our only 
 government, and Radical will our only law. 
 
 J look for this revolution to go on. Whoever thinks this war upon the 
 Constitution will stop with the ten States is a madman, or a simpleton to be 
 pitied, or a knave to be despised. I have expected them to take charge of 
 Connecticut because she dared to elect a governor that did not agree with 
 the Radical party ; and sure enough Sumner in a late letter strikes that key 
 note. He says a similar bill for all the States is a short cut to universal 
 suffrage. The so-called Congress immediately on its meeting took charge 
 of Kentucky and excluded her whole delegation with one exception. If 
 they can reject these, they can reject every one who differs with them, and 
 they will do so ; and they will receive only those who agree with them. 
 These they will receive. I care not what may have been their sins hereto 
 fore ; if the very worst Secessionist in all the land will whine around the 
 
 p 
 
 streets and say he is Radical now, he is as good as the saints in heaven 
 for Radical purposes. They care not for race or color, nor for antecedents ; 
 if you now favor Radical schemes you are loyal, and if you oppose them 
 you are disloyal ! 
 
 But you say you are in favor of going into the Union, because if you do 
 not your property will be confiscated. A gentleman of this city a few days 
 ago said to me that he was in favor of the acceptance of these military bills 
 because he thought it the best we could do. I said to him : " You do not 
 say that for yourself, but for your brick stores ! r But, you are not half so 
 
300 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 wise as you are knavish ! You would lose the Constitution and the country 
 to save your brick stores, and thus, by your very course, you will lose your 
 brick stores also ! I am ashamed to talk or use arguments about confisca 
 tion in time of peace ! It is a war power, not known to international law 
 except as a war power, to be used only in time of war, upon an enemy s 
 goods ! Confiscation in time of peace is neither more nor less than robbery ! 
 
 But you say they have all the power and they will exercise it, unless we 
 do as they bid us. And will you, in this case, abandon your only protec 
 tion? It is like going out into the highway and surrendering your purse 
 to the robber to keep hfm from taking it. 
 
 I could introduce a great deal of high authority to establish this point, 
 but I will not insult the Radical portion of the audience by reading from 
 any authority for them, except from a Massachusetts judge. Here is what 
 he says : 
 
 It has been supposed that if the government have the rights of a belligerent, then, 
 after the rebellion is suppressed, it will have the rights of conquest, that a State and its 
 inhabitants may be permanently divested of all political privileges, and treated as foreign 
 territory acquired by arms. This is an error, a grave and dangerous error. Belligerent 
 rights cannot be exercised where there are no belligerents. 
 
 That is what I said : " Confiscation is only a war measure, and ceases 
 with the war." Again : 
 
 When the United States take possession of a rebel district, they mean to vindicate 
 their pre-existing title. Under despotic governments the right of confiscation may be 
 unlimited ; but under our government the right of sovereignty over any portion of a 
 State is given and limited by the Constitution, and will be the same after the war as it 
 was before. 
 
 There is one Lot in Massachusetts, and if Abraham were alive to-day I 
 would have him pray to God to spare, that State and trust it not only to 
 ten men, but even to one. There is at least one good man in it and he is a 
 judge, and dares to proclaim to all that security to property is given by the 
 Constitution, the same after as before the war. And now I will read for 
 the patriots of the audience something from the most distinguished of all 
 writers on international law : 
 
 When a sovereign, arrogating to himself the absolute disposal of a people whom he 
 has conquered, attempts to reduce them to slavery, he perpetuates the state of warfare 
 between that nation and himself. Should it be said that in such a case there may be 
 peace and a kind of compact, by which the conqueror consents to spare the lives of the 
 vanquished on condition that they acknowledge themselves his slaves ; he who makes 
 such an assertion is ignorant that war gives no right to take away the life of an enemy 
 who has laid down his arms and submitted. But let us not dispute the point ; let the man 
 who holds such principles of jurisprudence keep them for his own use and benefit ; he 
 well deserves to be subject to such a law. But men of spirit, to whom life is nothing 
 less than nothing, unless sweetened with liberty, will always conceive themselves at war 
 with that oppressor, though actual hostilities are, suspended on their part, through want 
 of ability. 
 
 My friends, this was written by a man who lived in despotic times ; by a 
 man who was taught under a despotic government ; and how his love of 
 liberty and law shames the praters about loyalty in free America. 
 
 But I will dwell no more on this subject. Confiscation is the law of 
 enemies in war, and in peace it is the law of the robber. If they have the 
 will to rob you, you will never escape by submitting to their power. If you 
 submit, give up the la\v and substitute the will of the robber ; he boldly 
 avows that it is his purpose not to give the black man his rights, but to 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 301 
 
 bring about such measures and so to shape things as to perpetuate the rule 
 of the Radical party ! Every man who joins the party, and can satisfy them 
 that he will sincerely help in this work, will be accepted. They will put their 
 arms around your necks and call you brothers. You can make a friend of 
 the devil upon these same terms, and there is but little difference between 
 them. If you please the one you will go to the other, and I am not sure but 
 you will get what you deserve ; but I object to your taking the country 
 with you. 
 
 But, oh ! it is sad to see the Constitution trampled upon and the country 
 destroyed, only to perpetuate their hellish dynasty ; and then to see some of 
 our own people join in this unholy work, calling upon us to submit and 
 become the agents of our own dishonor ! This is sad, sorrowful, and fills 
 me with shame! 
 
 These bills propose at every step to abrogate the Constitution trample 
 upon the State and its laws to blot out every hope to perjure every man 
 who accepts them, with every principle of honor, justice, and safety dis 
 regarded, trampled upon, and despised all to perpetuate the power of 
 their wicked authors. Can this scheme succeed ? Will it succeed ? That 
 is the question. I feel truly thankful in my heart that I have an answer 
 which lifts my soul amid all the gloom and apprehension of the hour. 
 Some of you may not appreciate it, but to me it is the only oasis in this 
 desert. This scheme will never, never succeed, and I proclaim its ultimate 
 failure to-day in your hearing. I know that some think it will. The air is 
 full of the words of those who proclaim that there is no power to prevent 
 it. Men have before this been weak and foolish, and cowards and traitors 
 have before believed as you talk now, but I have a reason for the faith that 
 is in me, which is absolutely sublime in the strength of its foundations. 
 
 First. It will fail because it is not possible to perpetuate a government 
 of force under the forms of a democracy. It may take some time to com 
 prehend this thought, but you will not forget it. That which is now pro 
 posed is force. It is proposed by men who do not live in this State, and 
 whose agents do not live here ; and it is sought to be accomplished by 
 military power, but under the pretense of your sanction not to please 
 yourselves, but them. There is not an instance in history where a govern 
 ment of force has been perpetuated under the forms of free institutions. 
 It is an impossibility, and can never succeed. 
 
 Second. But it is sought to be accomplished by deceit and fraud, 
 which cannot much longer escape detection. The masses of the people of 
 the North love the Constitution, and fought for it and the Union, but the 
 leaders did not fight for it, and do not love it ; and they now seek to 
 destroy it under pretense that we must give some further guarantee for our 
 future good behavior than merely supporting the Constitution. As soon 
 as the means by which their deceit and fraud have been covered up are 
 removed, the scheme will be crushed to death by the people. It is a double- 
 shaped monster, like the sentinel at Hell-gate, which can live nowhere 
 except in a political pandemonium. 
 
 And what must be the results ? I do not say we will come out of all 
 this with free institutions preserved, but this scheme can never succeed. 
 A despotism over the whole country and over all the people, guilty and 
 innocent alike, may ensue. You will fail, but you may bring ruin upon all. 
 Whenever you pull down the temple of liberty, you also will be crushed by 
 the fall. You cannot level or lower us and elevate yourselves. We must 
 
302 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 either all rise or all go down together. Despotism may come, empires may 
 rise and fall among us, but whether they do or not, we shall not have the 
 reign of a Radical party. Understand me : If I say a man cannot live high 
 up in the air, I do not mean he cannot go up in a balloon and remain for a 
 time, or if I say a man cannot live under water, I do not say he cannot go 
 down in a diving bell and remain a while ; but the Radicals will as cer 
 tainly fail to perpetuate their power under this scheme, as that a man will 
 fail who attempts to dwell in the air, or drown who makes his home under 
 water. Such a government would be unnatural a political monstrosity 
 and cannot possibly last ; but you may destroy the forms as well as the 
 principles of free government, and then you will have a monarchy, an autoc 
 racy, an empire, or a despotism, as the case may be. 
 
 This very scheme was attempted in Rome by much better men than you 
 Radicals are, and for a much better reason than you give. It is not origi 
 nal with you. You are but plagiarizing traitors at best, and get your 
 scheme from the criminals of long ago. If I did steal, I would try to steal 
 something better and from a more respectable source. 
 
 If you will examine, arid compare with former times, the productions of 
 such men as Stevens, Phillips, and Sumner, and the lesser followers and sec 
 ond-hand plagiarizers down South, you will find all their miserable jargon 
 about " liberty and equality," the " natural right of man," and " the born 
 right of manhood s suffrage," are borrowed from the men who fomented 
 social and civil wars in Rome, and which have been repeated in every age 
 since, by those who have no statesmanship but the devilish ability of exciting 
 ignorant men to cut each other s throats. Republican Rome had an immense 
 number of slaves and freedmen, and non-voting citizens. She had a landed 
 aristocracy embracing comparatively few of her people. 
 
 An agrarian law was proposed, and for a time was immensely popular, 
 but it failed, and its first author was slain. His brother renewed the law 
 and enlarged it by proposing suffrage to the slaves and freedmen with equal 
 political rights. It was said " there could be no freedom without equality." 
 But the brother also perished. Then a great general became the leader of 
 the Radicals of that day, and he had more fame and merit and ability and 
 honesty than all the Radical party of this day combined, but he also failed. 
 And why did they all fail ? Because they were attempting to engraft a 
 government of force and robbery upon republican forms attempting the 
 absurd task of making equal things which God had made unequal attempt 
 ing equality by taking that which industrious and frugal men had made 
 and giving it to thriftless vagabonds, and by depositing in the keeping of 
 ignorance and vice, powers and trusts which intelligence alone can know 
 how to exercise and preserve. But by the struggle Republican Rome per 
 ished and never knew liberty again. Nor was this all ; her history from the 
 beginning of the agrarian attempt was one of blood and faction, and waste 
 and ruin, until the goal of empire was reached. In the social and civil wars 
 which marked the struggle, more than seven hundred thousand of her best 
 citizens were slain, and, besides these, whole populations of some of her 
 most populous territories were exterminated. 
 
 It may be that we of the United States have been so crazy in leaving the 
 Constitution the only ark of safety that our Heavenly Father has doomed 
 us to perish, but I am gratified with a hope that it is not so. If not, there 
 is but one method for our rescue, and that is by a prompt restoration of the 
 Constitution. Will it come ? Will we escape an agrarian war, with result- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 303 
 
 ing despotism, and save our institutions for our children ? I hope we shall. 
 I believe we shall. Though a great effort is being made a designed 
 effort to destroy us as Rome was destroyed, I believe the effort will fail. 
 I have great faith in the Anglo-Saxon blood. I derive great encouragement 
 from Anglo-Saxon history. Our liberty was not born in a day. It is not 
 the work of one generation. It is the fruit of a hundred struggles, and its 
 guarantees have been perfecting for eight hundred years. Many have been 
 the efforts to destroy it. Often the English Constitution was trampled on. 
 Often traitors sought to substitute arbitrary will for well-established law, 
 and often have the people for a time been misled. But thus far they have 
 always waked up and called the traitors and factionists to account. 
 
 Charles I trampled on the Constitution. He had judges who decided that 
 his will was the law, and all who resisted that will and defended the Con 
 stitution were punished as disloyal. And it did seem as if his power was 
 irresistible. No doubt if you weak-kneed Radicals of the South had lived 
 in that day you would have said, " the Constitution is dead and we must 
 consent to what we cannot resist." But John Hampden would not consent. 
 He resisted. He was tried as a criminal for resisting, and was condemned. 
 But what was the sequel ? The people finally asserted their power. Charles 
 and his ministers perished. The very judges that condemned Hampden were 
 themselves tried and condemned as criminals, and the very officers, even the 
 sheriffs who executed the orders of Charles and his courts, were sued by the 
 citizens for damages, and had to pay nearly a million of dollars for execut 
 ing the processes of a void, unconstitutional law ! For a time traitors held 
 the power and trampled on rights, but vengeance came, and perpetual 
 infamy followed. 
 
 So Cromwell and his parliament violated the Constitution, and though 
 they also flourished for a season, they too were overthrown. So James II 
 trampled on the Constitution, and had to fly from his kingdom a fugitive 
 for life. In all these struggles good men, for a time, suffered, and bad men, 
 for a time, ruled, but the English race have never yet failed to rescue their 
 Constitution from the power both of traitors and fanatics. 
 
 I tell you the American people will not always be deceived. They will 
 rise in defense of their Constitution and traitors will tremble. They who 
 rallied three million strong to defeat what they considered an armed assault 
 on the Constitution and Union, will not sleep until a few hundred traitors 
 from behind the masked battery of Congressional oaths and deceptive pre 
 tensions of loyalty shall utterly batter down the Constitution and Union 
 forever. I warn you, boastful, vindictive Radicals, by the history of your own 
 fathers, by every instinct of manhood, by every right of liberty, by every 
 impulse of justice, that the day is coming when you will feel the power of 
 an outraged and betrayed people. Go on confiscating ! Arrest without 
 warrant or probable cause ; destroy habeas corpus; deny trial by jury; 
 abrogate State governments ; defile your own race, and flippantly say the 
 Constitution is dead ! On, on, with your work of ruin, ye hell-born rioters 
 in sacred things ! but remember for all these things the people will call you 
 to judgment. Ah ! what an issue you have made for yourselves. Succeed, 
 and you destroy the Constitution ! Fail, and you have covered the land with 
 mourning. Succeed, and you bring ruin on yourselves and all the country ! 
 Fail, and you bring infamy upon yourselves and all your deluded followers ! 
 Succeed, and you are the perjured assassins of liberty ! Fail, and you are 
 defeated, despised traitors forever ! Ye who aspire to be Radical governors 
 
304 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 and judges in Georgia, I paint before you this day your destiny. You are 
 but cowards and knaves, and the time will come when you will call upon the 
 rocks and mountains to fall on you and the darkness to hide you from an 
 outraged people. 
 
 y Does it do you good to trample on the Constitution deceive the 
 v negroes and ruin the country ? It may be sweet now, but I tell you the 
 sulphurous fires of public infamy will never be quenched on your spirits. I 
 pity you from my soul. Would that the time had never come when I had 
 to stand upon Georgia s soil and thus talk to Georgians. A struggle is 
 coming. It may be a long and bloody one, and you who advocate this 
 wicked scheme will perish in it, unless the people now arouse and check its 
 consummation. Let every true, law-loving man rally at once to the stand 
 ard of the Constitution of his country. Corne. Do not abandon your rights. 
 Defend them. Talk for them, and if need be, before God and the country, 
 fight and die for them. Do not talk or think of secession or disunion, but 
 come up to the good old platform of our fathers the Constitution. Let 
 all, North and South, come and swear before God that we will abide by it in 
 good faith, and oppose everything that violates it. The man who loves the 
 Constitution now, and is willing to live and die for it, is my friend and 
 brother, though he come from the frozen peak of Mt. Washington ; and the 
 man who is for trampling upon it is my enemy, and I shall hold him so, 
 though he come from the sunny clime of the orange and the cotton bloom. 
 That is my issue. 
 
 Oh how sorry a creature is the man who cannot stand up for the truth, 
 when the country is in danger. There never was such an opportunity as 
 now exists for a man to show of what stuff he is made. How can you go 
 about the street and say, "All is wrong, but I cannot help it ? " You want 
 courage, my friend ! You are a coward ! You lack courage, to tell the 
 truth, and would sell your birthright for a temporary mess of pottage, even 
 for a little bit of a judgeship or a bureau officer s place. 
 
 But some one says : " How will you resist it ? I will resist it first by 
 not approving it. If everybody would do that it would be effectually 
 resisted so far as we are concerned. But the so-called Congress has pro 
 vided a cover for itself in advance, under which to hide from the odium 
 attaching to this scheme. It has provided that you can vote either for against 
 a convention and again vote for or against whatever constitution it may 
 frame. It is sought to make us responsible for whatever may be the conse 
 quences and relieve them. After a while, when you become alarmed at the 
 results, they will say, " We did not do this. We only gave you a chance and 
 you did it." 
 
 But if we defeat this, it is said, military rule will continue. Certainly 
 until wicked men shall be driven from power. But let it be so. General 
 Pope seems to be a gentleman, and I infinitely prefer his rule to the rule of 
 such men as you will get under this scheme. Besides, the new govern 
 ment, if inaugurated, will not be able to live a day without military protec 
 tion. It is safer to be governed by power than by treachery. 
 
 Perhaps you will think I have overdrawn the picture of the fearful con 
 sequences of accepting this scheme. I recollect an incident which occurred 
 over six years ago, when I was urging the people of Georgia not to secede, 
 because the country would thereby fall into the hands of Radicals, and pre 
 dicted war and its attendant sufferings as the result though then deemed 
 visionary. I would be almost ashamed now to read my remarks of that day 
 
fffS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 305 
 
 my picture would be so tame and so far short of the dreadful reality that 
 has followed. A very prominent gentleman replied to me, urging that there 
 would be no war, and, to prove it, he read an article from Horace Greeley s 
 Tribune and old Ben. Wade s speech declaring the South had a right to 
 secede, and if she chose to exercise that right they should be allowed to do 
 so in peace. He then said that Greeley and Wade were better friends of 
 the South than I, who was born here, for I was trying to frighten the 
 Southern people from the exercise of a right which they conceded, and they 
 were representative me., of their party. What could I say in reply? I could 
 only tell him the truth that these men only desired to encourage the South 
 to disunion for their wicked purposes to destroy the Constitution ; and that 
 a great government could not be dissolved without blood ; and what have 
 Greeley and Wade done since that time ? And now I advise you to reject this 
 scheme of force, fraud, and deceit which Congress has devised. If you, of 
 your own free will, submit to it, you will see the consequences of it. 
 
 I advise you to register. There is no dishonor in that. It is arming 
 yourself with an important power to be wielded against the nefarious scheme, 
 but don t vote for a convention don t go for anything whatever which is 
 an assent to the scheme, but be against it at every step. Never go half way 
 with a traitor, nor compromise with treason or robbery. If they hold a 
 convention, vote against ratification vote against all their measures and 
 men, and indict every one who, under such void authority, invades your 
 rights according to existing State laws. That s my policy. Fight this 
 
 O O V 4r 
 
 scheme all the time. I have no more idea of obeying than John Hampden 
 had of paying ship-money, because I have taken an oath to support the Con 
 stitution, and I intend to keep it. 
 
 This whole scheme is in violation of all the issues of the war all the 
 promises during its progress and all the terms of surrender. More than a 
 hundred thousand men abandoned Lee s army because they were assured 
 that if they laid down their arms they would be in the Union again with all 
 their rights as before. I knew the promise was false, and warned you against 
 the seductions of the syren. The people the soldiers of the United States 
 were then willing to fulfill the obligation ; but the politicians intended to 
 deceive you. Such men as Sunnier and Stevens never intended to carry out 
 the pledge of the nation. They would acknowledge the independence of 
 the Confederate States to-day, before they would agree to restore the old 
 Union, even with slavery abolished. I respect the Northern man who 
 honestly fought for the Union, but I despise the traitors who, under the 
 name of the Union, have used the Northern people to destroy the South, 
 and then to destroy the Constitution. The people of the North have been 
 long discovering this deception, but they will be compelled to see it before 
 the traitors can go much further in their worl:. 
 
 How many people in Atlanta belong to the " loyal league " ? I warn all 
 decent men to abandon such dens. I know the times have been such that 
 many good men have naturally gone astray. But save yourselves before it 
 is too late ! Destroy all the evidences of your membership bind all your 
 comrades to mutual concealment of the fact that you were members and 
 come out. You are pardonable for the past ; but if you continue you 
 will be covered with shame, and your very children will disown you. Come, 
 join the Patriots League. Our only pledge is to support the Constitution 
 love its friends and hate its enemies, and proclaim our love and hatred at 
 noon-day and from the house-tops. Save yourselves now, or be forever lost 
 
306 SENATOR B. It HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 to decent society and your own self-respect. All the brave and true men, 
 even at the North, respect me this day more than they do you. The very 
 Radicals will use, but even they will despise, the Southern man who becomes 
 their sycophant. 
 
 My colored friends, will you receive a word of admonition ? Of all the 
 people, you will most need the protection of the law. You will most suffer 
 by anarchy and usurpation. Do you believe that the man who is faithless 
 to the Constitution of the country will be faithful to you ? If a man will 
 take an oath to support the Constitution and then violate it, can you rely 
 upon his keeping any promise to you ? No ; I tell you such people are 
 friends to nothing but their own interest. They are betrayers of the Con 
 stitution to keep themselves in office ; they desire to use you to help them 
 get office, and they will betray you whenever they find it to their interest 
 to do so. 
 
 They tell you they are your friends. It is false ; they are your very 
 worst enemies. They tell you they set you free. It is false. These vile 
 creatures who come among you and put themselves on a level with you, 
 never went with the army except to steal spoons, jewelry, and gold watches. 
 They are too low to be brave. They are dirty spawn, cast out from decent 
 society, who come down here and seek to use you to further their own base 
 purposes. 
 
 They promise you lands, and teach you to hate the Southern people, 
 whom you have known always and who never deceived you. Are you 
 foolish enough to believe you can get another man s land for nothing, and 
 that the white people will give up their land without resistance ? 
 
 If you get up strife between your race and the white race, do you not 
 know you must perish ? You are now ten to one the weaker race. You 
 will grow weaker every day. You can have no safety but in the Constitu 
 tion and no peace except by cultivating relations of kindness with those who 
 are fixed here, who need your services, and who are willing to protect you. 
 
 The same experiment which is now being attempted with you by these 
 Northern knaves who seek your votes, was attempted by similar people in 
 France for the negroes in Hayti. They passed laws to give the negroes 
 political equality abolished all distinctions of color and what was the 
 result ? There was first a war of classes : then a war between the whites 
 on one side and the blacks and mulattoes on the other. Then there was a 
 war between the blacks and the mulattoes, and neither white, black, nor 
 mulatto have ever seen peace or prosperity in Hayti since. 
 
 These men intend your extermination. Some of them are writ 
 ing books in favor of your extermination, and I have myself heard 
 some of them avow that you ought to be exterminated or driven from 
 the country. These are the same people whose fathers found the 
 Indians here. They declared the earth was the Lord s and belonged to his 
 saints, and that they were his saints. Then they killed and drove off 
 the poor Indian and took his lands. If you do not make and keep friends of 
 the Southern people, your fate is that of the Indians ! Woe to your race ! 
 You well know your race is not prepared to vote. Why do you care to do 
 what you do not understand ? Improve yourselves. Learn to read 
 and to write ; be industrious ; lay up your means ; acquire homes ; live in 
 peace with your neighbors ; and drive off, as you would a serpent, the mis 
 erable, dirty adventurers who come among you, and who, being too low to 
 be received into white society, seek to foment among you hatred for the de- 
 
LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 307 
 
 cent portion of the white race. You can always know a gentleman, whether 
 from the North or South, and all such respect and esteem for such will not 
 deceive you. Do not desire to vote until you are qualified to vote, and then 
 look for the right to be given, not in a manner that violates the Constitution, 
 but in accordance with it, and through your own State governments. I feel 
 more deeply for you than I do for the white race. White people ought to 
 know better than to disregard the laws and expect any good. But you do 
 not know the laws ; you do not understand deceivers. 
 
 I am willing, anxious to welcome among us good and true men from the 
 North, who come to help build up our country, and add to its prosperity. I 
 wish they would come on and come in multitudes. They will find us friends. 
 
 V / 
 
 But when I see the low, dingy creatures hatched from the venomous eggs 
 of treason coming here as mere adventurers to get offices through negro votes 
 to ride into power on the deluded negro s shoulders and creeping into se 
 cret leagues with negroes and a few renegade Southern whites, and talking 
 flippantly about disfranchising the wisest and best men of the land, because 
 they know it is the only possible chance for knaves and fools like themselves 
 to get place, I can but feel ashamed that such monsters are to be considered 
 as belonging to the human species. I warn you, my colored friends, if you 
 would be respectable in society, or prosperous in your purse, or decent in 
 your own feelings, to avoid all such people. They will hug you and call you 
 friend, and talk about your friends, but they will pull you down to 
 degradation, to sorrow, to poverty, and to shame. They have A T hite skins 
 but black hearts, and will ruin your characters if you associate with them. 
 
 . v 
 
 They are creatures born of political accidency and treasonable conspiracy, 
 and are the enemies of all good governments and of all decent people. 
 
 And now, my friends, of all races, of all colors, of all nations, of all sexes, 
 of all ages let us resolve to stand by our Constitution, and surrender it to 
 no enemy. This is our country. Let us resolve that we will never be driven 
 from it, nor ostracised in it. 
 
n. 
 
 SPEECH DELIVERED IN ATLANTA, GA., JULY 23, 1868. 
 
 This speech is known as the "Bush Arbor" speech, from the fact that it was 
 delivered under an immense bush arbor, prepared by the awakened Democracy of 
 Atlanta to shelter the great multitude that assembled. The writer was present as a boy 
 and heard the speaking that day, and the scene is ineffaceably impressed upon his memory. 
 Mr. Hill s " Davis Hall" speech and his " Notes on the Situation" had aroused great 
 enthusiasm in the State, and over twenty thousand people met in Atlanta on this 
 memorable day to hear Georgia s three greatest orators. Kobert Toombs spoke first. 
 His speech fell far below expectation and did not even quicken the pulses of Ihe vast 
 crowd. Howell Cobb followed. His oration was a grand combination of eloquence, 
 logic, and invective. The enthusiasm was intense when Mr. Hill rose to speak. The 
 cheering that greeted him was indescribable and lasted for several minutes. He was 
 very pallid, not only from that pallor always characteristic of the great orator, but he was 
 just recovering from an attack of fever. In scathing invective and impassioned eloquence 
 this speech surpasses any ever delivered on the hustings in Georgia. Yet, considering the 
 occasion and time of its delivery, it was universally regarded as consummate wisdom. 
 The people simply went wild with enthusiasm and excitement, and at its conclusion 
 Toombs rose in the presence of the crowd, tossing his hat in the air, and throwing his 
 arms around the speaker, shouted, " Three cheers for Ben Hill." 
 
 The speech was not well reported, and no report could give any conception of the 
 fervor of its delivery, and the reader can form little idea of its power and compass from 
 the synopsis preserved. 
 
 Mr. President and Fellow-citizens : I especially request entire quiet 
 while I attempt to address you to-day. In addition to the fact that I have 
 to follow two gentlemen who have no superiors on this continent, I am, un 
 fortunately, laboring under considerable physical disability, the extent of 
 which is not even known to myself. 
 
 I greet you to-day, my countrymen, with a joy and gladness that no 
 language can express. 
 
 One year ago I came, in my humble way, to this same city, to speak to 
 the people what I believe to be words of truth and soberness. There has 
 been quite a change since then. On that occasion I met, in a quiet, retired 
 room, some half dozen gentlemen, who had made up their minds to brave 
 the storm, that was coming upon us, at all hazards. That little band of half 
 a dozen in that private room has swelled to-day to thousands of freemen, in 
 the open air of this once more to be redeemed country. I must confess that 
 the history of the past year is one to me full of cheer and rejoicing. I may 
 differ with most of you, bnt I feel that during the past twelve months the 
 white race of the Southern States has done more to manifest heroism, endur 
 ance, and courage than any other people had ever manifested on a hundred 
 battle-fields. It is not uncommon for a people to lose their property ; it is 
 nothing new in the history of nations for a people to be defeated in battle ; 
 it is not even altogether new, unfortunately, that a people should lose their 
 cities and bury their dead, that they should be cowed in their spirits, arid 
 should be made almost hopeless of the future. But there is something else 
 which is possessed by every people far more valuable than property, far 
 more to be desired than cities, far more to be coveted than the victories of 
 war, and that thing you still possess, notwithstanding your enemies sought 
 to destroy it I mean your honor as a people. There were two propositions 
 
 308 
 
LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 309 
 
 made to you, which I would briefly state, so that you can see clearly what I 
 mean. The first proposition, which affected your honor, was, that a Congress 
 in which you were not represented a band of foreigners, not one of whom 
 has ever lived or expects to live upon your soil nay, men who have avowed 
 that they hate you, claimed the right to destroy the government you had 
 formed, and to dictate to you the formation of a new government. 
 
 This was done, too, right in the teeth of the Declaration of Independ 
 ence, which says that all government derives its authority from the con 
 sent of the governed. You are asked to forfeit your honor because a band 
 of foreigners men among whom you hr,d no representatives among whom 
 vou were denied representation who confess their hate of you these men 
 claimed the right to destroy the government which you had formed, and to 
 dictate the formation of another in its stead. None but slaves would have 
 acceded to such a demand, and none could have been other than slaves who 
 would consent to it. 
 
 The second reason why your honor as a people was so seriously involved, 
 is this : That in the formation of the new government which this foreign 
 power dictated, it was prescribed, as a necessary condition, that the intelli 
 gent and virtuous of your people those whom you had all your life deemed 
 worthy of the highest trust should be forbidden to participate, while those 
 who had been your slaves should be at liberty, without discrimination, to 
 participate. You were to form a government, under the dictation and by 
 the direction of a foreign power, and you, in the formation of the govern 
 ment, were to be deprived of the services of the intelligence and virtue of 
 your countrymen, simply because you had trusted them, and you had to submit 
 to the government being formed by those who had recently been your 
 slaves, ignorant and debased as they were. You w r ill remember now that 
 these are the reasons why your honor was involved. The base Congress 
 the unprecedentedly traitorous Congress who got its own consent thus to 
 attempt, in the day of its power, to dishonor an unarmed people this 
 Congress, I say, had a vague, lingering suspicion of the dishonor of its 
 scheme, and therefore provided a plan by which the infamy should seem to 
 spring from your own consent. Well, I confess truly that when I looked at 
 the picture, when I saw the issue and remembered that no people had ever 
 grown great who suffered their honor to be sullied no people had recov 
 ered from misfortune who had yielded their honor to the enemy when I 
 remembered all these things and saw the condition of our people, saw all 
 the dangers that surrounded them and the power that dictated these terms, 
 Oh God ! Thou and Thou only knowest the anxiety of my spirit ! When 
 the smoke of our burning cities went up to heaven, and our brave men fell 
 in battle, I was grieved exceedingly ; but when a whole people millions of 
 freemen were asked ordered commanded by power to sacrifice their 
 honor at the bidding of hate, and there were found those who whispered 
 that the sacrifice would be made, my heart did sink within me ; and when I 
 remember now the means and appliances brought to bear to compel you to 
 yield, I do rejoice in knowing that you refused. I have had only one point 
 to accomplish in this struggle ; some have troubled themselves about offices, 
 others about votes, others yet about carrying the election against the con 
 vention, and still others about the defeat of tho Constitution. For all this 
 I care nothing ; the great and only point which I had ever felt to be of 
 serious consequence in this struggle, was to induce and persuade the white 
 people of the South never to consent to this infamy. I knew that elections 
 
310 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 would be declared successful ; I knew that, right or wrong, they would say 
 that the elections were carried. They came for that purpose. That was not 
 the point with me. I wanted your women and children to see ; I wanted 
 posterity to know ; I wanted a record made so that it could be read by all 
 men, now and forever, that the white people of the South refused to give 
 their consent to this iniquity. That is why I wrote and spoke ; that is why 
 I despised the infamous and defied the powerful. 
 
 Still, fellow-citizens, it was a time to fear. If I doubted and trembled 
 on that occasion, do not blame me ; if I feared you would not be equal to 
 the great crisis, don t chide me. Remember the powerful influence brought 
 to bear. The Congress claimed to be all-powerful, and they avowed their 
 purpose of carrying out this infamy, and if you did not accept it, of making 
 you accept a worse. First of all these, in carrying out that plan, they sent 
 the military here ; they sent an army of bayonets to make war upon a help 
 less people as another means of accomplishing this infamy, and securing the 
 form of your consent ; they came to some of your own public men natives 
 of Georgia and of the South men whom you had honored of old, and they 
 bought them up as coadjutors in the work. I speak of a class, and I affirm 
 fearlessly, and I want the people of the country to know it, that there was 
 not a single Southern public man who advocated the acceptance of this 
 Reconstruction scheme who was not bought, and bought with a price, by 
 your enemies. The price has partially been paid, and you are to pay the 
 balance. What arguments did they use ? Did they .appeal to your pride, 
 your honor, or your interests ? Not at all. They came among you and 
 traveled from the seaboard to the mountains, and they told an impoverished 
 people, " If you don t accept this infamy, the little property that you have 
 left shall be confiscated, and every man of you shall be disfranchised ! 
 Congress, claiming to be all-powerful, installed an army in your midst, and 
 found citizens ready and willing to urge, to persuade, to intimidate, and to 
 threaten a starving and almost helpless people. 
 
 Oh, my countrymen, proud as I know Southern blood to be, don t chide 
 me if in this dark hour I felt uneasy. I confess that I did. I watched the 
 first election the election for the convention with intense interest. I 
 happened to be in New York City when the first election in the South came 
 off, and I shall never forget how my hopes were lifted and my desires ful 
 filled on receipt of the first telegram from the South, giving as one of the 
 facts connected with the first day of the election, that the whites refused 
 to have anything to do with it. I waited anxiously for the second day, 
 thinking that perhaps the " superior race" had crowded in, and the whites 
 were, on that account, unable to go to the polls. The second day came, 
 and brought the news that the whites had, almost to a man, remained away 
 from the polls only a few carpet-baggers and office-seekers voting. Thus 
 the* elections went on to the last. I tell vou, fellow-citizens, I moved 
 
 / 
 
 among the inhabitants of the great commercial metropolis prouder that day 
 than ever before. I shall never forget meeting some of the prominent men 
 of that city, one of whom said to me, " We had been taught to believe that 
 the people of the South would indorse this measure, and they have had 
 nothing to do with it. Why," added he, " your people are more honorable 
 than we gave them credit for." 
 
 Well, the power with the bayonet said that a convention was ordered. 
 All knew, however, that it was ordered by negroes not by whites though, 
 in truth, nobody did order it but the bayonet and certain scoundrels. The 
 
HIS LIFE SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 311 
 
 negroes never ordered it. I exonerate the negroes. I affirm to-day another 
 great fact, which I want to be remembered, and which, whenever the 
 occasion may demand, I stand prepared to support : The convention in 
 Georgia was defeated by thirty thousand votes ! Ah, my friends, there is 
 nothing like it in history ! You were poor, you were betrayed, tempted, 
 threatened you were told that every man that didn t vote for the conven 
 tion must have his little remaining property confiscated, besides being 
 disfranchised, and that the list of voters was to be used to ascertain who 
 you were. 
 
 Miserable threat ! Proud people noble people ! The verdict you gave 
 was that, though many of our gallant spirits were sleeping under the sod, 
 there was heroism still left in the South. Well, the false convention 
 assembled, and a thing called a constitution was framed. It had to be 
 ratified, and a governor and officers had to be chosen, and what was the 
 appeal then ? Of course, if the Southern white people approved the consti 
 tution, this dishonor was complete. They had exhausted appeals to your 
 fears you could not be frightened from your honor and the next thing 
 was to buy you up. So they put in the new Constitution something called 
 relief. The few men in the South (who, unfortunately, were Southern men 
 from accident or other cause) who had sold themselves to engage in this 
 work, being entirely conscious that they were bought up for the purpose, 
 thought, of course, that the same means would answer for the balance of the 
 people. They, therefore, sought to buy you, and they promised you relief. 
 I came here to this very city, and I took occasion to notify you that this 
 promise was put into the new Constitution for no other purpose than to 
 cheat you, and that the rogues and hypocrites who put it in, did so with the 
 distinct knowledge that it would be stricken out after the election. They 
 used it well. They bid high. The question was this : how many men in 
 Georgia are willing to confess themselves no better than negroes if they 
 could thereby get rid of their debts ? how many of you would be willing 
 to be negroes, if, by being negroes, y^u could be excused from paying your 
 debts ? Well I came to this city in March to inaugurate the fight on that 
 question, and some of you, my friends, were weak-kneed. You didn t do 
 right. A good many of you came to me then, and said, " Don t you say 
 anything against the Constitution ; everybody is going to vote for it ; every 
 body was going to be sold." It was a great wound to inflict upon me. I 
 was struggling for nothing on this earth but to preserve the honor of the 
 people of Georgia, and knowing that they could not be frightened. I 
 hoped they could not be bought. We made the fight and let the whole 
 world know it ; the white people of Georgia, by an overwhelming majority, 
 refused to be bought. 
 
 Some few men, I apprehend, are about in the category of the poor 
 negroes who voted for a convention to get " forty acres and a mule." Ah, 
 you poor victims of a wily hypocrisy ; of men to whom God gave a white 
 skin by mistake. You who went upon the public block, before your country 
 men and the world, and publicly proclaimed that you were willing to be 
 a negro, if, by being a negro, you could be excused from* paying your debts, 
 how do you feel to-day, after agreeing to be a negro and having to pay your 
 debts too ? 
 
 My friends, General Cobb made a request of the military ; I shan t make 
 any never intended to ; but I advise you, poor fellows, to make one. The 
 only evidence of how you voted is in the possession of the military. Go 
 
312 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 then, before they leave, and ask them to burn up the record. The great 
 majority of the white people spurned the bribe and despised the bribers. 
 And let it be forever remembered, to your pride and honor, that the people 
 of Georgia, under the threat of the bayonet, with the temptations of treach 
 ery all around and in the very ashes of their poverty, have said to all man 
 kind : " We can neither be frightened nor bought from our honor." 
 
 I have said the military declared a convention had been ordered, when 
 there was thirty thousand majority against it. They also declared that 
 Gordon was defeated, and that the Radical party had succeeded, when, in 
 truth, Gordon was elected by nearly ten thousand votes. I say that it is so, 
 counting the correctly registered voters and correcting the frauds of the bal 
 lot. I repeat, counting the honest registered voters, that this express 
 agent was largely defeated for governor, and he knows it, and they know it. 
 
 We Avon two victories, and we won them against the bayonet, against 
 force, against fraud, against treachery, and against the negroes. The white 
 people of this country are not going to consent to this thing ; they never 
 have and never will. If the Radicals have been unable thus far to get the 
 consent of the white people to this scheme of infamy, will they be able to do 
 it hereafter ? How can they ? They have appealed to your fears and your 
 avarice, and taken advantage of your poverty, but they have been disap 
 pointed ; they have failed in their schemes, and I tell you that there is no 
 argument or appliance which they can use in the future more powerful than 
 those they have used in the past. Any people who can withstand such appli 
 ances of force and pressure as have been brought to bear upon you within 
 the past twelve months, can never be seduced or driven from their honor. I 
 am proud of Georgia, and I pray that when God takes me hence my bones 
 may be laid in her honored old soil. 
 
 My friends, I wish to pass now to another subject. The issue has some 
 what changed. I have told you what the issue has been the last twelve 
 months, and I wish to state here, in a few brief words, the main points in 
 issue now. Some who consented to be bought for the purpose of inducing 
 the people of the South to accept this infamy, offered this excuse. They 
 said they were not going to be Radicals, they were not going to consent to 
 negro government, but they said " let us seem to go into this thing, let us 
 get back into the Union, and then we ll turn it all over and do as we please." 
 That was an argument based upon treachery. They had betrayed you, and 
 they were justifying their treachery to you by proving that they were going 
 to betray the Radicals. That suggestion deceived a great many people for 
 a time. For myself, I had nothing to do with it, because I could not con 
 sent to join traitors. I don t believe in treachery no people ever saved 
 themselves by it. Where the honor of a people is involved, they cannot 
 swerve from principle for the sake of policy. The only line of honor is a 
 direct one. But what is the result ? Those manipulators at Washington 
 who had bought these Southern men had more sense than the men they 
 bought. They were not going to be caught in any such trap as that, and 
 in this respect my. prophecy has turned out to be correct. The issue now, 
 then, is this : Shall this infamy, which has been thrust upon the people of 
 Georgia, and of the other Southern States, be valid and perpetual ? That 
 is the first point to which I wish to direct your attention. In order that it 
 may be perpetual, the Chicago platform says that the rights of trie North 
 ern States to regulate the franchise and to change and modify their own Con 
 stitutions shall not be infringed but the Southern people shall not have the 
 
HIS LIFE, SPKEOHES, AND WHITINGS. 313 
 
 right to change their Constitutions at will. Now, if anything in American 
 history never was disputed before it is this, that the States were members 
 of the Union on an equal footing ; and there is no man, from George 
 Washington down, whether high or low, wise or simple, black or white, who 
 ever had any idea that the Union formed by the States was a Union of un 
 equal States ; it was always admitted that the States were equal and each 
 retained control of the franchise. I state a mere fact and history ; since the 
 acknowledgment of our independence we have added twenty-four new 
 States to the Union, and in every act admitting a State as a member of this 
 Union it is distinctly stated that she is admitted on an equal footing with 
 all other States. But this Chicago Convention, with the Georgia Radicals 
 in it, for the first time in American history, makes the declaration that the 
 Union shall be a Union of unequal States. I want you all to remember that 
 point. It is the great aim of the Radicals. Where are you now, my good 
 Union men ? You that wanted to get back into the Union and were willing 
 to sacrifice everything for the accomplishment of that object ; you that con 
 gratulated the country upon being again in " the Union " ? It is a Union in 
 which the Southern States are vassals and the Northern States rulers. I 
 want you to hear it and to remember it. That it is mere sheer naked dis 
 union in the most odious and traitorous form in which the word was ever 
 spoken. It cuts the femoral artery it is a stab to the very heart, and de 
 stroys the Union of equal States, which our fathers formed. 
 
 I read with shame and mortification (I knew the poor fellow did not 
 know much) I read, I say, in the papers, that this stupid express agent, in 
 the presence and under the protection of force and treachery, went yester 
 day through the farce of being inaugurated a miserable sham Governor of 
 Georgia. Why, every word he uttered shows he does not, this day, know 
 the difference between a restored Union of equal States and a constructed 
 new-Union of unequal States. Take that fact down pencil it carefully and 
 take it to your hearts. If I can teach you to take home with you that single 
 sentence, you will not have come here to-day in vain. There never was, in 
 the history of any people, such a bold, plain, palpable, universally admitted 
 cause of war, as that simple statement in that Chicago platform. 
 
 And yet that is not all. You, gentlemen, who think you are members of 
 a Legislature poor, deluded souls, how I pity you ! you who come here 
 and go through the form of passing laws, I want you to hear one thing. 
 Not only is that doctrine of unequal States in the Chicago platform, but it 
 is in what you call your Omnibus Admission Bill. That bill prescribes the 
 manner in which you shall go back, and every one of you who voted the 
 other day to get back, as you say, into the Union, agreed to the doctrine 
 that Georgia shall never have the right to do what Ohio can do ; that the 
 Southern States shall never have the right to do what the Northern States 
 ican do. You agreed to remain forever an unequal member of the Union. 
 You agreed that you would get back into the Union by consenting that 
 Georgia shall never have the power to modify or to change her own State 
 constitution, as to her own domestic affairs, according to her own will and 
 pleasure. Ah, you renegades you rogues who tried to steal your neigh 
 bors property and could not do* it ! Ah, ye men that adopted the Recon 
 struction measures for the purpose of getting back into the Union, and then 
 catching the Radicals by changing the Constitution afterward. Are you 
 net ^caught caught by Thad. Stevens caught by Charles Sumner? I 
 don t know but one thing that is worse, and that is agreeing to be a negro, 
 
314 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 to get rid of your debts, and then, after becoming a negro, having your 
 debts to pay. 
 
 Remember, oh, my countrywomen ! mothers, teach it to your children 
 as you rock them in their cradles and in the nursery ditties by which you 
 send them to sleep tell them that men white men Georgians some of 
 them " to the manor born " have come upon this classical old hill and have 
 deliberately put upon record their solemn consent that the proud old State 
 of Georgia goes back into the Union on the express condition that she shall 
 never be equal to other States. Oh, you renegades from everything that can 
 make you hope for even a chance of being gentlemen ! You have buried the 
 sovereignty of your State, you have sullied the character of your ancestors, 
 and agreed to make vassals of your children. You have agreed to wear a 
 Radical yoke in order to vote yourselves eight dollars a day for a few hot 
 days in summer. That is the Union we have a Union of unequal States. 
 Ye cowardly, base disunionists of the vilest type, you disgrace humanity 
 by calling honest men rebels ! That is not all. You have not only agreed 
 to inequality, but you have also agreed to what is called the equality of 
 races ; that is, you have agreed to equality among the races as a condition 
 of getting back into the Union, and you have agreed that that shall never 
 be changed ; but you are so given to lying that you could not tell the truth 
 even when you thought it was to your interest to do it. 
 
 You say in your record that you have agreed to an equality of the races, 
 when you know, you vile hypocrites, that the very agreement you make in 
 cludes the disfranchisement of the intelligent, virtuous and educated, and 
 wealthy white men, and that they shall not be allowed to hold office in this 
 country, or while any scalawag or negro may. Is that equality ? If a 
 negro has a right to vote and hold office, why not these men whom you have 
 always trusted? Oh, you whited sepulchers ye who are degrading the 
 poor negro by your example of fraud and treachery. Ye vile renegades 
 from every law of God and every right of humanity, you are deceiving the 
 unfortunate negro to his ruin. If the negroes ever get a permanent right to 
 vote in this country, it must be by the consent of the people that live here. 
 If the negroes, when this infamous proposition was made to them by more 
 infamous white men to disfranchise the white people, had come out and 
 said publicly and openly, " We are willing to accept the franchise ; if there 
 is any benefit in political equality we want it, but we will never consent to 
 disfranchise the intelligent white men of this country," if the negroes had 
 come out and said that, they would have furnished an evidence that they 
 were capable of exercising the franchise. You Radicals of the Legislature 
 have agreed to degrade your own State and people, and you have agreed 
 that that degradation shall be perpetual. 
 
 The question in this contest is, whether that program shall be carried 
 out. That is where Grant stands, and where Col fax stands, and where all 
 you vagabonds stand. Where do we stand? Where do Seymour and 
 Blair stand ? Upon the glorious ancestral doctrine that the States are equal 
 and that white blood is superior. Now choose ye which you will vote for. 
 Some of you got scared last fall for fear of losing your property by confisca 
 tion ; others of you were afraid of being disfranchised, and others still were 
 bought this spring with relief. Where is relief now ? Echo answers, Where ? 
 Now come, my friends, I know you feel very badly. I know you don t feel 
 like associating with gentlemen ; come now, go home immediately ; tell your 
 wife to put on you a clean shirt ; take a good wash with soap and warm 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 315 
 
 water, and then come back and be free and decent white men. Come to 
 our side of the question. We will try to forgive you, but you must come 
 quick. I admit that there are some or you I would be very sorry to see come, 
 for the reason that I know our party would be betrayed very soon ! Still, 
 you who didn t know any better, you who were sold if you will clean up and 
 get on a clean shirt, we will take you back. 
 
 How many white men in Georgia are going to say by their vote that 
 Georgia is not an equal member of this Union with Rhode Island, and that 
 Virginia proud old Virginia that State which has in its bosom the ashes 
 of Washington, and has furnished more Presidents to this country than any 
 other State, shall not be the equal of Kansas ! I want to know how many- 
 men in Georgia are willing to say that proud old Virginia shall never be the 
 equal of Kansas. I want to know, too, how many white men in Georgia are 
 willing to put upon the record, that pauperism shall fix the burdens for 
 property, and ignorance and vice shall prescribe the law for intelligence and 
 virtue? Take this concern up here take the Radical wing of it and tell 
 me how much property in this State they possess ? It is true there is one 
 man in the whole concern that represents some property, and it is said he 
 stole it. I repeat, how much property do the Radical members of this thing, 
 that imagined itself a Legislature, represent? It does not represent taxable 
 property enough to pay their per diem. And these men are to make laws 
 to tax disfranchised property holders in this enlightened nineteenth century 
 and in this Christian country. Shame ! shame ! Is there a member of the 
 Legislature who hears me to-day? Ah, to your shame be it said, more than 
 a hundred of you have so recorded your names ! Go, my friends, and take 
 it back, for I charge you this day, in this bright sun and in this central city 
 of Georgia, that if that record remains as you have made it, whereby you 
 have covenanted and agreed that these Southern States shall be unequal 
 members of this Union, and that the intelligent men of this country shall be 
 disfranchised and deprived of their right to hold office, and that pauperism 
 shall fix the burden of taxation, and vice and ignorance make laws for intel 
 ligence and virtue, you will go down to posterity so infamous that when a 
 legitimate Legislature shall have assembled, some unfortunate creatures who 
 may be compelled by Providence to call you father, will apply to the Legis 
 lature to have their names changed. I understand some of you that voted 
 for that fourteenth Article, and voted to expunge relief, call yourselves 
 Democrats. You are vain, deluded creatures if you think that the Demo 
 cratic door will be ever open to receive you with such a name. Such a vote 
 is directly against the Democratic platform, and directly for the Radical 
 platform, and must be repented of and changed. 
 
 Are these, then, the terms of the new Union? terms of negro dominion, 
 of pauperism in power and ignorance in legislating, I say such terms will 
 never succeed. The white people have refused to consent to them, and I 
 tell you that they will not consent to them, and you can never establish any 
 government permanently in this country against the consent of the white 
 people. The Supreme Court of the United States made up their minds that 
 the Reconstruction measures were unconstitutional and void, but they were 
 too cowardly to declare the decision. This is a melancholy fact, that the 
 supreme judiciary of this country should have given way so cowardly. But 
 it will not always be thus it cannot forever refuse to pronounce its decision. 
 It is true, a Radical Congress has taken away jurisdiction in the McCardle 
 case, but we shall have another case. A gentleman, who is the only real 
 
316 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Governor of Georgia, is making a case in which jurisdiction is given by the 
 Constitution. Yes, when I mention him, I mention a man who, in any age 
 or nation, is worthy to be a governor ! I tell you, then, you who trade in 
 the respectability of your race you who are venders of your people s 
 honor I tell you to-day that this very court will pronounce these acts 
 unconstitutional and void, and everything done under them unconstitutional 
 and void. 
 
 But we have a party now organized, a strong and a glorious party, with 
 statesmen at its head and with correct principles for its platform. From 
 Maine to California the glorious tramp of the Democracy is growing more 
 and more distinct, and by November a verdict will be pronounced by the 
 great freemen of America that shall gladden the hearts of patriots now and 
 forever. And when the people shall have pronounced that verdict the court 
 will take courage and pronounce their judgment. Then ah, then, what 
 will become of you, ye isolated hypocrites ? All power to threaten gone, 
 treachery exhausted, relief measures and Reconstruction measures both dead, 
 the Radical party out of Congress, how on earth will you hide your shame, 
 thus stripped naked to the gaze of the world in all your unhidden infamy ! 
 What will become of you ? " Ye generation of vipers, how will you escape 
 the damnation of hell ? r That s what is coming. Oh, it s coming ; thank 
 God it s coming coming to the cheer of patriots and the dismay of traitors. 
 Yes, I tell you victory is coming. We have suffered, and suffered much. 
 Our comrades are sleeping. Ah, sleeping ! many of them by the streams and 
 in the valleys of Georgia. They are sleeping on the banks of the deep-roll 
 ing Mississippi ; they are sleeping all over Virginia, grander than the pyra 
 mids of Egypt and richer than the mines of India. Spirit of our departed 
 braves, we are not dishonored yet ! and though the vile, the low, the cor 
 rupt, and the perjured are seeking to be our rulers, and have seized upon our 
 high places, the noble, the valiant, and the true are stilt left to us, and 
 through all our borders are taking courage and hymning the notes of coming 
 triumph. Ye miserable spawns of political accidency, hatched by the putrid 
 growth of revolutionary corruption into an ephemeral existence renegades 
 from every law of God and violators of every right of man we serve you 
 with notice this day that this victory is coming. The men of the South and 
 the men of the North patriots everywhere are sending up their vows to 
 heaven that this is, and shall forever be a Union of equal States, and never 
 a hateful Union of unequal States. Men of pride, men of character, women, 
 thank God! without a dissenting voice, and even children in their play 
 grounds, are proclaiming on hill-top and in valley, that those whom God 
 made superior shall not be degraded to the dominion of the inferior. 
 
 A few more words and I will close. If, as I now hope and believe, we 
 shall again have liberty and law under the Constitution, what shall be done 
 with those who have taken advantage of these corrupt times to insult inno 
 cence, trample upon rights, and oppress helplessness ? These criminals will 
 be among us, and must be assigned appropriate positions. What shall 
 we do with them ? Ye who have traveled through the blood and losses and 
 sorrows of war, for asserting nothing but what the very framers of the Con 
 stitution taught was your right ; ye who have been taunted and reviled as 
 rebels and traitors ; ye who have been disfranchised in the land of your 
 fathers, and made exiles in the home of your birth. When this victory shall 
 come, and we shall once more be free men, and no longer insulted and 
 oppressed by miserable vagabonds and renegades, what shall we do with 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 317 
 
 
 
 the criminals ? I would not hurt a hair of their heads, do them no personal 
 harm, and deprive them of no right. Give them over oh, give over the 
 miscreants to the inextinguishable hell of their own consciousness of infamy. 
 But some things you must do for the protection of your children and of your 
 selves, and for the vindication of your honor. I affirm it, and I want it heard. 
 It is going to be the law of this country, and a law more irrepealable than the 
 laws of the Medes and Persians. Not one man that dares record his vote for 
 the inequality and vassalage of the Southern States and the degradation of 
 his own race, ought ever to be received into a decent family in Georgia, or 
 in the South, now or hereafter. 
 
 And this rule we can make now. If we have not the power to help make 
 the laws for our government or for society, thank God! we can at least pass 
 social laws for our own homes. I charge you this day, as you honor your 
 children and your household, and would preserve your good name for your 
 posterity, never suffer a single native renegade who votes for the vassalage 
 of these States, and the disgrace of your children and your race, to darken 
 your doors, or to speak to any member of your family. You condemn the 
 poor victim to the penitentiary who steals a horse or a hundred dollars, and 
 yet these miserable creatures have sought to bargain away everything that 
 you have or can value. You scorn the criminal who has violated the penal 
 laws of your country. These miserable renegades are faithless to every law 
 of heaven and of earth, and have used every means to sell you to those who 
 hate you, and to place your lives and your all in the power of the ignorant 
 and debased. 
 
 Another thing I insist shall be done : A people who will not resent 
 such foul innovations of their right, are not worthy of freedom. You have 
 been helpless your great men have been silenced ; you surrendered your 
 arms to what you thought was a gallant foe ; you surrendered them under 
 the assurances of protection and yet these men, your own citizens many of 
 them, who hurried you to war, have taken advantage of your poverty and 
 helplessness, and of the presence of the bayonet ; they have invaded your 
 households ; they have stolen your property ; they have robbed you of your 
 goods ; they have joined the negro and the stranger to tax, insult, and, op 
 press you ; and they have, contrary to the laws of the land, forced into dun 
 geons and before military commissions the proud freemen of this country. 
 You have been powerless to prevent these things. 
 
 But my vow is recorded, and I shall redeem it if I find the people willing 
 to sustain me. Men who have trampled upon the rights of the citizens of 
 Georgia, at a time w r hen the laws were paralyzed, shall feel the power of that 
 restored law when liberty is reawaked. Ye vile miscreants of the conven 
 tion, who stole the money of the State to pay your per diem, I give you 
 notice that you shall pay it back. And there is a good legal principle here, 
 which I want you to remember, and that is, that where a number of men 
 band themselves together for the commission of a common purpose, each one 
 is responsible for what all the others do or get. And, therefore, every man 
 who took a portion of that stolen money, is liable for every cent that negroes 
 and carpet-baggers received, and we are going to make them pay it. Ye 
 constitution makers, ye men that sprung at one bound from the penitentiaries 
 of the country, to frame constitutions for honest people ; ye men who oscil 
 late from grand jury rooms with charges of perjury upon you, up to legisla 
 tive halls and other high places in the land, I serve you with notice to-day, 
 that the money shall be repaid with interest. And you who are depriving 
 
318 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 the people of liberty, threatening and conspiring against their lives (hold me 
 responsible for what I say) I tell you that the day is coming when the judges 
 shall be in the prisoners box, and the persecutors shall be clamoring for 
 mercy. " Thou shalt not take the life or liberty or property of a citizen, 
 except according to the laws of the land and by the judgment of his peers," 
 is the first and great commandment in liberty s decalogue, and upon it all 
 the other commandments hang. It was given as a concession from power 
 to the people more than six hundred years ago, at the political Horeb of 
 Anglo-Saxon history, and no man from that day has violated or disregarded 
 it who was not a tyrant or a traitor, or both. No man in English history 
 ever trampled upon those sacred rights without being called to account. 
 Wicked men have the power now ; they have bayonets to protect them, and 
 they feel they can insult and oppress with impunity forever. 
 
 So did Judas feel safe when he helped eat the Lord s Supper with the 
 Lord. Catiline held power in Rome. Arnold once held a commission in 
 the American army. And you you vile creatures, whose infamy no 
 epithet can describe, and no precedent parallel you will find your names 
 more odious than those of Catiline and Arnold combined. Return then, 
 the day of grace is almost passed. Reform now, and we will forgive you. 
 I do not want a single man except a carpet-bagger to vote for this Chicago 
 platform. And you, members of the Legislature, I will talk to you kindly 
 you who voted for this infamy the other day the Fourteenth Amend 
 ment mark what I tell you. At the peril of your respectability, go and 
 take it back. It is a record whose stain will reach your children. 
 
 And you who call yourselves Democrats and who yet are lying round 
 here seeking and bargaining to get office from a Legislature which every 
 line of Democratic principles declares to be an illegal and illegitimate body, 
 shame, shame upon you. If this usurping Governor and Assembly had 
 sufficient regard for the country s welfare to tender positions to Democrats, 
 even the acceptance of such positions would present a question for serious 
 consideration. While I will not condemn those who differ with me, I must 
 be permitted to say for myself that no earthly consideration or power could 
 induce or force me to so far recognize them as to accept an office at their 
 hands. For myself, I hold them to be nothing but wicked, willful, and 
 corrupt usurpers of power, by authority of none but strangers and deluded 
 negroes, and wanton conspirators to subvert the legitimate government of 
 our State, and as such I shall hold myself in readiness to visit upon them, 
 by proper legal process, the penalties due to their crimes. I do not, of 
 course, include in these remarks the Democratic members. These are there 
 to prevent the mischiefs I announce. Their positions are necessarily un 
 pleasant. But they are making sacrifices by the votes of our people, and 
 are patriots, doing all the good they can, or rather preventing all the evil 
 they can, and merit our regard. But those who voluntarily come forward 
 to beg office of such a body ; above all, those who, either in the Legislature 
 or out of it, make bargains with Radical usurpers to get office for them 
 selves and their friends to all such I repeat, shame, shame upon you ! 
 
 One thing more will be necessary to a proper expression of the abhor 
 rence of our people for the infamous attempt to destroy the Union by 
 destroying the equality of the States, and for the measures, authors, and 
 advocates of this whole scheme to degrade the States and people of the 
 South. When liberty shall return ; when the law shall be again respected, 
 and good men shall again be our rulers, we must gather all the journals, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WAITINGS. 319 
 
 and constitutions, and enactments, and records of every character of the 
 conventions and assemblies, thus forced upon us by force, and fraud, and 
 usurpation, and, catching tire from heaven, burn them up forever ! 
 
 And right here, my countrymen, I want you to understand that I am a 
 candidate but for one office on earth. When the glorious day shall come, 
 and the free women, and the free men, and the laughing children, and the 
 proud youth of Georgia, shall gather together to fire the miserable, hideous 
 record of infamy, let the office be mine to kindle the flames. That is all i 
 
 % 
 
 want. I would have my children know, I would have my children s children 
 to know, if my humble life shall be remembered so long, that from first 
 to last, through thick and through thin, I fought this attempt to disgrace 
 our people ; and that at the sequel I kindled the fire that consumed 
 the infamous record of its existence. That will be a proud day, my 
 countrymen ; that will be a glorious day, when you and I can look each 
 other in the face, and feel as no Grecian ever felt as no Roman ever 
 felt that we have passed through the most trying ordeal in the annals of 
 humanity, and, as a people, have come out gold pure gold. Take courage, 
 my countrymen, that happy day shall come. The Union of equal States, as 
 made by our fathers, shall be ours again. The disunion of unequal States, 
 which Radical treason seeks to make, shall not be. With the records of 
 the vile attempt, we will build the bonfire of the Constitution s triumph. 
 By its light we shall read joy in each other s faces. Around the burning 
 pile we shall gather our wives and little ones, and strike up anew the song 
 of our deliverance, and, as the ascending smoke shall rise high in the skies, 
 it will wake the notes of our heroes in bliss, and heaven and earth shall ring 
 with the universal symphony : " Well done ! well done ! noble people ! 
 Through sorrows the most bitter, through trials the most severe, through 
 misfortunes multiplied and prolonged, you have passed with your honor 
 unsullied, growing brighter and brighter. Enter again into the joys of 
 freedom here, and finally into the realms of the good hereafter." 
 
SPEECH DELIVERED BEFORE THE YOUNG MEN S DEMO 
 CRATIC UNION, IN NEW YORK CITY, OCTOBER 6, 1868. 
 
 This was the first speech made in the North by a Southern man after the war. It 
 contains an elaborate defense of the South, her full and frank acceptance of all the legit 
 imate results of the war, and a most earnest appeal to the North for justice. No more 
 eloquent and earnest appeal for a restored Union of brotherly love was ever made, and 
 all speeches delivered by Southern men in the North since, have only been a repetition 
 of its great truths and non-sectional patriotic sentiments. 
 
 People of the North : In deference to the earnest wishes of a committee 
 from the Young Men s Democratic Union Club, and the request of personal 
 friends, some of whom differ with me in political views, I depart from my 
 original intention not to make a speech in the North, and appear before you 
 this evening. 
 
 O 
 
 I do not come to ask any favor for the Southern people. The represent 
 ative, however, of that people, who have experienced burdens of despotic 
 power, and the insecurity of anarchy, I come, all the more earnestly, to ad 
 dress you in behalf of imperiled constitutional free government. Will you 
 hear me without passion ? 
 
 The South exhausted by a long war and unusual losses needs peace ; 
 desires peace ; begs for peace. The North distrustful, if not vindictive 
 demands guarantees that the South will keep the peace she so much needs. 
 
 In countries where wars have been more frequent, the important fact is 
 well established by experiment, that magnanimity in the conqueror is the 
 very highest guarantee of contented submission by the conquered. It is to 
 be regretted that you seem not to have learned this lesson. A people who 
 will not be magnanimous in victory are not worthy to be, and will not always 
 remain, victors. 
 
 In the next place, if you of the North would only open your eyes, and 
 see the plainest truth of the century that the Southern people fought for 
 what they believed to be their right you would find at once a sufficient guar 
 antee for peace. The South believed honestly, fought bravely, and sur 
 rendered frankly ; and in each of these facts she presents the most ample 
 title to credit. Why will you not see and admit the fact, which must go into 
 history, that the Southern people honestly believed they had a right to secede? 
 Some of the wisest framers of the Constitution taught that doctrine. Many 
 of the ablest men in the North as well as in the South, of every generation, 
 have taught this doctrine. Some of your own States made the recognition 
 of that right the condition of their acceptance of Union. Even your own 
 Webster your orator without a rival among you, dead or living taught 
 that this right existed for cause certainly for much less cause than now ex 
 ists. Will you, then, persist in saying that the Southern people are all 
 traitors, for exercising, or attempting to exercise, what such men and such 
 States taught was a right ? Will you say they did not honestly believe such 
 teachers ? Was it their intent to commit treason ? 
 
 Here lies the whole cause of our continued troubles. The North will not 
 
 320 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 321 
 
 admit what all other people know, and what all history must concede that 
 the South honestly believed in the right of secession. As a result of this in- 
 
 i/ 
 
 fidelity to such plain fact, you assume that the Southern people are criminals. 
 This idea is the sum of all your politics and statesmanship. It must be 
 abandoned. It must be repudiated thoroughly and promptly. There can 
 never be any peaceful and cordial reunion possible while one-half the nation 
 regard the other half as criminals. How can you trust criminals ? Why 
 should you desire union with criminals ? Why do you exact guar- 
 ahtees of criminals ? If the Southern people are honest, their assent 
 to the non-secession construction of the Constitution is a sufficient 
 guarantee. If they are not honest, but criminals, no promise they could 
 make ought to be trusted. Power is the only guarantee of fidelity in crim 
 inals, and if you cannot believe and cannot trust the South, you must, in 
 deed, abandon the Constitution, and govern with power forever, or you must 
 give up the South as unworthy to federate with you in an equal government 
 of consent. I speak frankly. If you cannot abandon this miserable theory 
 and habit in your politics, in your religion, and in your schools, of regarding 
 the Southern people as criminal traitors for attempting what good men, and 
 wise men, and great men taught was their right, you will make peaceful 
 reunion under free institutions utterly impossible. 
 
 You must hold them as friends, or let them go as foreigners, or govern 
 them as subjects. If you govern them as subjects you must share the pen 
 alty, for the same government can never administer freedom to one half and 
 despotism to the other half of the same nation. 
 
 Rise above your passions, then, and realize that herein is your guaranty. 
 The South believed honestly, fought bravely, and surrendered frankly. 
 
 Again. The exhausted condition of the South ought to inspire you with 
 confidence in her professions of a desire for peace. Are you afraid for her 
 to recover strength ? Take care lest the desperation of exhaustion prove 
 ^tronger than the sinews of prosperity. Peace is not desirable without its 
 blessings. 
 
 But you of the North will not try magnanimity ; will insist that the 
 Southern people are traitors ; and that an exhausted people are dangerous, 
 and you must have guarantees. In your papers, from your pulpits, behind 
 your counters, on your streets, and along your highways, I hear the perpet 
 ual charge that the South fought to destroy the government, committed trea 
 son and murder, and every inhuman crime, and that she is still intractable, 
 and rebellious, and dangerous, and insincere, and must concede and give 
 guarantees. 
 
 \\ ell, I am here to show you that the South has made every concession 
 that an honorable people would exact, or an honest people could make. 
 
 Every day I read in your papers, and hear on your streets, that the 
 Southern people will not accept the results of the war. 
 
 I am here to prove, so clearly that no honest man shall doubt, that the 
 Southern people have not only accepted every result of the war, but also they 
 have accepted every proposition and abided every condition of reunion which 
 has been proposed from any quarter, or by any department of the United 
 States Government which could have benefited you, or strengthened the 
 Union, or not dishonored themselves. 
 
 Now, to the history : 
 
 1. The first terms of settlement agreed were the terms granted to Gen 
 eral Lee by General Grant, at Appomattox. These terms were : first, that 
 
322 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 the Confederates would not again take up arms against the United States ; 
 second, that they would obey the laws of force where they lived. These 
 terms were agreed to by the Confederate armies universally, and received 
 the pledge of the Union armies in turn, that they should never be further 
 molested. These terms must ever stand as greatly honorable to both sides. 
 They were in exact accordance with all the promises made by the United 
 States Government to induce surrender. They simply preserved the Union 
 with secession abandoned. This covered the whole issue of the war. Gen 
 eral Grant was truly great on that memorable day of defeat and magnanimity . 
 
 Now, see also the most happy effect which that day s work produced. 
 On both sides there had been great fears of a guerrilla warfare after regular 
 war should terminate. These noble terms of justice and good faith, granted 
 with the magnanimous spirit exhibited by General Grant, sheathed every 
 sword of vengeance. All idea of guerrilla warfare vanished, as these terms 
 and scenes were eagerly read throughout the South. More than this, confi 
 dence was almost universally restored, and good will, to an extent before 
 deemed impossible for -generations, at once revived. Happy, most happy 
 had it been for this country if those terms had been faithfully abided at the 
 North, and exactions had ceased. Not a single Southern man has ever vio 
 lated the Appomattox covenant. It has been said these terms were confined 
 to the army. The army was representative. Terms granted to those who 
 bore arms could not be reasonably denied to those who had not borne arms, 
 and the terms were received at the South as a settlement of the controversy 
 an end of war, and the return of universal peace. And I desire distinctly 
 to record the good effects produced as another encouraging lesson of the 
 power of magnanimity in victory. 
 
 2. But the politicians of the North were not satisfied with this settle 
 ment by the armies, and soon we heard that other concessions must be made 
 by the South to guarantee a permanent restoration of the Union. So next 
 to the army, the President, the Executive Department of the United States 
 Government, claimed the right to fix the terms of restoration. Accordingly, 
 the people of the Southern States were required to assemble conventions, 
 and agree to the following terms of restoration : 
 
 (1) The annulling of the ordinances of secession. These we considered 
 as already annulled by the surrender at Appomattox, and therefore readily 
 agreed to annul again. 
 
 (2) The ratification of the proposed Amendment 13, abolishing slavery 
 and the incorporation of like provisions in the State Constitutions. Well, 
 we did not regard slavery as strictly the cause of the war, but the world had 
 regarded the institution as staked on the result, and so had the Southern 
 people generally. Besides, experience had taught us that it cost more to 
 maintain slavery than the entire slave property was worth. Therefore our 
 people readily complied with this exaction, simply leaving the question of 
 compensation, without demand or expectation, to the magnanimity and sense 
 of justice of the future. 
 
 (3) The repudiation of the Confederate debt was the last material exac 
 tion of the President. At this our people hesitated. A suggestion of 
 honor arose. But nearly all Confederate creditors were themselves Confed 
 erates, and repudiation by creditor and debtor in joint act relieved us on the 
 question of honor. If, in the future, we become able, and pay the few out 
 side creditors who remain unpaid, we suppose there will be no objection, 
 
 we complied with t^his demand, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 323 
 
 Thus we see the Southern people complied promptly with every demand 
 made by the President as a condition and under promise of cordial reunion. 
 
 3. But though the army was now satisfied, and the Executive satisfied, yet 
 we soon learned that Congress was not satisfied, and the Southern people 
 must make further concessions give still more guarantees. To justify 
 itself in this demand, Congress now denied the right of the Executive to 
 prescribe terms to the South, and claimed that right as exclusively in Con 
 gress. Here commenced a fierce war between the Executive and Legislative 
 departments of the government. Now, let me right here make a statement 
 which I do not think is generally understood at the North. On this ques 
 tion of power and right, as between the President and Congress, the South 
 has never taken sides never judged. We thought the Union was restored 
 at Appomattox, and did not need the intervention of either the President or 
 Congress. Neither of these really had any power not expressly guaranteed 
 in the Constitution, and secession having failed at Appomattox, the Union 
 remained, and the Constitution was the supreme law of both rights and 
 powers. 
 
 But the South was not disposed to debate. Her humor was to concede 
 give guarantees. 
 
 When the President demanded concessions, the South did not ask him 
 for his authority but guaranteed his terms. So precisely she was disposed 
 toward Congress. Let us see : 
 
 (1) The first thing demanded by Congress was that the South should not 
 have representatives in Congress, until Congress should be pleased to receive 
 representatives, but in the mean time must continue to pay taxes. The South 
 pointed to the Constitution, and to the provisos made, during the war, of 
 immediate equal reunion, and to the great cause of original quarrel between 
 our common fathers and Great Britain, who said that " taxation without 
 representation was tyranny," but only pointed submitted. We paid the 
 taxes heavy, discriminating taxes. Nay, the demand went behind Appo 
 mattox, and we were required to pay taxes levied during the war. Our peo 
 ple had already paid taxes to the only power then over the country, but they 
 paid again, so anxious were they to satisfy with concessions and guarantees. 
 
 (2) The next claim by Congress was the right to separate the popula 
 tions of the Southern States, and withdraw the negroes from the absolute 
 government of the States, and place them under the government of the 
 I Yeedman s Bureau. On this arose quite a quarrel between the President 
 and Congress ; and the South, when thinking at all, thought that on this 
 question the President, constitutionally, was right ; but while the President 
 and Congress quarreled, the South submitted, and the Bureau was allowed to 
 run its course of outrage upon the whites, and of peculation on the poor 
 blacks. 
 
 (3) The next concession demanded by Congress was the Civil Rights 
 bill. Here again a quarrel arose between the President and Congress. But 
 the South did not even care to think which was right, constitutionally, on 
 this question. The negro being free and deprived of the protection of his 
 master, was entitled to the equal protection of the law, and to absolute equal 
 civil rights. To show you how unnecessary was the confusion created by 
 Congress on this subject, I will state that before Congress had passed this 
 Jivil Rights bill, of which it boasts so much, the Legislature of Georgia had 
 passed a bill giving absolute equal civil rights to the negro, in language 
 
 precisely the same with that afterward adopted by Congress. ; Con- 
 
324 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 gress re-enacts the law of Georgia under pretense, before the Northern peo 
 ple, of a necessity to compel Georgia to give civil rights to the negro ! 
 
 Thus far, ladies and gentlemen of the North, you perceive that every 
 demand upon the South, whether made by the military or civil authorities, 
 whether by the President or by Congress, whether inside or outside of the 
 Constitution, whether in accordance with or in plain violation of every 
 promise made during the war, was promptly granted and sometimes even 
 anticipated. Thus far, who will say the (South was intractable and not dis 
 posed to accept the results of the war ? 
 
 (4) But Congress was still not satisfied, and made a fourth demand. 
 This demand was in the shape of a proposed amendment to the Constitution, 
 known as Article 14. There have been so many misrepresentations at the 
 North of the action of the South on this amendment, and the motives of 
 that action, that I am afraid the amendment originated to prevent what it 
 pretended to desire a cordial reunion. 
 
 This amendment analyzed contains four distinct and different proposi 
 tions. (1) The first was to confer equal civil rights upon the negro as a 
 free citizen. Now, this had already been done by the Civil Rights bill of 
 Congress, and long before that, as to Georgia, by the Civil Rights bill of 
 that State. So the amendment was not rejected on account of this proposi 
 tion. (2) The second proposition of the proposed amendment was, in plain 
 language, that if the negro was excluded, in any State, from the ballot on 
 account of color, his race should not be counted in the basis of representa 
 tion in fixing the number of representatives from such State in Congress. 
 The South thinks, that under the Constitution the basis of representation is 
 a very different thing from the question of suffrage. But every possible 
 injury to the South which this proposition could work, was easily remedi 
 able by a wise rule of impartial suffrage, and in the spirit of concession 
 which the South was determined to manifest, the amendment would not 
 have been rejected on account of this proposition, and was not for this 
 reason rejected. I hope you of the North will now distinctly understand 
 this, for, on this point, the South has been greatly misrepresented here, and 
 this misrepresentation has been the cause of much foolish discussion and 
 angry bitterness toward the South. (3) The third proposition in this 
 amendment guarantees the payment of the national, and repeats the repudi 
 ation of the Confederate debt. Now, I have already shown you that the 
 Southern States had already repudiated the Confederate debt under the 
 President s plan. As to them that question was settled. As to the national 
 debt the Southern people, as I have shown you, were paying all taxes 
 required heavy taxes to meet it. The South has never stopped to make 
 any question as to how and in what way the national debt was to be paid. 
 She has quietly paid her taxes imposed without representation and if the 
 heavy taxes so paid have been applied to maintain the Freedman s Bureau, 
 and to enforce a military Reconstruction, it is not the fault of the South. 
 (4) This brings us to the fourth and last proposition in this Amendment 14. 
 This was that about two hundred thousand of the most intelligent and 
 trustworthy white men in the South should never be chosen by the people 
 to hold any office whatever, State or Federal. The exclusion from Federal 
 offices, if by act of Congress or the North, would not have been much re 
 gretted especially by those excluded. But the Southern States never so 
 much needed the counsels of their wisest and best men in their State affairs. 
 Their resources were exhausted, their whole system of industry changed, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 325 
 
 their society greatly demoralized, their old laws not at all applicable to the 
 new order "of" things. Now why, at this critical conjuncture, should the 
 Southern people be told that they must consent to deprive themselves of the 
 right to choose their wisest men those they were most willing to trust to 
 H ive strength and hope to their counsels ? 
 
 Besides, these leaders had done only what the people had requested them 
 to do. The people were as guilty as their agents. To require the people, 
 therefore, to disfranchise their agents to them faithful agents was to 
 require the people to dishonor themselves. And how could this benefit the 
 South? How could Massachusetts be benefited by depriving South Carolina 
 of the right of filling her own State offices with her own wisest citizens? 
 Now, therefore, because to agree to such a provision as a part of the funda 
 mental law of the Republic would have dishonored the South as a section, 
 and her people as a people, and would also have worked incalculable injury 
 to them, and brought no benefit to the North, nor strength to the Union, 
 the South rejected this proposition. And because Congress had so inten 
 tionally submitted this Amendment 14 as to require the acceptance of all, 
 or the rejection of all, the Southern States rejected all rather than accept 
 this dishonor. Now you have the plain truthful history of the rejection of 
 that amendment. The time will come when you of the North will rise up 
 and honor the Southern people for this manly conduct, and curse the crea 
 tures w r ho have so wickedly deceived you on this subject. 
 
 (5) Under the pretext of the rejection of this amendment Congress be 
 came vindictive and determined to play the role of a conqueror. In this 
 spirit the measures known as the Reconstruction measures were enacted. 
 These are so numerous that I cannot stop to take them up in detail. I will 
 give you a clear view, however, of the reasons why the Southern whites 
 have never consented to these measures and never will consent to them. 
 
 In the first place, these measures set aside as illegal the Southern States 
 governments of 1865. If these governments were illegal, then all they did 
 was illegal. 
 
 If this be true, then Amendment 13, abolishing slavery, has never been 
 ratified, and the State constitutions abolishing it are void. Now, to compel 
 the ratification of Amendment 14, which contains no proposition which is 
 not already law, or which the South is not willing to make law, except the 
 one to disfranchise their own agents for nothing but their fidelity to the 
 ju ople, you propose a legal relinquishment of Amendment 13. The South 
 is not willing to do this. Her people prefer the loss of property by Amend 
 ment 13 to the loss of honor by Amendment 14. Which do you prefer? 
 
 In the second place, Congress, by these Reconstruction measures, created 
 a new constituency of all negroes and a portion of whites to do what the whites 
 have refused to do. Now, the plain question is, shall the Southern States 
 be members of the Union under constitutions adopted by the white people 
 
 by ignorant 
 
 dling strangers ? How will you of the North decide this question ? 
 
 In the third place, Congress intrusted the execution of these measures- 
 not to the courts and the civil officers of the country, as all civil laws hereto 
 fore have been intrusted but to the military. Is it right to establish civil 
 government and execute civil law by military power in times of peace ? 
 You of the North must decide. 
 
326 SENATOR B. It. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 But even these measures, which the South rejected to save her honor, 
 she was always willing to refer to the courts for decision : mark you, not to 
 her own courts, but to the courts of the United States. The Congress was 
 always unwilling that these questions should be passed on by your own 
 courts. Which party in this showed an intractable temper, a disposition not 
 to accept the results of the war ? 
 
 When passion shall subside ; when truth, not falsehood, shall be be 
 lieved ; and when virtue and honor and law and right shall again be appre 
 ciated and loved, the temperate firmness with which the South has rejected 
 these measures of lawlessness and dishonor, will constitute the noblest, most 
 enduring monument of her heroism, intrepidity, and worth. 
 
 You ask for guarantees that the South will be true to her professions. 
 Herein is the very highest possible guarantee, that her people, under every 
 pressure, and at every sacrifice of material interests, reject dislionor. If 
 they accepted dishonor, the acceptance would be worthless, and every con 
 cession made under its influence would be disregarded. Are you such 
 strangers to this high sense of honor, that you cannot see its force or appre 
 ciate its reliable power ? Your children will see it to your shame, and to 
 our credit. If the Southern people were not sincere, they would seem to 
 agree to anything in order to regain power, and then repudiate the agree 
 ment. This is exactly what your so-called Southern friends propose. But 
 we can see no permanent peace in such hypocrisy, and therefore frankly 
 reject what we cannot in honor accept and abide. 
 
 Note, also, the fact that everything rejected by the South has been con 
 fessed to be outside of the Constitution, and based exclusively on the idea 
 of conquest, which your own government, in every department, solemnly 
 promised should never be, and which your own courts have uniformly de 
 cided could not be the result of the war. 
 
 I cannot stop now to show you how these Reconstruction measures have 
 been executed in the South. This history will be written, and when written, 
 every agent engaged in enacting this, the dark age of American life, will 
 sink into universal infamy, and the cheek of every honorable Northern man 
 will blush for shame. 
 
 Now, I have gone over before you every single proposition of settlement 
 or restoration or reconstruction of the Union, which has been made by the 
 army, or by the President, or by Congress ; and what is the result ? All the 
 terms of the army were accepted, and have been most faithfully kept. All 
 the terms demanded or suggested by the Executive Department were 
 promptly accepted, and have been faithfully observed, though no promise 
 made to induce their acceptance has ever been fulfilled. Again, all the terms 
 proposed by Congress have been accepted, and most quietly submitted to, 
 except the single proposition that our people should dishonor themselves by 
 disfranchising their own faithful agents, and have refused to consent to 
 the plan of substituting negroes and strangers as a constituency, that this 
 dishonor may be accomplished. This is all. I affirm fearlessly, this is all. 
 I have defied your papers, and I defy your leaders even your preachers 
 to point to a single proposition ever submitted to the Southern people as a 
 condition of reunion, by the army, or by the President, or by Congress, 
 which they have not accepted and faithfully abided by, except the single 
 proposition to dishonor themselves by disfranchising their own agents, or 
 consenting that negroes and strangers may disfranchise them. No man has 
 taken up the challenge ; no man will take up the challenge ; no man can 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 327 
 
 take up the challenge. But everywhere, by editors, by preachers, and by 
 politicians, the false, wicked charge is repeated, that the South is intractable 
 and unwilling to accept the results of the war. 
 
 People of the North, will you not rise above passion, and save your own 
 honor, and our common free government, by doing plain justice to a people 
 who accepted your pledge and trusted your honor ? 
 
 I beg you to understand the facts of actual history before it is too late. 
 I repeat, and beg you to note, what the South has already conceded as the 
 results of the war : 
 
 First. The South conceded, at Appomattox, that the arguments of the 
 ablest statesmen America ever produced i) i favor of the right of secession 
 as a constitutional remedy, had been replied to in the only manner they 
 could be effectually replied to, by physical force ; and the South consented 
 that this judgment, written by the sword, should have legal force and 
 effect. 
 
 Second. The South, by her own act, made valid the emancipation of her 
 slaves in the only way in which that emancipation could be made valid, and 
 thus gave up the property the North sold her, without compensation. 
 
 Third. The South has solemnly repudiated her debts contracted in her 
 defense, and has agreed to pay a fall share of the debt contracted for her 
 subjugation. 
 
 Fourth. The South has permitted, without hindrance, the Congress to 
 enter her States, and establish tribunals unknown to the Constitution, to 
 govern a portion of their population in a manner different from the govern 
 ments of the States. 
 
 Fifth. The South has agreed to make the negroes citizens, and give them 
 absolutely equal civil rights with the whites, and to extend to them every 
 protection of law, and every facility for education and improvement, which 
 are extended to the whites. 
 
 Sixth. In a word, I repeat, the South has agreed to everything which 
 has been proposed by the civil or military government of the United States, 
 and by every department of that government, except the single demand to 
 disfranchise their own best men from their own State offices, at a time when 
 their counsels are most needed, or to consent that negroes and strangers may 
 disfranchise them. 
 
 For this, and for this only, all their other concessions are spit upon, and 
 they are denounced as intractable, insincere, rebellious, and unwilling to 
 accept the results of the war ! Shame upon leaders who will persist in such 
 charges ; and shame upon a people who will sustain such leaders ! 
 
 But while the white people have refused to agree to these Reconstruction 
 measures for the reasons stated, the negroes and adventurers from your 
 worst population in the North, and the military, have proceeded with the 
 work of executing them. Governments have been formed by them, which 
 have consented to the dishonor required by Congress. What are the effects 
 already produced ? 
 
 In the first place, they have done more to break down confidence at the 
 South in Northern pledges and Constitutional justice than all our previous 
 history, including the war. In the second place, they have stopped both 
 capital and emigrants from going to the South, and have put a sudden end 
 to all improvement. In the third place, they have depreciated property in 
 the South to less than one-fourth the value of 1866, and have lessened pro 
 ductions a hundred millions annually. In the fourth place, these paralyzing 
 
M28 SENATOR R II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 effects are daily increasing, and threaten the utter destruction of our industry 
 and prosperity. In the tifth place, society has become demoralized, laws 
 rendered inefficient, property insecure, and life and innocence kept in per 
 petual hazard. 
 
 Now, then, I advance to the question Are these reconstructive measures 
 of Congress, and the ill-shapen governments they have produced, to be 
 maintained and perpetuated ? The Chicago platform says they shall be, and 
 the New r York platform says they shall not be. This is the issue. Count 
 the cost, if you can, of maintaining them the cost of honor, of peace, of 
 life, of money, of freedom ! I tell you no figures can add up the sum. 
 Neither your bonds nor the government that issued them can stand if these 
 measures are to be maintained. It is impossible in the very nature of things, 
 and you of the North are simply rnad if you will not see the destruction you 
 are bringing on j^ourselves. To perpetuate these measures is to perpetuate 
 infidelity to the Constitution, infidelity to Northern pledges, infidelity to 
 every object of the war, and infidelity to every hope of peace. These 
 measures of Congress repudiate the results of the war, and you of the North 
 alone " are intractable." 
 
 These measures are bad enough in themselves, but still worse in the. 
 means adopted to sustain them at the North. 
 
 The only argument I have heard in their support is based upon hatred 
 of the Southern people. To inflame that hatred a system of misrepresenta 
 tion of Southern feelings and utterances has been adopted which is without 
 parallel. I have seen my own sentences cut up and changed, and made to 
 say exactly what I condemned. I have seen whole letters and speeches 
 manufactured and repeated to Northern people by men of social and respect 
 able standing here. The South is slandered by the very prayers which go 
 up from Northern altars. Ministers of the Gospel turn demagogues in order 
 to sanctify calumny ! These things I see, and hear, and know, and they 
 make up nine-tenths of the materials of the Republicans in this canvass. 
 I refer to them in sorrow and shame, not in anger. 
 
 I know no government can last under such influences ; and no administra 
 tion can give hope of peace, influenced and controlled by a people who can 
 be the victims of such hate and falsehoods. 
 
 I know there are very many among you who tell me that General Grant 
 is not a Radical, and will disregard the Chicago platform, and will do for 
 the South according to the noble spirit he exhibited at Appomattox. If so, 
 he will find cordial support at the South. But what right have we to expect 
 it? In my opinion the question of what man shall be elected is compara 
 tively a very contemptible question. By what means, and under what influ 
 ence is he to be elected ? Here is the great question for one who loves his 
 country and cares nothing for an office. How can we have faith in free in 
 stitutions, when fraud, falsehood, sectional hate, and the worst feelings of 
 human nature are resorted to as the most effective means of pleasing the 
 people and securing the highest offices in the land. God, if not man, will 
 destroy such a nation. Do you suppose the early patriots, such as Washing 
 ton, and Adams, and Madison, would have permitted themselves to be 
 elected to the Presidency by a pandering to sectional hate in their sup 
 porters ? Has sectional distrust become a stronger passion with the Ameri 
 can people than love for the Constitution ? 
 
 But we are told that this policy of Reconstruction is a fixed fact, and 
 though it is hated by every respectable white man in the South, it is to be 
 
HIS LTFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 329 
 
 enforced under General Grant s administration with the same vigor which 
 marked the prosecution of the war. That is, the Constitution is to be de 
 stroyed as vigorously as the Union was saved, and only to force on the 
 Southern whites governments which disfranchise their best men by negro 
 votes under Congressional dictation. 
 
 Well, if such be the verdict of the people, what will the South do? You 
 lean forward, anxious to hear this question answered. 
 
 If the gravity of the subject did not forbid, I might for a moment imi 
 tate Dr. Henry Ward Beecher, and become facetious. He tells us that get 
 ting outside of the Constitution is very different from going against it, and 
 his audience greeted the bright idea. Well, I suppose the South will not 
 actually oppose go against the Reconstruction measures she will only get 
 outside of them. In that event we shall expect this ecclesiastical interpreter 
 of Constitutional law to defend us, and we retain his services in advance. 
 
 But what will the South do? I will tell you first what the South will 
 
 w 
 
 not do, in my opinion. 
 
 1. The South will not secede again. That was her great folly folly 
 against her own interest, not wrong against you. Mark this : that folly 
 will not be repeated. Even if the people of the South desire the disruption 
 of the Federal Government, their statesmen have the sagacity to see that 
 that result can more effectually come of this secession by the North from 
 the Constitution. Those ominous words " outside of the Constitution " are 
 more terribly significant than those other words " secession from the Union." 
 The former is a secession having all the vices of the latter greatly increased, 
 and none of its virtues. Certainly none of its manliness, straightforward 
 candor, and justification. So note this : the South does not desire or seek 
 disunion. If she desired it, she does not deem another secession necessary 
 to bring it about. Disunion will come from Chicago, in spite of Southern 
 opposition. 
 
 2. The South will not re-enslave the negro. She did not enslave him in 
 the first instance. That was your \vork. The South took your slave-savage 
 and gave him the highest civilization ever reached by the negro. You then 
 freed him, and kept the price of his slavery, and you alone hold the property 
 that was in human flesh. 
 
 3. But the Southern whites will never consent to the government of the 
 negro. Never ! All your money spent in the effort to force it will be 
 wasted. The Southern whites will never consent to social and political 
 equality with the negro. You may destroy yourselves in the effort to force 
 it, and then you will fail. You mav send down your armies, and exhaust 
 
 * ** ? v 
 
 the resources of the whole country for a century, and pile up the public 
 debt till it lean against the skies ; and you may burn our cities and murder 
 our people our unarmed people but you will never make them consent to 
 governments formed by negroes and strangers, under the dictation of Con 
 gress, by the power of the bayonet. Born of the bayonet, this government 
 must live only by the bayonet. 
 
 "XT T 
 
 .Now, I will tell you some things, which in my opinion the South will do. 
 
 1. The South would accept the election of Mr. Seymour as a verdict of 
 the Northern people that the general government was to be administered 
 according to the Constitution, and she would rejoice and come out of her 
 sorrow strong, beautiful, and growing. 
 
 The South will accept the election of General Grant as a verdict by the 
 Northern people that the Constitution is a nullity, and that they will" that 
 
330 SENATOR D. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 the general government be administered outside of it. But the South will 
 then submit passively to your laws, but in her heart hope will still cleave to 
 the Constitution. It is her only port of safety from the storm of fanaticism, 
 passion, and despotism. 
 
 The South surrendered secession as a constitutional remedy at Appomat- 
 tox, but she did not surrender the Constitution itself, nor the great princi 
 ples of freedom it was intended to secure. 
 
 2. Whether Mr. Seymour or General Grant shall be elected, the South 
 ern States each State for itself will quietly, peacefully, but firmly, take 
 charge of, and regulate, their own internal domestic affairs in their own 
 way, subject only to the Constitution of the United States. What then 
 will you of the North do ? What will President Grant do ? Will you or 
 he send down armies to compel tiiose States to regulate their own affairs to 
 suit you outside of the Constitution? Will you? 
 
 It is high time this people had recovered from the passions of Avar. It 
 is high time that counsel were taken from statesmen, not demagogues. It 
 is high time that editors, preachers, and stump speakers had ceased slander 
 ing the motives and purposes of the South. It is high time the people of 
 the North and the South understood eacli other, and adopted means to in 
 spire confidence in each other. It is high time the people of each State 
 were permitted to attend to their own business. Intermeddling is the crime 
 of the century. If it was folly in the South to secede, it was crime in the 
 North to provoke it. If it was error in the South to dissolve the Union, it 
 is crime in the North to keep it dissolved. 
 
 The South yields secession, and yields slavery, and yields them for equal 
 reunion. People of the North, now is the auspicious moment to cement 
 anew, and for still greater glory, our common Union. But it must be 
 cemented in mutual good will, as between equals and under the Constitu 
 tion. Such a Union the South pleads for. I care not what slanderers. say, 
 what fanaticism represents, or how selfish and corrupt hate and ambition 
 pervert ; I tell you there is but one desire in the South. From every heart 
 in that bright land, from her cotton-fields and grain farms, from her rich 
 
 * C? " 
 
 valleys and metal-pregnant mountains, from the lullabies of her thousands 
 of rippling streams and moaning millions of her primeval forest trees, comes 
 up to you but this one voice this one earnest, united voice : " Flag of our 
 Union, wave on ; wave ever ! But wave over freemen not subjects ; over 
 States, not Provinces over a Union of equals, not of lords and vassals over 
 a land of law, of liberty, and of peace, and not of anarchy, oppression, and 
 strife ! 
 
 People of the North, will you answer back in patriotic notes of cheering 
 accord that our common Constitution shall remain, or, in the discordant 
 notes of sectional hate and national ruin, that there shall be protection for the 
 North inside of the Constitution and oppression for the South outside of it ? 
 
 If the latter, then, not only the Union, not only the Constitution, but 
 that grand, peculiar system of free federated governments so wisely devised 
 by our fathers, and known as the American system, and of which the Con 
 stitution is but the instrument and the Union but the shadow will die, 
 must die is dead ! 
 
 Have you ever studied this American system of government? Have 
 you compared it with former systems of free governments, and noted how 
 our fathers sought to avoid their fatal defects ? I commend this study to 
 your prompt attention. To the heart that loves liberty it is more enchant 
 ing than romance, more bewitching than love, and more elevating than any 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 331 
 
 other science. If history proves any one tiling more than another it is that 
 freedom cannot be secured in a wide and populous country, except upon the 
 plan of a federal compact for general interests, and untrammeled local gov 
 ernments for local interests. Our fathers adopted this general plan with 
 improvements in the details of profound wisdom, which cannot be found in 
 any previous system. With what a noble impulse of common patriotism 
 they came together from distant States and joined their counsels to devise 
 and perfect this system, henceforth to be forever known as the American 
 system. The snows that lodge on the summit of Mount Washington are 
 not purer than the motives that begot it. The fresh dew-laden zephyrs 
 from the orange groves of the South are not sweeter than the hopes its 
 advent inspired. The flight of its own symbolic eagle, though he blew his 
 breath on the sun, could not be higher than its expected destiny ! Alas, 
 are these motives now corrupted ? Are these hopes poisoned ? And is this 
 high destiny eclipsed, and so soon, aye, before a century has brought to 
 manhood its youthful visage ? Stop before the blow is given and let us 
 consider but its early blessings. 
 
 Under the benign influences of this promising American system of gov 
 ernment, our w^hole country at once entered upon a career of prosperity 
 without a parallel in human annals. The seventy years of its life brought 
 more thrift, more success, more individual freedom, more universal happi 
 ness with fewer public burdens, than were ever before enjoyed or borne by 
 any portion of the world in five centuries. From three millions of whites 
 we became thirty millions. From three hundred thousand blacks we became 
 
 *r 
 
 four millions a greater relative increase than of the whites with all the aid 
 of immigration. From a narrow peopled slope along the dancing Atlantic 
 we stretched with wide girth to the sluggish Pacific. From a small power 
 which a European depotism, in jealousy of a rival, patronizingly took by the 
 hand and led to independence, we became a power whose voice united was 
 heard throughout the world, and whose frown might well be dreaded 
 by the combined powers of earth. Our granaries fed, and our factories 
 clothed mankind. The buffalo and his hunter were gone, and cities rose in 
 the forests of the former, and flowers grew, and hammers rang, and prayers 
 were said, in the play-grounds of the latter. Millions grew to manhood 
 without seeing a soldier, or hearing a cannon, or knowing the shape or 
 place of a bayonet ! And is this happy, fruitful, peaceful system dying- 
 hopelessly dying ? Has it but twenty days more to live a struggling life ? 
 People of the North, the answer is with you. Rise above passion, throw 
 away corruption, cease to hate and learn to trust, and this dying system 
 will spring to newer and yet more glorious life. The stake is too great for 
 duplicity, and the danger too imminent for trifling. The past calls to you to 
 vindicate its wisdom ; the present charges you with its treasures, and the 
 future demands of you its hopes. Forget your anger, and be superior to 
 the littleness of revenge. Meet the South in her cordial proffers of happy 
 reunion, and turn not from her offered hand. From your great cities and 
 teeming prairies, from your learned altars and countless cottages, from your 
 palaces on sea and land, from your millions on the waters and your mul 
 tiplied millions on the plains, let one united cheering voice meet the voice 
 that now comes so earnest from the South, and let the two voices go up in 
 harmonious, united, eternal, ever-swelling chorus, " Flag of our Union ! wave 
 on, wave ever ! Aye, for it waves over freemen, not subjects ; over States, 
 not provinces ; over a Union of equals, not of lords and vassals ; over a 
 land of law, of liberty, and peace, not of anarchy, oppression, and strife ! r 
 
SPEECH DELIVERED BEFORE THE ALUMNI SOCIETY OF 
 THE UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA, AT ATHENS, GA., ON JULY 
 
 31, 1871. 
 
 This speech is one of the most thoroughly prepared and profound ever made by Mr. 
 Hill. It furnishes a philosophical and exhaustive review of the causes that contributed 
 to Southern weakness in the past, and the means and methods by which the South could 
 grow strong and great in the future By adopting these methods the South has become 
 rich and potential. The speech is that of a leader, and was in advance of the thought 
 of the day, and as a consequence met with much unjust and harsh criticism. We who 
 stand in the light of the fulfillment of its wisdom can but marvel at the genius of the 
 statesman who so clearly pointed out the way for his country s growth and rehabilitation, 
 and wonder at that narrowness which could question the patriotism of his motives and 
 purposes. 
 
 The perversions of the speech were so persistent, and the attacks on Mr. Hill so unjust 
 that he deemed it necessary to make the following explanation of the address. The 
 explanation itself is full of practical wisdom. 
 
 August 3, 1871. 
 
 Editor Constitution : Much as I have been accustomed of late to gross 
 misrepresentation of my opinions, and contemptible flings at motives, I was 
 not prepared for some of the very ludicrous statements concerning this 
 Alumni address. In the first place, the address was written, and, excepting a 
 very few extempore sentences, was spoken as written. In the next place it- 
 is known that by unanimous vote of the Society of Alumni, it is to be given 
 to the public. A very ordinary sense of justice even propriety would 
 suggest that adverse criticisms be delayed until the address appeared in its 
 own language. The language employed by others in reporting it, however 
 honest, cannot be accepted as a proper standard for judging, much less criti 
 cising, a written literary address. 
 
 Attempting, nevertheless, as the address does attempt, however feebly, 
 to blaze the only way by which, in my opinion, the Southern States and 
 people can reach wealth and power, and then, if they desire, and necessity 
 of interest require, independence ; if the unjust denunciations which precede 
 its appearance shall cause it to be read when it appears, I shall really re 
 joice rather than complain, that I was reviled. If my humble suggestions 
 shall have the effect of arresting the attention of great minds, who shall 
 take up the subject, and either cleave out the way indicated or find a better 
 to reach the great end, I can afford to disregard all the shallow allusions to 
 " motives " and other " latitudes," and " tumbling acrobat " of thoughtless 
 scribblers and anonymous slanderers. 
 
 Therefore, to quiet the nerves of some, and prevent the prejudices 
 sought to be created in advance of its publication, allow me space to say, 
 that the address does not underrate Southern civilization in the production 
 of an elegant select society, and of the most superior individualism in the 
 field and in the cabinet. It does not allude, either directly or indirectly, to 
 politics, or political parties, old or new. It does not allude to slavery as a 
 moral question or a question of property, nor is there one word in it which 
 can by possibility be construed as even doubting "our glorious right to carry 
 slaves to Kansas." 
 
 332 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 
 
 Well knowing the great number of "noble minds" engaged in the great 
 work of saving " Southern rights," and seeing the unparalleled success which 
 has attended their wise counsels and well directed efforts in this field hith 
 erto, I thought I could be spared to inquire whether we could not strengthen 
 Southern rights with a little Southern power in the way of developing our 
 natural physical resources through the means of scientific schools and edu 
 cated industries. That which I sought to typify under the classical figure 
 of Prometheus bound and unbound, and at whose release I was disposed to 
 give thanks, was not the negro, but Southern genius. 
 
 Will the time never come when a native Southern man even one than 
 whom none has felt more keenly Southern wrongs, nor denounced more fear 
 lessly Southern oppressors, nor is willing to labor more earnestly for South 
 ern prosperity can venture to suggest that negro slavery is not the only 
 way of Southern salvation, without having so many, who make no effort to 
 meet the argument, denounce him as " unsound." 
 
 In their countless multiplicity of specimens for six thousand years, hu 
 man annals have never before furnished such a people as " we glorious 
 Southerners." 
 
 With every ingredient more abundant at home, we send to the originally 
 barren North for fertilizers to give life to our originally fertile, now dead 
 ened, soil ; with the finest ores and exhaustless coal beds peeping at us from 
 our own hill-sides, we send North for tools to work our fields ; with the 
 richest lands on the continent, we send North for bread to feed our children ; 
 with the noblest trees that ever lifted their tops toward heaven, if we want 
 a finer church in which to worship, or a more convenient residence in which 
 to live, we send North for the plan, for the architect, and for the builder ! 
 We spend millions of dollars sending our children North to be educated, and 
 refuse the smallest pittance for the endowment of universities at home. 
 Our physicians and surgeons send North for their medicines to heal, and 
 for the tools that secure skill in their delicate art. Our lawyers send North 
 for the books in which to learn the rule of justice for our people. Our 
 preachers send North for commentaries on the Bible to teach their 
 fiock the way of salvation. Our editors send North for type to print their 
 papers ; and lawyers, preachers, and editors make long speeches, say long 
 prayers, and fill whole columns, thanking God for superior Southern genius, 
 purity, and learning ! And our politicians, ah ! shades of Demosthenes and 
 Cicero, bend down and hear the matchless periods of true patriotic eloquence. 
 Our politicians strut like condescending Jtipiters to the hustings with 
 Northern hats on their heads, Northern shoes on their feet, and Northern 
 coats on their backs, and prove to gaping crowds their unequaled fitness for 
 office, in straining their lungs as the thunder gust doth the yielding clouds 
 with noisy denunciations of Northern weakness and greed, and climatic 
 eulogies on Southern power and independence. 
 
 If my humble voice could be heard by the Southern people, I would 
 urge them to do many things which these very derided Northern people 
 have done. Endow first-class universities ; provide for polytechnic schools 
 in those universities ; honor labor, and make the callings of the miner, the 
 manufacturer, the metallurgist, the machinist, the agriculturist, and the 
 mechanic, as learned and as honorable, as are the learned professions of law, 
 medicine, and theology. We cannot live by bread alone. We cannot grow 
 great, or rich, or independent, by planting alone. Let us find in our children 
 that skilled labor which was impossible in the ignorant negro slave ; and 
 
334 % SENATOR R II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 with that skilled labor let us utilize the unsurpassed natural physical ele 
 ments of power with which God has filled almost every portion of our here 
 tofore neglected country. If we do these things promptly, vigorously, and 
 liberally, it will soon be that the sun in his cycles will not let fall his rays 
 on a greater or more prosperous people. If we do not these things, we shall 
 grow weaker until we be despised as contemptible. The stranger even the 
 enemy we hate will come in and possess our heritage ; will build up the 
 land we neglect, and will be the rulers of the children we leave behind us. 
 
 To have pointed out the weakness which has prevented these blessings 
 in the past, and the means which may secure them in the future, is my only 
 offending. To see the work begin and progress in my day is my greatest 
 earthly desire. To aid in that work is my highest ambition, and to be 
 remembered as one who had the courage to tell unpleasant truths to a long 
 deluded and now impoverished people, that they might wake up and grow 
 great, is the only earthly glory I crave, when I have been interred and 
 sleep with the fathers. 
 
 Now read the address, and by its own words let me be judged. 
 
 BENJ. H. HILL. 
 
 CORRESPONDENCE. 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA, 
 
 ATHENS, GA., July 31, 1871. 
 
 My Dear Sir : I have the honor of submitting to you the following res 
 olution, unanimously passed by the Society of the Alumni of the University 
 of Georgia, at their regular annual meeting, held this day, viz. : 
 By Colonel Samuel Hall : 
 
 11 Resolved, That the thanks of the Society of the Alumni be returned to 
 Mr. B. H. Hill for the able, eloquent, and instructive address delivered at 
 their request before them, on this day, and that a copy of the same be re 
 quested for publication." 
 
 Hoping that you will comply with the wishes of the society, I am, with 
 great respect, your obedient servant, 
 
 WILLIAM HENRY WADDELL, 
 
 Secretary of the Society of the Alumni, University of Georgia. 
 Mr. B. H. HILL. 
 
 ATLANTA, GA., September 9, 1871. 
 
 My Dear Sir : Your letter of July 31, communicating the resolution of 
 the society, asking a copy of the address for publication, reached me two 
 days ago. 
 
 I cheerfully furnish a copy as requested, and for the purpose designated. 
 With high regard, I am yours, very truly, 
 
 BENJ. H. HILL. 
 Professor WILLIAM HENRY WADDELL, 
 
 Secretary of Society of Alumni, University of Georgia. 
 
 ADDRESS. 
 Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Alumni Society : I congratulate you 
 
 on this SWiemWu*S tQ-day t J congratulate our dear, though unfortunate, old 
 
.575- LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 335 
 
 State, because of the purpose which has prompted us to come together. 
 And I greet with words of cheer and hope the many who shall come after us, 
 because of the work which, I trust, we shall this day inaugurate. 
 
 Residents in every portion of our commonwealth representatives of 
 every interest in this, the land we love sharers in all the trials of the past 
 -sufferers in all the destitutions of the present, and yet partakers, all, of that 
 bliss-inspiring ambition which looks for compensation to the glories with 
 which ourselves shall help to enrich the future we, her children, gather this 
 day in this, her nursery-hall, to ask our loved mother what she needs to place 
 and keep her abreast, the equal of the greatest, the peer of the noblest, in the 
 progressive world of science, letters, and art. 
 
 In the present, far more than in any preceding age, ideas govern mankind. 
 Not individuals, nor societies ; not kings, nor emperors ; not fleets, nor armies, 
 but ideas educated intellects using and controlling all these, as doth the 
 mechanic his tools, uproot dynasties, overturn established systems, subvert 
 and reorganize governments, revolutionize social fabrics, and direct civiliza 
 tions. True, we have the most wonderful physical developments as mar 
 velous in character as they are rapid in multiplication. Whether we look to 
 the engines for war, or the arts of peace, to the means of destruction or the 
 appliances for preservation, to the facilities for distribution or the sources of 
 production and accumulation, we shall find nothing in the past comparable to 
 the achievements of the present. But all these gigantic elements of physical 
 power are but the fruits of educated minds have leaped into being at the 
 command of ideas, and they are under the absolute control of ideas ; and 
 whether they shall really promote or destroy civilizations must depend alto 
 gether upon the wise or unwise discretion of this omnipotent commander. 
 Thought is the Hercules of this age, and his strength is equally a vigorous 
 fact, whether it be employed in throttling the lion of power, or in cleaning 
 out the Augean stables of accumulated social errors. Moving by nations, by 
 races, and by systems, this irresistible ruler educated thought is setting 
 aside old and setting up new civilizations at will. 
 
 It is not my purpose now to analyze the different civilizations which are 
 competing in the great struggle to lead humanity, nor to select any one for 
 prominent advocacy. Nor must I be understood as saying that that which 
 changes always reforms, nor yet, that every apparent triumph is a just prog 
 ress. But this much I affirm is true ; that community, that people, that 
 nation nay, that race or that system which, Diogenes-like, will now content 
 itself with living in its own tub, asking nothing of the conquering powers 
 around it, except that they stand out of its sunshine, will soon find itself in 
 hopeless darkness, the object of derision for its helplessness, and of con 
 tempt for its folly. Whether civilizations, on the whole, be going forward 
 or going backward, the result must be the same to those who insist on 
 standing still they must be overwhelmed. Because all the world is, there 
 fore, each portion of the world must be awake and thinking up and 
 acting. Nor can we afford to waste time and strength in defense of theories 
 and systems, however valued in their day, which have been swept down by 
 the moving avalanche of actual events. No system which has fallen and 
 been destroyed in the struggles of the past will ever be able to rise and grap 
 ple with the increasing power of its conqueror in the future.- We can 
 live neither in nor by the defeated past, and if we would live in the growing, 
 conquering future, we must furnish our strength to shape its course and our 
 will to discharge its duties, The pressing question, therefore, with every 
 
336 SENATOR R II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 people is, not what they have been, but whether and what they shall deter 
 mine to be ; not what their fathers were, but whether and what their chil 
 dren shall be. 
 
 God in events mysteriously, it may be, to us has made the educated 
 men in the South, of this generation, the living leaders of thought for a great 
 and a noble people, but a people bewildered by the suddenness with which 
 they have been brought to one of those rare junctures in human affairs 
 when one civilization abruptly ends and another begins. I feel oppressed 
 with a sense of fear that we shall not be equal to the unusual responsibilities 
 this condition imposes, unless, conquerors, indeed, of the greatest model, we 
 can deal frankly with these events, frankly with ourselves, and bravely with 
 our very habits of thought. Though unjustly, even cruelly slain, brave sur 
 vivors lie not down with the dead, but rise up resolved all the more to be 
 leaders and conquerors with and for the living. 
 
 Let, then, the other days of this literary festival suffice for the fascina 
 tions of rhetoric and the cultured figures of oratory. It accords alike with 
 the grave duties of our assembling, with the suggestions of those who have 
 called me to this task, and with my own convictions of duty, to deal with 
 practical thoughts, looking to results, and to " speak forth the words of truth 
 and soberness." I propose, therefore, to consider: 
 
 I. The situation of the Southern people in their relation to the other civ 
 ilized peoples of this age. 
 
 II. The means by which that situation may be improved and advanced, 
 and especially our educational wants and demands in this connection. 
 
 III. The application of the views presented to our own State, to our own 
 university, and thence deduce our duties as citizens of the State, and as 
 alumni of the university. 
 
 In 1787, when the States, by their delegates, were engaged in the work 
 of framing a government for a common Union, and the then existing and 
 prospective relative powers of the several States and sections were being dis 
 cussed, there were wise men who ventured, with much confidence, to predict 
 that in a not distant future the Southern States would surpass all others in 
 population, wealth, and power. Nor was this prediction then unreasonable. 
 The areas of these States were most extended. Their soils were naturally 
 the most fertile. Their climate was the most genial, with a temperature 
 compatible with out-door labor during all seasons of the year. Their pro 
 ductions were the most varied and deemed of greatest commercial value, 
 though at that time tobacco, rice, and indigo were the chief staples; and that 
 marvelous fibrous texture which is now strong enough to tie the fortunes of 
 all people, more or less, to these States, was then little known or relied on. 
 So, also, their harbors for commerce were as many and as wide and as deep; 
 and although geology and other physical sciences had then scarcely more 
 vision than he who only saw men as trees walking, yet, with even that faint 
 vision, they saw gold and silver, and iron and lead, and coal and all minerals, 
 rich, accessible, and exhaustless, in their hills and valleys and mountains. 
 
 But the hopeful anticipations of those wise men have not been realized. 
 Areas less extended contain more, homes. Soils less fertile have produced 
 more fruits. Climates where the snows scarcely melt have attracted more 
 people than our sunny skies. Coal and iron, and all metals, which in other 
 States were deep buried, have been, with immense labor and expenditures and 
 dangers, dragged from the bowels of the opened earth; while here, where 
 they lie at the surface, and seem to throw off the earth s covering as if to hear 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 3G7 
 
 the zephyr and peep at the sun, they are still undisturbed. Many of our best 
 harbors, as fine as any filled by the waters of the sea, do not know to this 
 
 %f & 
 
 day but that the vessels which carry the golden fleeces of commerce are still 
 of Argonautic pattern, and if they were to hear the fierce blowing of the fly 
 ing steamers, they would testify to all the gods of mythology that old Neptune 
 had grown angry, and in thundering wrath was lashing his dominions. Why 
 this failure ? Charge not God. He has done for no people more than for us. 
 He gave us not only the sweetest flowers, the richest fruits, and the brightest 
 skies, but He added to these every other good gift. Nor can this failure be 
 charged to any deficiency in the white race. This earth contains no white 
 race superior to the Southern people. Still, the question comes back to us, 
 why have States with inferior natural advantages advanced more rapidly in 
 wealth, in population, and in all the elements and means of power ? Our 
 failure must be found in the manner of improving our gifts and not in the 
 want of them. The beginning of all greatness in our future must be based 
 on the wisdom which shall discern and the courage that shall correct the 
 real cause of this, our failure in the past. 
 
 This cause, in my opinion, is to be found in one fact, but a fact which, 
 like the Lernean hydra, multiplied itself. That multiplying fact is this : The 
 Southern laborer was a slave, a negro slave, and an ignorant negro slave. 
 
 It is not within the scope of this address to discuss the morality of slav 
 ery, nor the views of the Southern people touching the question of property 
 in slaves, nor even to allude to any political issue of the past on the subject 
 of slavery, nor yet to venture so much as an opinion on the effects of slav 
 ery, or of its abolition, on the fate of the negro race. I only propose to 
 show that slavery affected, and most deleteriously affected, the Southern 
 States and people in general scientific, physical, and educational progress, 
 and especially in material and commercial development, and, as a conse 
 quence, delayed their growth in population, wealth, and physical power. 
 
 In the first place it must be conceded that the most striking manifesta 
 tions of progress in modern civilization are found in the extensions of edu 
 cational facilities to the masses of the people ; in the elevation and advance 
 ment of strictly industrial pursuits ; in the establishment of scientific, 
 physical, mechanical, and all polytechnic schools, and in the discoveries 
 made and results wrought by educated and enlightened industries. Indeed, 
 I am not convinced that this generation has witnessed any religious, politi 
 cal, moral, or professional progress. Religion, the science of faith, so to 
 speak, being the inspiration of God, can never become a subject for im 
 provement by human skill or art. It was altogether perfect when first 
 given. It exhausted truth when first spoken. True, science does frequently 
 and arrogantly parade some new discovery as proof that the Bible is a 
 fable ; and hence it is that we have sometimes seen the greatest of human 
 intellects become, for the moment, victims of the most pitiable of human 
 weaknesses, and, discarding the only true God, bow down to some idol of 
 their own creation. This was strikingly illustrated in the early days of 
 geology. 
 
 Therefore, while there can be no new discoveries of faith, and no wiser 
 utterances than those of the despised Nazarene, yet in view of this anxious 
 proneness of the mind to discover a god of its own for worship, it is import 
 ant that the ambassadors of heaven should become the pupils of all human 
 schools, and keep pace with human science in all her ever-freshening fields, 
 that they may be able to show that whatsoever that science may or can dis- 
 
038 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 cover, however new or startling to us, it is only what He who guided the 
 babe of the bulrush, who elated the Judean shepherds, and inspired the 
 Galilean fishermen, always knew and never contradicted. To the extent, 
 therefore, that the physical and natural sciences have progressed, the theo 
 logians of this day may be and ought to be more learned than those of 
 preceding ages. 
 
 So, again, I doubt whether this century has witnessed any progress in 
 the science of government or of law. Popularism is the distinguishing fea 
 ture of modern statesmanship. Improvement in that direction is still a 
 problem. At the hazard of wounding the pride or offending the vanity of 
 the disciples of modern professional sciolism, I must be permitted to ques 
 tion whether, since their day, civilized nations have produced any lawyer 
 more profound than Blackstone, any pleader so accurate as Chitty, or any 
 judge wiser than Mansrield ? 
 
 Similar remarks might be made touching other branches of learning ; 
 but I have said enough to fix and isolate the point before stated, that mod 
 ern progress is chiefly, it* not entirely, found not in the advancements of 
 what are called the learned professions, but in the education and elevation 
 of the masses ; in the discoveries and appliances of the physical sciences ; 
 in the establishment of schools of science, and in the promotion, enlarge 
 ment, and results of all departments of industries. To these we owe those 
 remarkable inventions which substitute the sinews of nature for the muscles 
 of men and animals in the work of productions ; that wonderful facility of 
 distribution which makes the most delicate fruits of each clime the fresh 
 comforts of every people ; and that ever-marvelous system of communica 
 tion which enables each living man to step to his door, nay, to sit in his 
 chamber and converse with all other men in whispers, and which enables 
 the man beneath us, with his head pointing the other way, to send us his 
 greetings with each rising sun, saying, " Good-morning, neighbor" And to 
 these we owe also innumerable comforts and conveniences in every field of 
 business and in every sphere and department of life. 
 
 Now, let me ask, how much to all this wonderful progress of modern 
 civilization, to all these comforts, conveniences, and facilities of man and of 
 society, have the slaveholding States and people contributed? Nay, how 
 much of all these works of others have we even appropriated and reproduced 
 except as cupidity has tempted others to furnish them? We have railroads, 
 and telegraph lines, and a small proportion of needed manufactories. But 
 whence came the educated engineers who build and operate them? We 
 have a few machine-shops, but whence came the machinists? Go even into 
 our laundries, our kitchens, our chambers, and our parlors, and tell me how 
 many of the comforts, the conveniences, the elegancies you find there were 
 made by slave labor ; indeed by labor in slaveholding States ? These things 
 can be so truthfully said of no other people entitled to position in the column 
 of advancing civilizations. 
 
 In accounting for these shortcomings my predicate is, that the cause 
 must be found, not in the absence of natural gifts or resources, and not in 
 any inferiority of our white race, but in the fact that hitherto the laborer 
 of the South has been a slave, and a negro slave. The first step in the 
 argument is this : 
 
 Because of the condition of slavery, the supposed nature of the slave, 
 and the external pressure which aggravated both, it was deemed essential, 
 for internal peace and social security, to make ignorance the primal condi- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WHITINGS. 339 
 
 tion of the slave, and, as a result, the primal law of labor. Thus the South 
 ern States were driven to the fearful disadvantage, in competing with a 
 world advancing by means of educated industries, of making it a penal 
 offense a punishable crime to educate their laborers. 
 
 Whatever may have been the necessities of such a policy as touching 
 the safety of society or the well-being and proper subjection of the slave, 
 it must be said that no greater curse can be inflicted upon any people than 
 that of being compelled to keep as their chief laborers persons who, for any 
 cause, it cannot be both wise and safe to educate. 
 
 The first effect of this state of things was the necessity of confining our 
 principal labor to the simplest processes processes requiring muscle and 
 not skill. But this itself is a paradox, for I deny that there can be any 
 labor which skill cannot progress, elevate, and improve. Another effect, 
 and one still more serious, was that labor, in a great degree, became degraded 
 to the condition of the laborer. The real supporter of all society the pro 
 ducer and the true author of all comfortable appliances and physical im 
 provements the mechanic, the machinist, and the artisan felt the weight 
 which thus pressed them from the front seats of social consideration, and 
 assigned them a kind of half-way position between the gentleman and the 
 slave. A large proportion of our white population, not born to fortune nor 
 blessed with first-class educational advantages, struggled, by all practicable 
 means, to avoid the kinds of labor performed by slaves, and labor itself, if 
 possible. They would resent, as an insult impeaching their respectability, 
 all invitations to occupy the same useful positions in our society which the 
 same class of population in all other countries were glad to fill. "Thank 
 you, sir ; I am not a slave," was the ever-ready answer of starving pride to 
 the most courteous offers for service by opulence. 
 
 The educated minds of the South sought, almost exclusively, the profes 
 sional fields for employment. Our social fabric was built, in great measure, 
 upon the distinctions which these results created. Even intellectual and 
 professional labors were avoided, if the number of slaves doing vicarious 
 service would permit the enjoyment of those most generally desired of all 
 positions in society elegant leisure, luxurious abandon, and hospitable 
 idleness. Even the business of teaching the calling of Plato did not 
 obtain, save, perhaps, in our first-class universities, the position of estima 
 tion to which it is always so justly entitled, because its followers were 
 either, in some sense, laborers, or were supposed not to possess the number 
 of slaves deemed necessary to an easy independence. 
 
 Thus it was that, in a world whose greatest necessity is labor, and in an 
 age when all other peoples were being prized into power by the Archime 
 dean lever of educated labor, we of the Southern States were earnestly 
 defending and maintaining a system of labor whose legal status was igno 
 rance, and whose social impression was that labor was the badge of a slave, 
 entailing a sort of social degradation, while idleness was the lucky fate of a 
 gentleman, entitling to social excellence. Many of our "best societv" would 
 
 "1 1 v 
 
 nave deemed it a scandal to have been suspected of being capable of dis 
 charging the simplest functions of many necessary labors. How many of 
 our educated young men, especially sons of large slaveholders, were willing, 
 like Abraham, to bring with their own hands the tender kid from the flock ; 
 and how many of our accomplished and fashionable young ladies were either 
 willing or able, like Sarah, "to knead three measures of fine meal, and 
 bake cakes on the hearth," to induce even angels to tarry? They could 
 
340 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 well entertain them with exhibitions of imported millinery, with lively ac 
 counts of the last romance, and with marvelous sounds of operatic music, all, 
 doubtless, novelties in their country ; but, I fear, if some sable Dinah were 
 not about, even angels would have to go away hungry ! * 
 
 So, again, our politics became absorbed, passionately absorbed, with 
 issues involving slavery ; and those theories of our government, with the 
 maintenance of which the existence and protection of slavery were supposed 
 to be intertwined, became the specialty of our statesmanship. Here, indeed, 
 we produced lengthy, learned, and able disquisitions, combined with logical 
 power and exhibitions of oratory such as no people ever surpassed, and thus 
 most abundantly demonstrated that Southern intellectual capabilities were 
 equal to any task. But what real permanent progress have these made for 
 us? Take our most distinguished, able, and renowned statesmen of this 
 generation ; exclude from their works those portions devoted to slavery and 
 the theory of government alluded to, and pray tell me, what is left ? 
 
 Where are our Bacons, or Newtoris, or Blackstones, or Burkes, who, by 
 labors long and vigils many, have wrought out theories of government, 
 codes of law, and revelations of science, applicable alike to all people and 
 blessing all conditions of mankind ? Nay, where are even our Storys, Ban 
 crofts, and our Noah Websters ? There are many whom the ghost of our 
 dead civilization may justly call champions, her champions ; but how many 
 have we whom living, growing, immortal civilizations will honor as victors 
 in the world s field of thought ? Then, turning our attention to those fields 
 of thought and of progress which I have described as peculiarly distinguish 
 ing the civilizations of other peoples, and where are our trophies any 
 trophies for us ? 
 
 It has been said the South was intended by nature to be only an agricul 
 tural country. This is one of the sickening excuses of slavery. But con 
 cede it, and the question recurs with terrible force, What have we done in 
 agriculture save to wear away our soils by the application of ignorant mus 
 cle ? Do the millions of acres of land originally fertile, now deserted, as 
 barren, given up to sedge-grass and clump-pines, attest the skill of igno 
 rant slave labor in this its chosen field? If this were the only field for slave 
 labor and it was certainly a rich gift from nature how vigorously has 
 slavery been destroying it. 
 
 But why did God pile up our mountains and fill them with coal and iron 
 and all metals and minerals, if He did not intend us to be a mining and me 
 chanical people ? Why did He send through every neighborhood the finest 
 of earth s streams with exhaustless water-powers, if He did not intend us to 
 be a manufacturing people ? Why did He dig along our shores such mag 
 nificent harbors, and give us productions which exceed all others in com 
 mercial value, if He did not intend us to be a commercial people ? Nay, God 
 has given us every element of progress possessed by any other people, and to 
 none did He give them in greater profusion. But they all lie unimproved, 
 
 That great Southern man, Thomas Jefferson, in speaking of the evils of slavery on 
 the Southern people, says: " With the morals of the people their industry also is destroyed. 
 For in a warm climate, no man will labor for himself who can make another labor for 
 him. This is so true, that, of the proprietors of slaves, a very small proportion, indeed, 
 are ever seen to labor." (Jefferson s Works, vol. viii, 404.) Now, I admit that slavery 
 did have the industrial effect described by Mr. Jefferson, but I deny the moral effect. I 
 think no people ever exhibited a more hospitable and refined society, nor one in which 
 the standard of morals was higher, than did the Southern people under slavery. 
 
II1S LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 341 
 
 because labor, by which alone they can be utilized, has been degraded as a 
 thins: of muscle, meet to belong to the slave, and not honored as the God- 
 
 ^j ^j * 
 
 intended means by which educated genius and skill should convert every 
 thing into power. 
 
 So, too, while our native labor was thus kept by law, by ignorance, and 
 by consequent social distinctions, incapable of developing our physical re 
 sources, the educated skill of other countries, in great measure, declined to 
 abide among and work for a people with whom labor was the fate of the 
 slave and the aversion of a gentleman. For every one of these who was 
 
 */ 
 
 willing to make his home among us and work up our raw material on the 
 spot, there were ten who preferred hastily to gather up that raw material 
 and freight it away, and then freight back a proportion of the manufactured 
 result for our use, with all charges added. Thus, our exhaustless natu 
 ral resources seem to exhibit the more glaringly our inability, under our sys 
 tem of labor, to convert them into things of wealth, use, and power. 
 
 When controversy over slavery lately culminated into war, our enemies 
 had only to shut np the South from the outside world most effectually to 
 exclude her from all the modern facilities for conducting that war. In this 
 condition, thrown upon our own strength, we found ourselves unable to 
 manufacture those facilities. Every raw material we possessed in abundance, 
 but we had neither the machinery to make that material available, nor the 
 skilled labor to make or operate the machinery, save only in the persons of 
 a few who were educated in other countries and consented to cast in their 
 lots with us. We were reduced to the necessity of trusting to the skill and 
 daring of bold adventurers, stimulated with promises of large rewards, to 
 elude the wary sentinels of wrath in the darkness, to bring in a scant supply 
 of munitions of war, and of even clothing to hide the nakedness of our troops. 
 One of the most remarkable features of our struggle, without a parallel in 
 historic civilized annals, was that our soldiers often resorted to the most 
 courageous strategy to capture enemies, desiring less the enemy than their 
 improved weapons of war ; and often did it happen that our brave sons 
 threw away the inferior arms in which they began the fight, and rearmed 
 themselves, in the raging midst thereof, with the better arms taken from 
 the foe. 
 
 If, before the war, the Southern States had kept pace with the world in 
 physical progress and scientific schools, they would have been invincible by 
 anyforce which the enemy could have sent against them.* 
 
 We failed, but not for the want of skilled leaders. These we had, and 
 human annals never furnished their superiors. Not for the want of coura 
 geous armies; for these, too, we had, and human conflicts never marshaled 
 braver for battle. We had learned counselors, able generals, gallant soldiers, 
 
 * Since the address was delivered, a very intelligent gentleman has placed in my hands 
 a very able work on "Coal, Iron, and Oil," written by a gentleman of Pennsylvania 
 since the war. In this work I find the following confession": " If the Southern States 
 had kept pace with the Northern in developing their physical resources there would have 
 occurred no rebellion ; but if it had occurred, it would have been utterly impossible to 
 have subdued that people." 
 
 Coal lands sell in England for from $5000 to $7000 per acre ; in Pennsylvania for 
 from $500 to $1000 per acre. Lands, fully equal in natural value in Georgia, sell from 
 $1 to $5 per acre. Pennsylvania has $230,000,000 invested in the anthracite coal business 
 alone, more than the taxable value of the State of Georgia. The City of Pittsburgh, built 
 and sustained by the coal and iron business alone, has a population of one hundred and 
 fifty thousand, more than the six of the largest cities of Georgia combined. 
 
342 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 and an earnest people, all stimulated with the belief that independence, liberty, 
 and hope hung upon the issue of the struggle ; but we had not those physi 
 cal elements of power which modern sciences and skilled labor have fashioned, 
 and without which it is now vain to make war, and therefore we failed. In 
 the right for which we fought was the weakness by which we fell.* 
 
 In fine, it is no extravagance of thought nor straining of language to 
 affirm that for two generations Southern progress, Southern development, 
 and Southern power have been in bondage to the negro ; and Southern fail 
 ure, Southern dependence, and Southern sorrow are the heavy penalties we suf 
 fer for that bondage. For more than thirty years Southern genius, with all 
 its glorious natural spirit of Promethean daring and venture, has been chained 
 by some offended god of jealous vengeance to this solid rock of slavery, and 
 vultures have preyed upon it. 
 
 Tis LOOSED ! We inquire not how, whether by fate or by folly ; whether 
 in right or in hate ; nor whether the human agency was wicked in purpose 
 and cruel in manner ; we thank thee, God, for the fact TIS LOOSED ! 
 
 II. Understanding now the causes of our shortcomings hitherto, the next 
 question is, by what means shall our situation be improved ? Suddenly and 
 without remedy slavery has been abolished. The peculiar civilization wrought 
 by slavery must perish with it, and a great proportion of the labors of the 
 South, being mere supports and results of that civilization, must perish too. 
 But does it follow that Southern genius, Southern prosperity, and the 
 Southern people must perish also ? Are we to admit that our deficiencies 
 were attributable to the governing race of the South rather than to the want 
 of skill and efficiency in our system of labor ? The attempt to locate the 
 cause of our failure to advance in population, wealth, and power, in the laws 
 of immigration, by parallels of latitude, and in the exclusive adaptedness of 
 the South to agriculture, will not convince. The truth is, immigrants com 
 ing from free countries did not follow parallels, but followed systems, habits, 
 and feelings, and avoided slavery ; and negro slave labor was chiefly 
 confined to agriculture, because it did not possess the skill and intelligence 
 needed for educated industries. Let us see plainly the cause, and let us ap 
 ply vigorously the remedy. If this generation of our educated men will now 
 
 * In that great speech of Mr. Burke, "On conciliation .with America," we have a true 
 and philosophical description of the dominating and invincible spirit and love of freedom 
 found in slave countries. Every page of American history since that day has illustrated 
 the correctness of the utterance in that speech. And for that very feature in the philos 
 ophy of slavery, so tersely expressed by Mr. Burke, I believe if the slaveholding States 
 had been content to remain integral portions of the United States, and had sought redress 
 for grievances only in the Union, and as the faithful adherent and defender of the gov 
 ernment of the Union under the Constitution, they would have continued, as they had 
 ever been, the controlling power in that Union. They would have furnished the leaders 
 of the cabinet in peace, and the leaders of the armies in war. It was so in the first revo 
 lutionary war. It was so in the war of 1812. It was so in the war with Mexico. And if 
 in 1861 the united sections had gone to war with a foreign power instead of with each 
 other, who doubts that even the Northern people would have placed Lee and Jackson at 
 the head of the combined armies ? And against such a people, the South furnishing 
 unequaled skilled leaders, and the North unequaled skilled labor and materials the 
 world might have united in vain. 
 
 But that same dominating spirit and love of freedom spoken of by Mr. Burke made 
 slavery insist upon standing alone. Then we found that modern science and skilled labor 
 since Mr. Burke s day had made something besides brains and courage necessary to 
 success in war. Fatal mistake ? It was death to slavery ! I pray God it may result 
 in the final death of nothing else ! 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 
 
 bestir themselves, we shall soon find that only our fetters have been broken, 
 and the day of unequaled greatness and prosperitywill dawn and brighten 
 to glorious and lasting noon in the South. 
 
 All our natural advantages, damaged only by a worn soil, ignorantly 
 worked, remain in all their freshness and plenty. We must utilize them. 
 And that we may utilize thehi we must honor, elevate, and educate labor, 
 and to this end we must establish schools of science, and train our children 
 to businesses and callings other than law, medicine, and theology. 
 
 If our own people shall not be educated, and thus enabled to appropriate 
 and convert into power and wealth the natural resources we possess, other 
 educated peoples will now come in and appropriate them, and the orig 
 inal Southern population and their descendants will indeed perish with sla 
 very, or pass away like the Indians, or will sink into a condition of inferi 
 ority and dependence more galling and ignoble than death or exile. 
 
 The first step of upward progress is to build up our universities. Flow 
 ing down from these, education must reach the masses. Our own sons must 
 be taught to build and operate all machinery. Furnaces and foundries, 
 studios and workshops, must be as honorable and abundant as the offices of 
 the learned professions, and they must be filled with our own children, made 
 experts in our own schools of science. Then population will also flow in from 
 other States and countries, and in a form not to displace or dominate over us 
 but only to add to our strength. Then wealth will increase, homes will 
 multiply, power become a fact and not a theory, and then, and not till then, 
 we shall see and feel, taking bodily shape and form, those tantalizing, per 
 plexing myths after which we have so long vainly grasped State rights, 
 State sovereignty, and State independence ! 
 
 And what shall we do with [ the negro ? He is still among us. His 
 capacities still form a problem. But our duty is plain, and our interest is 
 equally plain. We must do all in our power to educate, elevate, protect, 
 and advance the negro. If his capabilities prove sufficient to enable us to 
 promote him into an intelligent laborer, the country will reap the benefit. 
 If they prove insufficient, we shall have demonstrated the fact, and others 
 will take his place. We must have an educated labor. We must have 
 multiplied industries. We must have schools of agriculture, of commerce, 
 of manufactures, of mining, of technology, and, in short, of all polytechnics, 
 and we must have them as sources of power and respectability, and in all 
 our own sons must be qualified to take the lead and point the way. 
 
 III. Let us, in the third place, apply the views presented to our own 
 State, to our own university, and thence deduce our duties to both. 
 
 No portion of the habitable globe surpasses Georgia in natural gifts. In 
 coal, iron, and metals she equals Pennsylvania. In timber and water power 
 for machinery she exceeds, beyond computation, Massachusetts. In capacity 
 to sustain population she is greater than New York ; and in the value and 
 variety of her productions and the genial healthfulness of her climate she 
 is excelled by no equal area of the earth s surface. Those wise men, there 
 fore, who, in 1787, predicted the superior growth of the Southern States in 
 wealth, population, and power, were certainly not unreasonable in reference 
 to our own State. Then why, with such vastly superior natural gifts, is 
 Georgia so far behind each of the States mentioned, and, indeed, so far 
 behind other younger and smaller States not mentioned ? Only because the 
 art and skill which utilize natural advantages have been applied there, and 
 have not been applied here. We have looked almost exclusively to the 
 
344 SENATOR R If. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 negro slave as our laborer. We have, by law, kept even the negro an 
 ignorant laborer. We have thus fixed a social brand on labor itself, and 
 have thus made it promotive of social caste to be able to live idly, and one of 
 the greatest of misfortunes, entailing a sort of social exclusion, to be compelled 
 to labor. This system has rendered our own people unwilling and unquali 
 fied to multiply our fields of industry, and this same system has kept away 
 the educated laborers of other countries. The result is, that almost the 
 only field of labor occupied in our State is that one of agriculture supposed 
 to be adapted to the capacities of the uneducated negro slave, and in that 
 field we find our natural strength greatly lessened by the perpetual wear of 
 ignorant muscle, instead of being, as in the States mentioned, improved by 
 educated skill. We have not only refused to mine our metals and give 
 employment to our water-powers, but we have been cutting down and burn 
 ing up our forests ; we have so stirred our soils that the rain which kindly 
 came to fructify them were compelled cruelly to wash them away ; we have 
 converted into the flesh and bones of the slaves the wealth which God 
 placed in our lands, and then carried the slaves west to repeat the process ; 
 and in all the natural elements of agricultural wealth we are weaker to-day 
 than we were in 1787.* 
 
 Now, this process cannot continue. Our coal and iron will not always 
 sleep in the shallow earth because we think it unbecoming the social position 
 of an educated gentleman to wake them up and lift them out. Our magnifi 
 cent trees will not always grow and fall and decay because our young men 
 think the style of a gentleman is a soft hand in a kid glove. Nor will the 
 educated laborers of other States and countries always, or even much longer, 
 send here and freight away, at great expense and labor, our raw material to 
 foreign shops for manufacture. No ; that supposed necessity which enacted 
 the law that labor, as a thing of muscle, must be kept ignorant, has been 
 swept away. Its consequences, social and otherwise, must cease. The time 
 is coming, and now is, when professional gentlemen will not be regarded as 
 the only class of occupied society who need a first-class education, and who 
 may compete with the more fortunate idle in social excellence and matri 
 monial preference. 
 
 Whether we educate them or not, and whether in the persons of our 
 
 * General T. R. R. Cobb, in his work on slavery, speaking of the migratory habits of 
 slaveholders, uses this strong language : 
 
 " In a slaveholding State, the greatest evidence of wealth in the planter is the number 
 of his slaves. The most desirable property for a remunerative income is slaves. The 
 best property to leave to his children, and from which they will part with greatest reluc 
 tance, is slaves. Hence, the planter invests his surplus income in slaves. The natural 
 result is that lands are a secondary consideration. No surplus is left for their im 
 provement. The homestead is valued only so long as the adjacent lands are profitable 
 for cultivation. The planter himself having no local attachments, his children inherit 
 none. On the contrary, he encourages in them a disposition to seek new lands. His 
 valuable property (his slaves) are easily removed to fresh lands ; much more easily than 
 to bring the fertilizing material to the old. The result is that they, as a class, are never 
 settled. Such a population is almost nomadic. It is useless to seek to excite patriotic 
 emotions in behalf of the land of birth, where self-interest speaks so loudly. On the 
 other hand, where no slavery exists, and the planter s surplus cannot be invested in 
 laborers, it is appropriated to the improvement or extension of his farm, the beautifying 
 of the homestead where his fathers are buried, and where he hopes to lie." (Cobb, On 
 Slavery, 217.) 
 
 The truth is that those wonderful patriots, who become hysterical when a defect in 
 slavery is admitted, are of very modern growth. It almost seems as if God raised them 
 up to run the people mad, that slavery might be destroyed ! . 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 345 
 
 own children or not, the practical geologist, the mineralogist, the chemist, 
 the miner, the manufacturer, the machinist, the mechanic, the engineer, the 
 artisan, the earnest alumni of all schools of applied science, with diplomas 
 in their pockets, are all to inhabit and will inhabit and work and build up 
 this State so favored with rich gifts and spreading fields for all. 
 
 Our tired soil will strike up a song like unto Miriam s, when it feels the 
 touch of accomplished skill. Our ores will leap from their beds, and in 
 ringing mirth make and feed active machinery. Our flowers and plants will 
 load the air with merry fragrance as they yield their hidden essences to 
 heal and to comfort. Our water-falls, wearied with the solos of centuries, 
 will join in musical duets with the shuttle and loom. Our pine and oak, 
 and walnut and cypress, will take every form of beauty and every shape for 
 use. Our fields, renewed like a strong man from his couch of fever, will 
 vield tenfold sheaves for our garners. Our wildernesses will be filled with 
 
 *. t__r 
 
 cottages ; our villages will grow into cities, and our cities will enlarge their 
 borders and increase their spires ; and our harbors will proudly ride the 
 ships of the whole earth, bearing away the products of mine and field, and 
 shop and factory, ready wrought into everything of ornament and value. 
 
 And I tell you, nay, in the earnest words of one whose very soul feels 
 the pressing weight of the utterance, I warn you this day, that they who 
 icork these results will govern in this country. If the present gives sure prog 
 nosis of anything in the future, if the examples of other countries like 
 developed teach any lesson, it is that the physical and scientific develop 
 ments of this country will fix the character of our institutions, and furnish 
 the rulers of our people. Progressive civilization has issued its new decree. 
 Professional men shall have rivals for the seats of power ; and those rivals 
 are the devoted children of applied science, the educated leaders of labor, 
 who hold in their grasp the ever-enlarging fields which employ, improve, 
 and control mankind. 
 
 The only question is, whether our children or the children of others shall 
 occupy these fields and be these rulers. They will be occupied, and by 
 rulers. God never gave this Southern country so many rich gifts to lie 
 forever unappropriated. Those who know their value will not permit them 
 to remain forever useless when all the world needs them. We must answer 
 the question. Will we, like wise fathers, like thinking, educated citizens, 
 wake up to the full realization of the new civilization that is now throwing 
 its light in floods upon us, and provide for our children and people the 
 facilities by which they may retain the possessions they occupy ? Shall we 
 teach them to pine away or fret to exhaustion for imaginary treasures hope 
 lessly lost rather than how to reach out their hands and gather richer real 
 treasures piled up all around them ? 
 
 The beginning of all improvement in Georgia lies in the enlargement of 
 our system of education. Education is like water ; to fructify, it must 
 descend. Pour out floods at the base of society, and only at the base, and 
 it will saturate, stagnate, and destroy. Pour it out on the summit, and it 
 will quietly and constantly percolate and descend, germinating every seed, 
 feeding every root, until over the whole area, from summit to base, will 
 spring " the tender blade and then the ear, and then the full corn in the 
 
 ear. 
 
 The first necessary step in any educational system, therefore, and the 
 first, the highest, the holiest duty now pressing upon every Georgian, is to 
 build up this university. This is our summit. This is the Ararat on which 
 
346 SENATOR B. If. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 the ark that bears all that is left of our old civilization must rest from the 
 storms and waves of revolution, and send out the life and strength and hope 
 of a better civilization, which shall not again be destroyed. 
 
 In organizing a complete university I would, in the first place, preserve 
 a full and rigid college curriculum for all who desire a strictly classical and 
 literary education. I would then add all independent polytechnic schools, 
 courses of study, abstract and applied, scientific, regular, and elective. I 
 would provide every facility to make and accomplish the universal scholar 
 and the special expert. Nothing desirable or useful in knowledge should be 
 better or more thoroughly and cheaply acquirable elsewhere. I would have 
 teaching by lectures, by recitations, and by experiments and sifting examina 
 tions, individual and class, oral and written. 
 
 In the next place, I would make tuition free in every department of the 
 university. I would pull down the toll-gates which bar the passage of light, 
 and knowledge should go to the ignorant mind as air goes to the tired lungs, 
 and water to the parched lips. Every father in Georgia should be taught 
 to feel and made to rejoice that his son had a patrimony in the university 
 of his State. And not only this, I would provide for the proper selection 
 from every portion of the State of the promising children of orphanage and 
 indigence, who should find here that parental kindness and smile of fortune 
 which would secure food and raiment, with education. I would establish 
 systems of scholarships and fellowships, and would require their recipients 
 to distribute throughout the State the blessings they had thus received from 
 the State. We have had in the past, nominally, a university of Georgia, 
 and I would have in the future really a university for Georgia. 
 
 The field of power and glory opened by this thought for our State in one 
 generation, from the present standpoint of humiliation, is rich and inviting, 
 but too broad for exploration to-day. 
 
 Let it not be objected that a system like this would require means. 
 Education is the one subject for which no people ever yet paid too much. 
 Indeed, the more they pay the richer they become. Nothing is so costly as 
 ignorance, and nothing so cheap as knowledge. Even under old civilizations, 
 the States and people who provided the greatest educational dissemination 
 and advantages were always the most wealthy, the most powerful, the most 
 feared and respected by others, and the most secure in every right of person 
 and property among themselves. And this truth will be tenfold more mani 
 fest in the future than it has been in the past. The very right arm of all 
 future national power will rest in the education of the people. Modern 
 civilizations mock any extent of brute force in the hands of ignorance. 
 Power is leaving thrones and is taking up its abode in the intelligence of the 
 subjects. Liberty, weakened with perpetual treacheries and worn out with 
 constant alarms for her safety in the forms of government, will soon find no 
 abiding home save in the intelligence of the people. Modern physical 
 sciences are writing many changes in the long- established maxims of political 
 economy. Capital no longer patronizingly employs labor, but enlightened 
 labor takes capital by the hands and directs it where and when and how 
 it should be invested. Industry educated industry, has taken possession of 
 the exhaustless stores of nature, and of nature s forces ; is daily lifting up 
 her hands, full of all new inventions ; is filling the earth with her instru 
 ments of elevation and improvement ; is grasping continents and binding 
 the nations in a bundle, and with right royal confidence, is bidding kings 
 and rulers, empire and republics, obey. 
 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 347 
 
 I affirm to-day that the wealth and the power and the security and suc 
 cess of existing nations are exactly measured by the standards and extent of 
 their educational systems, and that those nations possess the highest standards, 
 and the most efficient and widely diffused systems of education, which have 
 devoted the largest means and taken the greatest pride in endowing and 
 enlarging their universities. 
 
 What is, and long has been, the secret of the power of England ? You 
 will say her well-balanced government, her almost perfect administration of 
 law, her navy, her material improvements, her vast industries, her educated 
 people, and her experts in every known science. But whence come those 
 who maintain that well-balanced government ; who administer her laws ; 
 who build and command her navy ; who multiply her industries ; who de 
 velop her resources, and who gather tribute for old England from everything 
 and everywhere ? There stands the grand answer Cambridge and Oxford. 
 And is England wasteful, or unwise, or oppressive upon her people because 
 upon each one of these her eyes, her ears, her arms, her wealth, her power, 
 her glory she annually bestows two millions of dollars ? 
 
 Prussia annually appropriates to nine of her universities more than one 
 million thalers. Need I tell you now that the victories of Sadowa and 
 of Sedan were won in the school-rooms and the workshops ? It was educated 
 artillery to which Austria so readily courtesied, and before the approach of 
 \vhich France, haughty France, lifted her crown, yielded her capital, and 
 bowed in humility. What would become of the statesmanship of Gladstone 
 and Bismarck if they moved to discontinue these universities on the ground 
 that they were costly ? 
 
 Let us look nearer home. 
 
 Massachusetts has one university with an endowment of over two millions 
 of dollars. Connecticut possesses one with an endowment of over one million. 
 New York contains two universities with an aggregate endowment of over 
 six millions of dollars. The universities of the North, and chiefly of New 
 England, have lately received appropriations amounting to nine millions. 
 The university of Georgia has received not one dollar. Even the small 
 pittance she receives annually from the State is only the interest on funds 
 she turned over to the State for a safe investment ! 
 
 Of twenty-two observatories in the United States, only two are south of 
 the Potomac. Both of these were erected by Northern gentlemen, and 
 neither is now in use. 
 
 Even some of the new States, more than a century our juniors in age, 
 have given a hundred-fold more than Georgia to establish and endow their 
 universities and industrial schools. 
 
 But these Northern States are all rich and we are poor ! They are strong 
 and we are weak ! Yes, add therefore is it so. And if the same process 
 shall continue, they will grow richer and we poorer, they stronger and we 
 weaker ! We have theorized about rights, and have degraded labor with 
 ignorance to preserve rights. They have worked for power, and have 
 educated labor to secure power. The result is, we have scarcely any right 
 or power, while they have population, wealth, rights, and powers, and every 
 means of maintaining and increasing them. 
 
 And were we ready for independence ? Were we not deceived as to the 
 real source of our weakness, and also as to the extent of that weakness ? 
 A\ ith every natural resource, but with no art or skilled labor to render them 
 available, is it wonderful that we failed ? Rather is it not the world s 
 
348 SENATOR fi. H. JJTLL, OF QEOKGTA. 
 
 marvel, that individual skill, social pride, and almost unarmed courage were 
 able to sustain the unequal struggle so long ? If we had won the acknowledg 
 ment of our political independence, would we not have been compelled to 
 send among our late enemies for an architect to plan and build a capitol for 
 the new nation ; and even for men of science to lead us into our own hills 
 and mountains, to show us the power sleeping there, and how that power 
 could be aroused and made valuable in peace and mighty in war ? 
 
 The people of Georgia, annually, send to other States and countries for 
 very many articles which they possess in greater abundance at home. Edu 
 cated industries at the North take our raw materials, apply to them their 
 skill and art, and resell them to our people increased in value some thirty, 
 some sixty, and some five hundred fold ! If one fourth the sum expended 
 in any one year by the people of this State, for either one of several of these 
 imported articles, were set apart as an endowment fund for this university, 
 every school of science taught at the North or in England or in Prussia 
 could be at once established here ; tuition could be made free ; a system of 
 education covering the State could be inaugurated and carried into effect ; 
 and the result would be that the next generation of our own educated sons 
 would find those same articles in our midst, would supply our own people 
 with tenfold the quantity they are now able to import and at less cost, and 
 would have a large surplus remaining for export, as articles of commercial 
 value to the North and to England and to Prussia. 
 
 Shall this waste continue ? Are our sons and daughters unworthy or in 
 capable of proficiency in the industrial arts ? Go now to the library room 
 of this university, and look again upon the perfect features of one of the 
 noblest of our own lamented curators, caught, cast, and preserved by the 
 beautiful genius and skillful touch of one of Georgia s own fair daughters, 
 and then say if Southern intellect need anything but the opportunity and 
 the effort to win trophies in any field ? 
 
 No period in the history and fortunes of our State was ever half so 
 critical as is the present. And in this anxious hour this crisis of her fate 
 to whom shall the State look with hope if not to her own educated sons ? 
 
 On whom shall this loved university now lean with faith, if not on her 
 own alumni ? 
 
 Who shall stay the coming of Philip, if Athenians abandon Greece ? 
 
 Who shall save our Rome from the clutch of the despot and the tread of 
 the vandal, if our Anthonies still madly follow the fleeing, faithless, fallen 
 African ? 
 
 Gentlemen, we cannot escape the responsibility pressing upon us. If we 
 prove unequal to our duties now, then a State, with every natural gift but 
 worthy sons, appropriated by others, and a university fallen in the midst of 
 her own listless, unheeding children, must be the measure of our shame in the 
 future. But if we prove equal to those duties now, then a State surpassed 
 by none in wealth, worth, and power, with the university made immortal for 
 her crown, will be the glory that is waiting to reward our ambition. 
 
 And we shall escape this shame and win this glory if we now will fully 
 comprehend and manfully act upon three predicate propositions : 
 
 1. That the civilization peculiar to the Southern States hitherto has 
 passed away, and forever. 
 
 2. That no new civilization can be equal to the demands of the age which 
 does not lay its foundations in the intelligence of the people, and in the 
 multiplication and social elevation of educated industries. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 349 
 
 3. That no system of education for the people, and for the multiplication 
 and elevation of the industries, can be complete, or efficient, or available, 
 which does not begin with an ample, well endowed, and independent uni 
 versity. 
 
 These three postulates embody the triunity of all our hope as a people. 
 Here the work of recovery must begin, and in this way alone, and by you 
 alone, can it be begun. 
 
 The educated men of the South, of this generation, must be responsible 
 for the future of the South. 
 
 The educated men of Georgia now before me must be responsible for the 
 future of Georgia. That future will be anything you now command. From 
 every portion of this dear old commonwealth there comes this day an earnest, 
 anxious voice to you, saying, shall we command or shall we serve ? Shall 
 we rise, or shall we fall vet lower ? Shall we live, or shall Ave die ? 
 
 %/ 
 
 Gathering in my own the voices of you all, and with hearts resolved 
 and purposes fixed, I send back the gladdening response : We shall live ! 
 We shall rise ! ! We shall command ! ! ! 
 
 We have given up the dusky Helen ! Pity we kept the harlot so long ! 
 
 True, alas ! Hector is dead, and Priam is dethroned ; and Troy, proud 
 Troy, has glared by the torch, and crumbled neath the blows, and wept 
 mid the jeers of reveling Greeks in every household. But more than a 
 hundred ^Encases live ! On more than a hundred broader, deeper Tibers we 
 will found greater cities, rear richer temples, raise loftier towers, until all the 
 world shall respect and fear, and even the Greeks shall covet, honor, and 
 obey ! 
 
SPEECH IN SUPPORT OF THE GREELEY MOVEMENT," OR 
 WHAT WAS CALLED THE NEW DEPARTURE," DELIVERED 
 IN ATLANTA, GA., IN JUNE, 1872. 
 
 Mr. Hill was a strong advocate of what was known as the " Greeley Movement" in 
 the Democratic party, and this speech was an argument demonstrating the wisdom of 
 such movement. It was received with great enthusiasm, and paved the way for the 
 almost unanimous acceptance by the Democrats of Georgia of the platform of the " New 
 Departure." General Toombs, who was against the movement, was present on the ros 
 trum for the purpose of replying to Mr. Hill s argument. On its conclusion, so greatly 
 was he impressed, that he declined to attempt a reply, but when called on arose and said : 
 "You have heard one of the most eloquent, one of the grandest addresses that you will 
 ever hear in favor of Mr. Greeley. He is entitled to the thanks of this country. Go home 
 and consider it. It was clear, eloquent, and impressive. I am against Greeley, but at the 
 same time, you have got the best of the case on his side, and I call for three cheers for 
 Mr. Hill." A most remarkable tribute from a political opponent. 
 
 Ladies and Gentlemen : In my early youth I impressed upon my mind 
 the vital thought that passion was the greatest foe of good sense and right 
 reason. The criminality of the indulgence of passion in the investigation 
 of any truth is in exact proportion to the great interest upon the correct 
 solution of that truth. There are wise people in this nation, and many of 
 them, who believe that upon the results of the pending canvass for Presi 
 dent the whole continuance of the original theory of American government 
 depends. There are wise men in the South, and many of them, who believe 
 that upon the results of this contest hang the absolute, material, moral, and 
 political destinies of especially the Southern States. Whether these States 
 shall continue to be oppressed, to be insulted ; whether they shall continue 
 to be mere vassals to the Federal Government, or whether they sliall be 
 loosed from their fetters and allowed to restore their own prosperity in 
 their own way, are the questions which many believe to be dependent upon 
 this canvass. It does seem to me that, in view of this fact, duty to our 
 selves, duty to our children, duty to the high trust committed to us by those 
 who have gone before us, requires that we should enter upon the investiga 
 tion of the questions involved with coolness, with calmness, with dispassion 
 ate reason. I am not here to-night to address enemies, I am here to address 
 friends, some doubtless differing with us, but still friends, and I shall not 
 employ toward them the language which they have justly provoked and the 
 punishment they justly deserve. 
 
 That you may understand clearly and distinctly the present political 
 situation, you will allow me briefly to review a few of the events in the 
 preceding months, which have wrought this situation. The termination of 
 the war left both sections, to a large extent, under the domination of 
 passionate feeling engendered by that war. That war itself, having been 
 preceded by a long, heated sectional controversy, necessarily engendered 
 passions of unusual heat and animosity during its progress, and unfortunate 
 circumstances occurred at its close which were greatly calculated to influence 
 the passions so engendered. The result was that the administration of the 
 
 350 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 351 
 
 government was absolutely taken possession of by the passions of the hour, 
 and statesmanship itself seemed to be the mere child and creature of those 
 passions. The States which had entered that war and came out of it un 
 successful, being prostrate, being paralyzed, suffered to an unusual extent 
 from the actions of these passions and prejudices, and it would not be very 
 extravagant to say that they suffered during the four years that succeeded 
 the termination of the war, wrongs and insults exceeding in infamy if not 
 equaling in losses all the calamities of the war itself. 
 
 This thing could not last always, and two years ago this state of things 
 became patent to the wise men of the country, men who, getting rid of the 
 domination of passion, began to reflect. The party in power seemed to find 
 no end of what might be justly termed war measures, especially as applicable to 
 what they pleased to term the " Rebel States." They not only passed what 
 were called the Reconstruction acts, by which the governments of ten of the 
 States were absolutely subverted, and other governments created by congres 
 sional power organized in their stead. They not only passed amendments to 
 the Constitution to preserve the fruits of the war, as they said, but they con 
 tinued, after these amendments were adopted, to exercise congressional pow 
 ers unknown to the Constitution, and absolutely startling in their character, 
 and exclusively of a war nature. Force was the power employed to govern 
 this country in a very large degree. Not only had these amendments been 
 passed by the dominant party, who passed them and incorporated them by 
 force into the Constitution, but a construction upon those amendments which 
 gave absolute power to the General Government, a construction centralizing 
 the government to the extent of obliterating State constitutions. Where 
 the end was to be no man could tell. This state of things alarmed I use 
 the proper term this state of things alarmed, and justly alarmed, many of 
 the best and wisest men of the Republican party. They saw that measures 
 which they had adopted in a moment of passion, and which they thought 
 were necessary after the war ended, were to be repeated and repeated, until 
 it seemed the party in power absolutely intended to subvert Republican 
 government and institute centralism, despotism in its stead. It was believed 
 that there was a sufficient number of patriotic men in the United States to 
 correct this evil, if by any means they could combine together. 
 
 Here, then, was the situation. Here was the Democratic party a unit 
 against these measures. Here was a large portion of the Republican party 
 < aily increasing, becoming more and more alarmed, that condemned these 
 encroachments upon the Constitution and the rights of the States, and these 
 added together, it was believed, would be sufficient to correct this evil and 
 turn out of power the party who were disposed to continue the encroach 
 ments. But the question was, how could this combination be effected ? 
 Could any purpose gentlemen, I submit it to you could any purpose have 
 been higher, nobler, or more patriotic ? How could these different elements, 
 agreeing in principle, equally alarmed, equally patriotic how could they 
 be combined into one solid, compact organization for the purpose of making 
 opposition to this party ? The Democratic party had said in its platform of 
 1868, that all the Reconstruction policy of Congress was revolutionary, 
 unconstitutional, and void. They had proclaimed their purpose, if they 
 acquired power in the government, to declare this whole Reconstruction 
 policy a nullity. On that position it was utterly impossible to get the 
 dissatisfied Republicans, the Liberal what I call the patriotic Republi 
 cans to unite with Democracy. And why ? Because upon that theory they 
 
352 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 would be required to put a party in power who proclaimed beforehand that 
 it was their purpose to undo everything that had been done, and, even 
 though they might deprecate much that had been done, much they had 
 done themselves, yet the process of undoing they feared might work another 
 revolution, and where the process of undoing would end nobody could tell. 
 It was impossible, therefore, for the Republicans to unite with the Demo 
 crats upon this point, and besides to ask them to do it was to ask them to 
 stultify themselves. On the other hand, it was impossible for the Demo 
 cratic party ever to say that these amendments and Reconstruction acts were 
 wise, Avere just, were right. They did not believe it. They were not wise, 
 they were not just, they were not right, and it was impossible for that por 
 tion of the Democratic party living in the Southern States ever to dishonor 
 themselves by such a concession as that. How, now, was it possible to 
 bring these elements, for a common purpose, together ? When men really 
 wish to accomplish a good, common purpose, the old adage that " where 
 there is a will there is a way," is true in politics as in other things. Here 
 was a solution of the whole matter. The Democratic party and the Demo 
 crats engaged in this move were not required to admit that either the 
 amendments or the Reconstruction policy, in substance or in form, were either 
 wise, just, or right. But they did agree to admit that they were accom 
 plished facts. Right or wrong, the thing had been done, and right or 
 wrong, the thing had to remain done until the people, in the exercise of 
 their own sovereign power, should recover sufficient virtue to undo them in 
 the peaceable constitutional way. This was the only concession on earth any 
 member of the Democratic party ever proposed to make. To concede that 
 a fact exists, by no means implies or concedes that it ought to exist. It 
 does not make you responsible for its existence. 
 
 But what was the concession to be made by the Republicans who were 
 dissatisfied with their own party ? Why, they were absolutely to quit their 
 party to abandon it in the zenith of its power, to abandon it in the control 
 of the government, and unite their fortunes with the Democratic party for 
 the purpose of turning out their former comrades, and they were perfectly 
 willing to unite with the Democracy on this basis ; simply ignore all issues 
 upon the Reconstruction policy, put it back where you put the war of seces 
 sion, as things of the past ; unite together in the living present to make a 
 glorious future. Well, these gentlemen of the Republican party were per 
 fectly willing to do this, and to unite with the Democratic party for these 
 purposes, on condition only that the Democratic party should show that it 
 was capable of organizing upon that position, for, if the Democratic party 
 in attempting to organize upon that position should go to pieces, or fail, of 
 course there could be no inducement for the Liberal Republicans to unite 
 with a divided Democracy. I believe, and I will say it to their credit, that 
 every single prominent leading member of the Democratic party in the 
 Northern States believed that .the Democratic party would come to this 
 position. 
 
 Mr. Vallandigham made the initiative move. Why? Because of all 
 men in the North, he was supposed to be the last one who would be sus 
 pected of possible infidelity to the Democratic party. Born a Democrat, 
 raised a Democrat, incapable of any infidelity to the principles or purpose 
 of the Democratic party, but a patriot as he was, he came forward to begin 
 this movement, which I confidently believe will succeed, with the sole pur 
 pose of saving the country. Now, fellow-citizens, I call your attention to 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 353 
 
 the fact that this movement made not the slightest concession of principle 
 on the part of the Democratic party. It made nothing in the world but the 
 concession of a historical fact. It based that concession upon two ideas. 
 One was, that the central government, in every department, would recognize 
 and administer these amendments, right or wrong ; that there was no right 
 of appeal to any higher power ; that the Supreme Court of the United 
 States would fail to give any relief against them upon the ground that they 
 were unconstitutional, declaring them political, to be decided by Congress, 
 and beyond the power of the court to review. That being the case, there 
 was no other alternative left by which to tight that policy, except to appeal 
 to the people, and the people at this time, it was believed were not in a 
 condition to hear the appeal, therefore they were simply allowed to pass by 
 and be treated as historical facts, and I call your attention to one distinct 
 fact. I wish vou to understand there was no member of the Democratic 
 
 */ 
 
 party, North or South, who ever dreamed, under any circumstances, of con 
 ceding the justice or righteousness of the Reconstruction policy. Every as 
 sertion to the contrary is a slander which ought to bring the blush of shame 
 to all who have uttered it. There was no purpose in the movement to collude 
 with what is called the Radical party in power. On the contrary, the 
 avowed underlying purpose was to organize the patriots of the country, in 
 order to turn that party out of power. Higher, nobler, more patriotic im 
 pulses never entered the bosoms of any men in this country in any period of 
 its history. Convention after convention of the Democratic party was called 
 at the North and it failed only because unfortunately, opposition in the 
 party itself was made to such an extent as to defeat any capacity in the 
 Democratic party to organize with all its forces upon that platform, and the 
 saddest view of the fact is that that opposition came in bitter terms and 
 chieflv from the Southern States, which were to be chiefly benefited by this 
 
 / 7 * / 
 
 movement. That great and good man that man who I shall go down to 
 the grave loving that true patriot and noble statesman, in an hour of 
 thoughtlessness, and with no expectation of being misunderstood, or to take 
 the position ascribed to him our former President, Jefferson Davis, in the 
 State of Georgia, at this juncture, unfortunately said that he accepted noth 
 ing unfortunately said to the people of the South, that their cause would 
 yet triumph. These remarks were caught up by the miserable creatures 
 hanging around him for the purpose of misrepresenting him. They were 
 circulated throughout the North and heralded as evidence to the people of 
 the North that the Southern people would never come into this movement, 
 not even recognize the amendments as historical facts or make any conces 
 sions at all, but were simply rebellious still. Unfortunately other distin 
 guished gentlemen indulged in very extreme utterances upon this subject. 
 Some, I have no idea, ever intended what was attributed to them, but they 
 were understood as meaning that the Southern people wanted another war. 
 Unfortunately another great and good man, Mr. Stephens, commenced 
 editing a paper, and his paper was full of statements that these amendments 
 should be treated as nullities, and when the Democratic candidate was 
 elected, that he was to proclaim them as such. These men were repre 
 sented as the representative men of the South as controlling the South 
 and without the South the Democratic party was powerless, and therefore 
 the leaders at the North, feeling that the party at the South was unjust to 
 them, they lost spirit, they became indifferent and said if the South will ac 
 cept no movement which will relieve it, if it will not act on patriotic 
 
SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 grounds, why let the South go. That indifference North, thus produced, 
 caused this movement to fail. The Democracy was defeated in nearly all 
 the State elections last fall. 
 
 It is one of the saddest portions of the history of this country that those 
 who brought forward this movement were slandered as unworthy of your 
 trust and confidence. That great and noble man, Vallandigham, was 
 declared to be no Democrat, was declared to be a traitor to his party, 
 He was held up by men who where neophytes in their party as false and 
 untrue. Unfortunately, the man was not allowed to see his vindication. 
 He went to his grave, doubtless his proud and noble spirit more pained by 
 the slanders of men who were not worthy to loose the latchets of his shoes, 
 than was his body by the cruel bullet which took away his life. 
 
 But I must hasten on. What now was to be done ? But before I pass 
 from this point I desire to call your attention distinctly to one thought. It 
 has been charged as an outrage, that a few hundred thousand Republicans, 
 at most, should require the whole Democratic party with its reported three 
 millions of votes, to come over to them, instead of the few hundred thousand 
 Republicans going to them, and that is compared to a tug-boat carrying 
 a big steamer into the harbor. Well, let me tell you. The original belief was 
 that these Republicans would come into the Democratic party, but only on 
 the condition that the Democratic party could manifest sufficient strength 
 to win the fight upon that principle, and if the attempt was made and failed 
 by reason of the extreme opinions to which I have alluded, the Republicans 
 could not be expected to join a divided Democracy. Well, what was to be 
 done ? Something was to be done. Was the whole cause to be sur 
 rendered ? Was centralism to go on ? Was the general government still 
 to continue its oppression ? Day by day these outrages continued to be 
 multiplied. They passed what was called the bayonet bill in its second 
 edition. Then came the Ku-Klux bill, then came the authority to suspend 
 the writ of habeas corpus in time of peace. What was to be done ? It 
 was now, for the first time, suggested that that portion of the Republican 
 party which was dissatisfied with the administration of the government 
 should manifest their sincerity and their faith to principle by first separating 
 themselves from the party to which they belonged and organizing a new 
 party of their own. It was now remembered that it had just been tried in 
 Missouri. In that State the Democrats were oppressed, and this extreme 
 wing of the Republican party was in power. Gratz Brown, Carl Schurz, 
 and General Frank Blair made what you call the coalition. The Republi 
 can party in Missouri organized upon substantially the same position to 
 which I have alluded and they dethroned the Radical party of Missouri. 
 They found the State in fetters and unfettered it, and enfranchised the 
 Democrats, and made Missouri the most Democratic State in the Union. 
 The suggestion then was that these Republicans should organize in the 
 nation upon this same idea, and if they could successfully organize upon 
 that position, the belief was that the Democratic party would come to their 
 support. Very well, a call was made that the Republicans entertaining this 
 purpose, and willing to cut loose from the ruling dynasty, should meet at 
 Cincinnati on the 1st of May and organize upon that basis. One of the 
 most distinguished orators of the Union took the lead, and going into the 
 different parts of the West, and coming as far South as Nashville, made 
 speeches in favor of the move, and they were grand orations, full of patriot 
 ism. But soon the move seemed to wane, and those who looked to it with 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 
 
 hope, as the means of redemption from the oppression then existing, began 
 to grow faint, and just at this critical period of the move, a large number 
 of the Republicans of New York, with Horace Greeley at the head, came 
 out and joined the movement. 
 
 Soon the Cooper Institute meeting was called, and then for the first time 
 Senator Trumbull, of Illinois, took open and firm position with the Liberals. 
 It went on swelling daily. It grew into large proportions. One of the 
 most patriotic conventions of our history, assembled in Cincinnati the first 
 day of May last. They organized, and the platform which they adopted 
 embodies in a large degree the principles of the Democratic party. They 
 put in a few words that contain a little pepper and vinegar, but they were 
 slight. Nobody dreamed that Mr. Greeley would become the nominee of 
 the party because a revenue tariff was expected to be a plank, and it was 
 considered an insuperable barrier to Mr. Greeley s nomination. But wise 
 and patriotic men in a great cause will not let small things stand in their 
 way of success. Therefore it was proposed that this question of the tariff 
 should be referred back to the people and let the people settle the question 
 to suit themselves. This removed the difficulty, and Mr. Greeley, a timely 
 supporter, was nominated, and Gratz Brown, one of the original movers, 
 who struck the shackles from the Democrats of Missouri, was put as the 
 second man. 
 
 With this movement at Cincinnati the Democratic party had no active 
 connection. It is true that a great many sympathized with it. It is true 
 that a large portion of the Democrats declared that if the convention at 
 Cincinnati should succeed in adopting a sensible platform they would recom 
 mend their party to make no nomination, but unite with them in defeating 
 a common enemy. 
 
 Now, fellow-citizens, you have in a few words the origin, the meaning, 
 the purpose and the philosophy of what some have styled the " New De 
 parture." And it is brim full of patriotism from its original inception to 
 this hour. 
 
 Now the question is, what will the Democratic party do ? That is the 
 question I came here to discuss with you to-night. The regular Radical 
 thoroughbred centralizing party have since assembled at Philadelphia, made 
 a platform in direct antagonism with the platform at Cincinnati, have nom 
 inated their candidates and asked your support. The issue is joined be 
 tween these two parties. They are getting ready for the battle. It is to 
 be a contest for liberty. It is to be a contest against empire. It is to be a 
 contest against the suspension of the glorious writ of habeas corpus. It is 
 to be a contest against Federal bayonet supervision of State elections. It 
 is to be a contest for the equality of the Southern States and the Southern 
 people. The wager of battle has been given ; the tocsin of conflict has been 
 sounded, and these gallant men I am courageous enough to call them gal 
 lant these men who quit their party in the zenith of its power, who sur 
 render the offices that were in its gift, and organized a new party for this 
 great battle, invite your co-operation. That s all. Now the Democratic 
 party has to do one or two things. 
 
 It must either nominate at Baltimore a ticket of its own, or it must sup 
 port the Cincinnati movement. I need not answer another alternative pro 
 pounded by Judge Stephens last night. He said : Suppose the convention 
 at Baltimore should nominate Grant. I don t suppose any such foolish 
 thing. What I suppose is that the Democratic party will either nominate 
 
356 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 a ticket of its own, on a platform of its own, or it will co-operate with the 
 Cincinnati move one or the other, and whatever it shall do, it is going to 
 do as a party ; it is going to do by its organization, and it is not going to 
 disband and turn you all loose to stray anywhere you want to go. Now I 
 admit this is a question upon which Democrats may honestly differ, whether 
 you shall go in favor of an independent nomination, or whether, under the 
 circumstances you will be useful to the country by co-operating with the 
 Cincinnati movement. It is a question on which the Democrats can honestly 
 differ, and on which they ought to be allowed to differ, and on which they 
 do differ. The matter is becoming warm, and I exceedingly deprecate the 
 feeling that is being engendered in some quarters. We are all friends, we 
 all desire the same end. 
 
 No enemy is engaged in this move. I tell my friend, who spoke last 
 night so eloquently, no man is engaged in this move who is opposed to 
 State rights. 
 
 The only difference between us is, what is the most effective policy to re 
 cover the lost rights of the States. Some think our most effective course 
 would be going to Cincinnati. Well, if you think so you ought to go there. 
 Some think we can succeed more effectively by nominating a straight ticket 
 at Baltimore. Well, if that be so, thank God, no man is more willing to 
 take that course than the one who addresses you. I admit that it is a ques 
 tion that ought to be calmly and dispassionately discussed, and I protest 
 against the spirit which denounces all, who will not go in a certain direction, 
 as traitors. We all are Democrats in this move, and we all want to get 
 back to the Canaan of local State government and constitutional limitations 
 upon Federal power. The only difference is some of our friends want to 
 get to the land of Canaan at one bound, and some hesitate because the Red 
 Sea and the wilderness are to be crossed. 
 
 I am willing to traverse the wilderness, and tread even a winding way, 
 if it only can lead me back to Canaan. But some declare they never intend 
 to leave the bondage of Egypt unless they can reach the promised land at a 
 bound. Well, my opinion is that they will die and be buried in Egypt. 
 
 Well, who is to settle this question ? Who is to determine whether 
 the Democratic party will go with Cincinnati or go by itself ? AVho is to 
 determine it ? When friends differ, there ought to be an umpire. We have 
 got no court to appeal to, who can determine it ? I say Democrats assem 
 bled in Baltimore will determine it, and you ought to go with them, what 
 ever they determine. 
 
 Well, said my distinguished friend last night, I will agree to abide by 
 Baltimore, provided Baltimore will decide according to my ideas. Well, if 
 everybody has a right to agree, provided Baltimore will decide the principle 
 as he understands it, and every man is a party by himself. What is to be- 
 
 A/ / 
 
 come of us ? I put it to your candor, I put it to your reason, is it reasonable 
 for one man, for two men, for three men, for I believe that is about all to 
 stand up before the Democracy of this country and say they will agree with 
 the party, provided the party will agree with them first ? Well, if that is 
 reasonable, then there is no use of going to Baltimore at all. Just let the 
 three call you together and tell you what to do. We have either got to do 
 it, or else we have to be traitors, and cowards, and thieves, and Radicals. I 
 remonstrate against all such arguments. If I were firing shot at an enemy, 
 I would make him feel it on this point, but I am firing only at erring friends, 
 and from the bottom of my heart I call to them, come back and let us go to 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 357 
 
 Baltimore. Let us all go together, and let us all co-operate together, and if 
 there is any fighting to be done, let us all fight together, and if there is any 
 dying to be done, let us all die together. Xow this is just what I want 
 to- do. 
 
 Fellow-citizens, if it were not for a certain reason, which perhaps you will 
 see in the progress of the argument, I would end this address right now. I 
 would not enter upon this discussion of that question still behind, as to what 
 nomination Baltimore ought to make. Whatever may be my individual 
 opinion upon that subject, I want you to understand that if Baltimore differs 
 from me, I admit my opinion is wrong, and I am going with Baltimore. I 
 shall not set my judgment up as against the whole party. When I set out 
 with this move eighteen months ago, God knows there was not the smallest 
 crevice in my heart that could harbor a purpose to do anything but contrib 
 ute all my humble powers would permit to devise some scheme by which the 
 Democratic party, under its own colors, under its own standard bearers, 
 could go to victory. I may remark here, in passing, that I anticipated Mr. 
 Vallandigham s movement by some months, for a reason applicable alone to 
 Georgia. Knowing that steps would be taken by certain parties to endeavor 
 to secure another reconstruction of the State, by setting aside the election if 
 it should go Democratic I simply put myself in a position to counteract 
 that movement, and, as far as this State has been concerned, the result has 
 been entirely satisfactory. Everywhere the people are sending up shouts 
 that we have the government in our own hands. This truly is an occasion 
 for rejoicing, but let it be remembered lest this result is not attributed, in 
 that degree, to our ultra friends. On the contrary, these results have 
 been accomplished, not only without their aid, but in spite of their un 
 fortunate folly. If these gentlemen, who took extreme position, had been 
 concurred with, you would, to-night, while I speak, be under the adminis 
 tration of a Radical Legislature, with Bullock for governor, and bonds issu 
 ing like thumb-papers. 
 
 But, I say, what shall Baltimore do ? Shall she go with Cincinnati, or 
 shall she nominate a ticket? Fellow-citizens, I confess to you frankly that 
 this question has given me great trouble. I do not disguise it. I do not 
 know that any question for solution has been submitted to my mind, to 
 which I have given more serious and earnest consideration. I have en 
 deavored to look at it in every light possible. I have endeavored to exercise 
 upon it clear, cool, dispassionate reason ; suppressing my feelings, for I con 
 fess to you if I allowed my prejudices and my feelings to take possession of 
 my judgment, I would ever} hour of my life pray God to spare me to the 
 day that I could gather this whole record of Reconstruction infamy into one 
 pile and make ona grand bonfire of it. But, hush ! hush ! You and I 
 have been taught by bitter experience to submit to many things that were 
 net agreeable, and we may have to submit to many more. We must obey 
 what the courts declare to be the law. We have no right to set our judg 
 ment as the only standard of our action, whether we approve or not. There 
 fore I am perfectly willing to gather secession, the war, and Reconstruction 
 into one triune bundle and bury them out of sight forever. But my 
 reason brings me to the conclusion that the Baltimore convention ought 
 and will accomplish most good by co-operating with the Cincinnati move 
 ment, If I could have had the construction of the platform, I would have 
 made it in some respect different. If I could have had the nomination of 
 the candidates, I certainly would have made them different. If the Demo- 
 
358 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 cratic party could muster all its forces, I might be willing to see them make 
 an independent nomination. I wish it could be done and done successfully, 
 and if it shall turn out that it can be done, no man will rejoice more earnestly 
 than myself. But I will proceed to give my reason why I think we had 
 better co-operate with Cincinnati. 
 
 Mr. Greeley has said and done many tilings which I need not tell you I 
 do not approve, but Mr. Greeley has always been in favor of one policy which 
 relieves me of the most vital objection to his support. He never has at any 
 time approved of those odious features of the Reconstruction policy, which dis 
 franchised the virtue and intelligence of the South and enfranchised the 
 ignorance and vice of the South. He has stood up like a man from the be 
 ginning and protested against every one of these odious features of the Re 
 construction policy. You know that the main reason why I never could, I 
 never can, and never will, while God gives me grace to remember that I am 
 a Southern man and a white man, approve these measures, is because they 
 will affect my honor, because they ask the Southern people to give that 
 policy validity by their own consent, asks them to consent to a policy which 
 degraded the white men of the South by consenting that the masters should 
 be in chains, while their slaves should be unfettered to rob them. That is 
 the reason why I never could and never can indorse that policy. As I said 
 before, in 1867 and in 1868, when all of you concurred with me, I do not and 
 did not propose to resist the United States, nor anything they might do. I 
 said all that then and tried to prove it, but said that when Congress passed 
 outside of the Constitution to oppress the Southern people, when the mem 
 bers of that body trampled upon their oaths to gratify their feelings of ven 
 geance against the Southern people and asked the Southern people to give 
 vitality to that action by their consent, I said to General Grant and I said to 
 General Pope, and I thank God that I said it, that I would take anything 
 death, confiscation, exile but consent to that infamy, never ! Now, Mr. 
 Greeley conies to our relief upon that point. Though acting with the Re 
 publican party, he from the beginning protested against these features of 
 that policy. Therefore, I don t, nor do you, violate that principle of honor 
 that we should ever hold dear, by supporting Mr. Greeley. That I put fore 
 most as the first reason why I am willing to vote for him. 
 
 There is another reason why I like Mr. Greeley. He has never been what 
 is called a partisan ; and an independent thinker, I think has the greatest 
 honesty. I pity the man who gets up before an audie#ice and talks about 
 building up a party. You must use party to accomplish a good purpose. 
 You must act harmoniously with your party ; but when it comes to thought, 
 be independent. Independence of thought and harmony in action is the 
 business of all who associate in party movements. Now to the history of 
 Mr. Greeley. 
 
 Why, I remember before the war he defied his party in the very hour of 
 its fanaticism, and boldly declared that if the Southern people desired to 
 secede, they had the right to do so. 
 
 But, said the gentleman, after the war began he prosecuted the war. That 
 is true. Can you object to that ? Mr. Greeley honestly thought that the 
 Southern States had a right to secede. But when the North waged war any 
 how, and the South waged war also, why Mr. Greeley joined his own side. 
 Well, I opposed secession and a great many other gentlemen opposed secession, 
 but when our States seceded we went with the States through the war. 
 
 Now, if you quarrel with Mr. Greeley for going with his State, you must 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 35 
 
 proscribe me for the same reason. I would go with it again under the same 
 circumstances. I have nothing to take back nor to apologize for upon that 
 subject. The only difference between us is, that he happened to be on that 
 side and I on this. That is all. But Mr. Greeley was against the whole 
 party upon the subject of peace. There was no day of the war that he was 
 not willing to negotiate upon the subject of peace, on terms honorable to both 
 parties. Some represent Mr. Greeley as a vindictive man ; but it is not true. 
 
 I call to my mind that at one time, when the Confederate Government 
 sent Commissioners around to Canada, to open negotiations with Western 
 Democrats. Our Commissioners were there, and, so far as I know, or believe, 
 or remember, Horace Greeley was the only man in the North, Democrat or 
 Republican, that had the courage to go to Canada and have friendly and 
 honorable communication with our people. Even the Democrats even the 
 Democrats of the North refused to entertain propositions from us, or to 
 treat with us. Horace Greeley was the only man that defied his party and 
 acted upon his conscience as a patriot, and went there ready to enter into 
 terms of peace consistent with the honor of both sections on the basis of pre 
 serving the Union. 
 
 After the war terminated, and our flag was furled and our noble chief, 
 than whom no people ever had nobler, was a prisoner, in chains, and the 
 bloodhounds of the North were after his blood, be exhibited the highest 
 moral courage. As I walked through the streets of New York, myself a 
 prisoner, the first time I ever saw that city, I saw streaming from all their 
 public buildings, humiliating pictures of Jefferson Davis, in women s 
 clothes and in chains. I heard their maniac cries for his blood. The first 
 sound that saluted my ears, when I entered the dungeon, was the miserable 
 jailor, saying : " You ought to feel honored because you occupy a dungeon 
 in which I had prepared to chain Jeff Davis." I replied to him : " I do feel 
 honored, and if you had chained him, a criminal would have chained a patriot." 
 Soon after Mr. Lincoln s unfortunate assassination, when passions were 
 inflamed, as I never saw them among any people, it was then that this man 
 Horace Greeley defied his party alone and went to Richmond and dared to be 
 come the surety of this man, and did do it. Because of the manhood, because 
 of the moral courage it exhibits, that is why I admire it. " Why," said the 
 gentleman, " he deserves no more credit than General Grant, who threatened, 
 if General Lee was molested, he w r ould resign his commission." Why, my 
 friends, don t you see the vast difference between the two ? Grant did that 
 as a soldier. That was the condition on which Lee surrendered that he 
 was not to be disturbed. Grant was under a solemn pledge to protect 
 General Lee. He would have been false to his honor as a soldier if he had 
 not done it. But Mr. Greeley had given no pledge to Jeff Davis. His act was 
 a voluntary act. His act was not done for the purpose of redeeming a 
 pledge but to illustrate a principle. 
 
 I am not saying these things to pronounce a eulogy on Mr. Greeley ; but 
 I like independence and moral courage. In some matters I like a man that 
 is yielding, that defers to the opinions of others, but when it comes to acts of 
 manhood, then it is that I like to see a man act as becomes a man. That 
 Horace Greeley has done in his whole history. There is no political principle 
 in this, I admit ; but I am just giving the reasons why the Southern man is 
 not inconsistent to vote for Horace Greeley. 
 
 I am willing to co-operate with this Cincinnati movement for another 
 reason, which is, for the good that I believe it will accomplish, as evi- 
 
360 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OP GEORGIA. 
 
 denced by the good it has already accomplished. Now, fellow-citizens, I 
 want to call your attention to the fact that this very move has already ac 
 complished three important things. In the first place, it has accomplished a 
 large amnesty. The Republican party had refused to pass the bill removing 
 the disabilities from the Southern people at all. It had come up over and 
 over again. They had managed t to vote it down. Greeley had always ad 
 vocated it. When this Cincinnati convention met and passed resolutions 
 demanding it, and Grant s party saw that the issue would be joined upon 
 that subject, they promptly passed the bill, and thus disabilities were re 
 moved from all but a few of our Southern people. 
 
 My distinguished friend said last night that he was an outlaw, and that it 
 was an outrage. And so it is. Horace Greeley says it is an outrage. 
 Horace Greeley has always said so. The nomination has stricken the fetters 
 from my limbs. The election of Horace Greeley will strike the fetters from 
 yours [pointing to General Toombs]. 
 
 Another good thing that this move has accomplished is this. The most 
 dangerous bill, in my opinion, ever attempted, for the purpose of cen 
 tralizing the American Government, is known as what is called the " Force 
 Bill " the " Bayonet Bill," by which the Federal Government, through its 
 own officers, takes charge of the election precincts of the country through 
 out the nation. I saw the infamy of this measure. I made a visit to New 
 York, expressly to beg the people, the authorities of New York, when the 
 experiment was first attempted upon the State, to resist it, and it was the 
 passage of that measure, as one of the outrages, that preceded and gave rise 
 to this new departure. When that measure was passed, it then only applied 
 to a few large towns. General Grant tried the experiment of enforcing the 
 measures upon New York. My own opinion was, and the opinion of the 
 leading Democrats was, that if New York submitted to that interference 
 with State elections that the Republican party would enlarge its powers, and 
 by 1872 would have a bill passed which would authorize General Grant to 
 take control of all the precincts and declare the election as he pleased. 
 Sure enough, in 1870 and 1871 an amendatory bill was introduced and 
 passed enlarging the powers of the President upon that subject, and during 
 the last session of Congress a bill was introduced to give the President 
 authority to take possession of every election precinct in the United States. 
 How was that move defeated ? It was not altogether defeated ; a hard 
 struggle ensued. It was modified and the most of its odious features were 
 stricken out, and now the President, instead of the right to arrest and im 
 prison voters, without the privilege of habeas corpus, till the election is over, 
 has no right, but simply to allow men to go and look on and make report. 
 How was that accomplished ? By a coalition by a combination of the 
 Democracy and the Liberal Republicans. That victory was won and that 
 iniquity was defeated, and that I consider one of the greatest victories won. 
 Fellow-citizens, I congratulate you. His chief machinery, the great engine 
 which was to be put in the hands of General Grant during the pending 
 election, by which he would be enabled to control it, has been defeated by 
 the management, by the combination, by the coalition if you please, of the 
 Greeley men and the Democrats. Oh, in the face of such a patent, such a 
 glorious truth, how I could look with utter contempt upon the poor creature 
 that, hyena like, could go back into the far records of this patriot and dig 
 up some little thing to object to. I feel that this move has accomplished 
 much for you and me. Now I don t believe the Democratic party could 
 
TltS LlFK, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 361 
 
 have acme that, because Grant was willing to resist to the last that party 
 alone; but General Grant and his party could not resist the Greeley and Cin 
 cinnati convention united in this work. 
 
 The third thing to which I alluded as accomplished by this move is this : 
 You remember that at the last session of Congress a bill was passed author 
 izing the suspension of habeas corpus, and the bill was to be in force till the 
 adjournment of the present session. Prior to the adjournment, that party, 
 the Republican party, brought forward a move for the purpose of continu 
 ing that act in force, and it was a most dangerous blow at the liberties 
 of the people. 
 
 Even the bayonet bill would be shorn of some of its power by the defeat 
 of the suspension of habeas corpus / but when the President had the right 
 to arrest a voter, right at the polls, and imprison him until after the election, 
 you see what the consequences would be. Well, my friends, when the Re 
 publicans brought forward the bill to prolong this power, again the Demo 
 crats and Greeley men united and defeated it, and thus to this move it is 
 owing that you and I to-day to-night need no longer dread martial law. 
 Martial law has been threatened upon this State several times, as it has been 
 actually enforced in North Carolina and in South Carolina. Their citizens 
 
 / 
 
 have been in chains in time of peace with this writ suspended, and marched 
 off to Northern prisons for imprisonment. Thank God this can no longer 
 be. Grant has no more power to take away the liberties of the people by 
 the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus than you and I have, and that 
 glorious result is attributable to the combination of the Democrats and 
 Greeley Republicans. Now, these are the three things amnesty, the 
 modification of the bayonet bill, and the restoration of the writ of habeas 
 corpus. These three things alone are worth the Cincinnati movement, and 
 are enough to inspire the great and noble with gratitude for the accomplish 
 ment of it. Therefore, as this much good has already been done, I argue 
 from that that much other good may be done and will be done. 
 
 There is another reason why I am willing to support the Cincinnati 
 movement if the Baltimore convention shall so order it, and that is this : 
 that Mr. Greeley had no expectation of being elected without the Demo 
 cratic voters, and if Greeley should be elected, that same election will carry 
 into the House of Representatives a majority of Democrats, and when you 
 have got in that body a majority of Democrats, the President is powerless 
 to do harm. 
 
 Again, the indications from Democratic action already had, show very 
 clearly that the great body of the party is decidedly in favor of co-operat 
 ing with the Cincinnati movement. It matters but little now what you and 
 I might have preferred. We cannot, if we would, arrest this current. Of 
 thirteen States, which have, up to this time, held conventions and appointed 
 delegates to Baltimore, only one has instructed her delegates to insist on 
 what is called a straight Democratic ticket. That one. exception is Dela 
 ware, which has three votes in the Electoral College. You cannot forget 
 your friends who so greatly outnumber you. You but help the enemy by 
 quarreling with your friends. There can be neither safety, nor policy, nor 
 principle, except in going with Baltimore. 
 
 The distinguished gentleman who addressed you last night [General 
 Toombs] said he was glad this test of party fidelity had come. He was 
 now going to winnow the Greeley chaff from the true Democratic wheat, 
 and he was going to chalk the true Democrats on tke back and kick the 
 
362 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 others out ! Well, I will not quarrel with this true and valiant gentleman, 
 but I will suggest a bargain for his own ease and benefit. If he will post 
 pone the chalking division of his labors for sixty days, I think he will find 
 in Georgia only three backs to chalk, and they will be so sick as to be 
 utterly indifferent. If he will only forbear to begin the kicking process for 
 over a much less period, he will find the undertaking so huge he will recon 
 sider his rash resolve and abandon the job. If he will not so abandon it, he 
 will illustrate the wisdom and courage of a certain wise animal, who seeing 
 the engine and train coming toward him under full speed, bravely planted 
 himself on the track, threw his tail in the air, pawed the ground with his 
 two feet, and loudly bellowed out, " If that traitorous and cowardly Greeley 
 engine run against him, he would butt it off the track." 
 
 The last I saw of that animal he was badly chalked. In the same breath 
 our friend said, "he would, with great pleasure, vote for the devil or John 
 Brown s ghost before he would vote for either Greeley or Grant." How 
 harmoniously men s ideas with their feelings unconsciously flow ! On his line 
 of passion and hate, I think the devil for President and John Brown s ghost 
 for Vice-President would be the very best ticket he could nominate ! On 
 that line our poor deluded South has been carried lower and lower and still 
 lower, until I now know of no lower place save the dominions of our friend s 
 favorite candidate. If the gentlemen s candidate should be elected, I pray 
 that he may not find place in that administration. 
 
 Kick out, indeed ! Kick out New York, Pennsylvania, Indiana all the 
 States but Delaware ! Kick out Hendricks and Pendleton, and Seymour, 
 and Hoffman, and Adams, and all the great life-long leaders of the Democratic 
 party, except three latter, born in Georgia ! 
 
 Judge Stephens, last night, begged you in most excited, pathetic strains 
 to repudiate Mr. Greeley for the sake of downtrodden South Carolina, while 
 South Carolina herself, with the unanimous voice of her convention, implores 
 you in tones louder than the clank of her chains to elect Mr. Greeley as the 
 only hope for her relief. Mr. Toombs has been alluded to as advising for a 
 straight Democratic ticket. But Mr. Voorhees s State (Indiana) has spoken, 
 through her convention, in the most emphatic manner, for Cincinnati in 
 dorsement, and Mr. Voorhees himself will abide the decision at Baltimore, 
 and he is, and ever has been, an honest man, a true man, and a patriot. The 
 truth is, the decision for Baltimore has been rendered by the Democratic 
 people before Baltimore meets, and whether you like it or not, it is your 
 duty to concur. 
 
 So then, if the Democratic party as a unit could elect a straight Demo 
 cratic ticket with the divisions now manifest, success on that line would be 
 impossible. And here I wish I could impress upon the South one truth our 
 people ought to learn. It is this : There are thousands of the best Demo 
 crats in the North who believe and affirm that one cruel reason why the 
 Democratic party is kept in the minority in the nation and in the Northern 
 States is because of certain ultraisrns at the South which they have been and 
 are required to bear in season and out of season. They applaud you for re 
 fusing to give vitality to the Reconstruction policy by your consent. This 
 was necessary to save your honor. But without your consent, by force, Re 
 construction has become an accomplished fact. Every department of the 
 government recognizes and enforces the amendments. All the people sub 
 mit fo them. Now, for us of the South to insist that the Democratic party 
 shall go before the people on a platform and with candidates pledged to 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WAITINGS. 363 
 
 treat the amendments as nullities, is simply to insist that the Democratic 
 party shall subject itself to the charge of defying the government, of dis 
 obeying the courts, and of seeking to get power only to undo all the results 
 of the war, even to the extent of re-establishing slavery. If every law re 
 sulting from force and successful usurpation is but a nullity ; that everything 
 done since secession is a nullity ; and to require the Democratic party to 
 approve or refute this logic, is a burden they cannot bear before the Northern 
 people in their present temper, and must constantly insure their defeat, and 
 make the wrongs and usurpations of which we complain perpetual. They, 
 therefore, do not ask us to approve, but only to bury Reconstruction with the 
 surrender, and secession with the dead past, and obey the laws as the courts 
 and the authorities decide them, as the only way to stop the ever-increasing 
 evils of a revolution which secession madly began and which Reconstruction, 
 with greater madness, seems determined shall never end. And I tell you, 
 my Southern friends, abuse what you call the new departure as you may, 
 you will get no other platform at Baltimore. The Democracy, whether 
 with or without Cincinnati, will not go into the canvass with Southern 
 ultraism such as you heard here last night as their recognized and repre 
 sentative sentiments. Whether Greeley and Brown, or straight-out nomi 
 nees be the candidates, they will stand on what you call the New Depart 
 ure platform. They will pledge you to abide and to obey, in good faith, 
 all the amendments and all the laws as verities, until the people, in a legal 
 way, shall choose to change them. Our Northern friends complain, and 
 justly complain, of those ultra Southern men who allow themselves to utter 
 contrary sentiments as the only true Democracy. To get rid of these 
 ultraisms and the charges to which they subject the Democratic party before 
 the Northern people, is one of the chief reasons which creates the necessity, 
 as they think, of adopting the Cincinnati platform and nominees. 
 
 Still another reason for co-operating with Cincinnati results from the one 
 just stated. If the Democratic party were to enter the race on the platform 
 of 1868, and under their own nominees, and were to get an actual majority 
 of the votes, it is believed they would still not secure the offices. As against 
 Democracy on the platform that the amendments are nullities, it is believed 
 that the ruling party would and could hold the government by force, and 
 would be sustained by the Northern people ; while as against the platform 
 and candidates of the Liberal Republicans so securing a majority of the 
 votes, they would not dare to make such an attempt. 
 
 And behold here another illustration of the dangers of extreme views and 
 intolerant tempers. How long, Southern people, must you suffer bitter ex 
 periences before you learn the great lesson that indiscreet zealots, controlled 
 by passion, may do more to destroy the cause they advocate than all the 
 power of the most malignant enemy could do ? What have you not already 
 lost and suffered from every evil ? I do not desire to stir any unpleasant 
 feeling, but we must not refuse to learn wisdom from our errors. I speak 
 what history must record as true when I say that the reopening of the 
 slavery agitation, by the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, did more to 
 destroy slavery than all the abolition societies of the world. Yet that repeal 
 was made in the avowed interest of the rights of slavery, and every Southern 
 man who did not approve it, and support the party that sustained it, was 
 denounced as unsound on slavery, and not fit to be trusted by the people ! 
 
 History will adjudge that when we hurried unprepared and in passion into 
 secession, we made the movement which destroyed the partisan power of 
 
364 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 the South in the government. And yet that movement Was made to 
 secure Southern independence and promote Southern power, and every 
 man who could not approve it was denounced as a traitor to his section. 
 History will declare, when all the facts are known, that the internal dissen 
 sions created by the quarrel kept up with their own side by distinguished 
 men in the Confederacy, did more to bring on Southern defeat and humilia 
 tion than all the armies of Grant and Sherman. Yet that war was made by 
 the Confederates on the Confederate Government avowedly in the name of 
 liberty, and every man who united in giving earnest and unmurmuring sup 
 port to our leaders in the field and in the cabinet were denounced as enemies 
 of liberty, seeking to establish a military despotism. 
 
 In the name of slavery, slavery was destroyed. In the name of independ 
 ence, Southern independence was destroyed. In the name of liberty and 
 right, Southern defeat and humiliation was wrought. And this fell spirit of 
 extreme unreasoning, unyielding, intolerant, self -sufficient, and self-immacu 
 late egotism and zeal, for twelve months has been binding into its exclusive 
 deadly embrace the Democratic party, and in the name of the " only true 
 Democracy" will destroy Democracy itself forever, if not now rebuked and 
 repudiated by the people. It will then have but one more work of destruc 
 tion to perform, and, that will be sure that now being done. Dinning for 
 ever, in place and out of place, into the ears of the people, their own self -pat 
 ented exclusive right to define and protect State rights. Indiscreet zealots 
 seem determined never to cease their ill-timed clamoring until, in the name 
 of State rights, they shall destroy the States themselves. 
 
 These tireless outragers of everything they advocate, are always known 
 by the fluent facility with which, they denounce everybody as a traitor, or 
 robber, or fool who will not be as indiscreet and destructive as themselves. 
 What a catalogue we had last night of thieves, and robbers, and Radicals, 
 made up of all classes, and trades, and professions of men who were willing 
 to support Mr. Greeley. 
 
 I tell these gentlemen there are thousands in Georgia just as honest, as 
 true, and wise as themselves, and who intend to vote for Mr. Greeley, if Balti 
 more shall so decide. Nay, I tell them more : if to be willing to obey the 
 laws of the land ; if to be anxious to co-operate with all who are willing 
 to restore local State government and Constitutional limitation upon Federal 
 power; and above all, if to be willing to adopt any honorable means of arrest 
 ing the wrongs under which we suffer, and to secure equal rights to the 
 Southern States and people in the Union, constitutes a man a traitor, a fool, 
 and a robber, then the greatest traitor, the biggest fool, and the worst rob 
 ber in America stands before you to-niorht. 
 
 %/ O 
 
 Now, in the beginning of this canvass I enter my remonstrance against 
 this intolerant oratory, and if the gentlemen who indulge in it have no re 
 spect for themselves, they should at least respect the character of our people 
 and the gravity of the issue, and abandon the ugly if not criminal habit. 
 
 Another reason why I am willing to support Mr. Greeley, if the Balti 
 more convention shall so decide, is because we of the South, by such support, 
 offer to the North the highest possible evidence of our sincere desire to end 
 sectional discord and have a cordial reunion. It has, heretofore, been diffi 
 cult for the Northern people to believe we were sincere in laying down our 
 arms, and that we agreed cheerfully to the emancipation of the negro. It 
 has been impossible for the Democratic party to inspire this needed confi 
 dence, because that party was charged with bringing about secession, and 
 
HTS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 365 
 
 with a desire to nullify all the results of the war, and the extreme and 
 thoughtless utterances of a few Southern men, have aided the Radicals in 
 their impeachment of Democratic sincerity on these questions. I have already 
 explained to you the origin and meaning and purpose of what is called the 
 " new departure." That movement had the warm approval of all the most 
 prominent Northern Democrats, and was indorsed by all the Northern State 
 conventions. It had no purpose but to prepare the Democracy to make this 
 Presidential race under their own flag, borne by their own standard-bearer, 
 and a large number of Liberal Republicans were willing to co-operate with 
 the Democracy on this line, if the party could organize on it. There was no 
 concession of a single principle. There was only the admission of the facts, 
 which, right or wrong, had occurred. There was no trouble with the Demo 
 crats at the North. But, unfortunately, an unexpected bitterness against this 
 movement was exhibited at the South, and, it is painful to add, chiefly in 
 Georgia. 
 
 All these utterances were eagerly caught up by the extreme Radicals of 
 the North and paraded as evidence that the Democratic party was not 
 sincere in the proposed movement to combine with the Liberals to beat the 
 Extremes and save the country. The charges were false ; the movement 
 was sincere and patriotic as you now see, but there are many at the North 
 as unreasoning as many at the South mere creatures of the war passions. 
 The result was, the Democratic party was defeated and thus rendered 
 unable, by these Southern utterances, to organize the party on this move 
 ment and make the race under their own flag, aided by the Republicans. 
 
 The extreme demagogues of the North will not be able to make the peo 
 ple believe that Mr. Greeley will nullify all the results of the war and restore 
 slavery. The people of the South exhibit a magnanimity which must excite 
 the admiration of the world, and offer conclusive evidence of their willing 
 ness to give up slavery, to give the negro his political and civil rights under 
 the law, and to have permanent peace and concord on a basis of universal 
 equality between the States of the Union, and of civil supremacy and local 
 freedom, by supporting the Cincinnati candidates. If the Northern people 
 do not respond to this magnanimous and patriotic feeling of the South, then 
 let them blame only themselves if discord reign until empire come. 
 
 The last reason I specify to-night for being willing to support Mr. Greeley, 
 if the Baltimore convention shall so decide, is, that as his election is more 
 probable than that of a Democratic ticket, so the prospect for our deliverance 
 from Federal interference in our local affairs through that election on the 
 Cincinnati platform, is more hopeful and will be more speedy. And, after 
 all, my Southern countrymen, this is the greatest reason of all. We have but 
 little interest in what becomes of the Federal Government, if we cannot get 
 and keep control of our own State governments. For seven years we have 
 suffered under disadvantages which no other people ever had to contend with. 
 We have been insulted and robbed, in our poverty and weakness, by strangers, 
 vagabonds, and negroes, under the protection of the Federal bayonet. Our 
 laws have been deranged, our industry paralyzed and society demoralized, and 
 our intellectual, virtuous men forbidden, under the penalties of felony, to em 
 ploy their qualifications to bring about order, security, and prosperity. For 
 five years thousands of our best people have slept without ease and waked 
 without hope. Our lands have continued to decrease in value, the fruits of 
 our soil have been taken by law-making and law-ruling robbers. Thousands 
 have been arrested without guilt, only to continue in power the strangers and 
 
3.66 SENATOR B. IL HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 thieves who ruled without authority and plundered without compunction. 
 Even now, while I speak, they are carrying citizens of a neighboring State by 
 the score from their desolate, but still sunny homes to Northern prisons ! 
 Oh, my countrymen, let us believe the day of our deliverance is dawning. 
 Let us hope the time for us to begin to improve is near. Weary watchers 
 for returning right to the war-ridden plains of the South, take courage ! 
 It seems to me I am catching the rays of a new star in the East, guiding 
 you to a new political Bethlehem, where is born, not a man, but that Divine 
 conception, a new hope for local State government and Constitutional limita 
 tions upon Federal power, which means redemption for you, peace for the 
 nation, and good-will to mankind. 
 
 A gentleman having a distinguished name said, but yesterday, he was 
 glad to hear I was willing to accept the Cincinnati movement, as it was good 
 evidence the people would not accept it, as they had never followed me. It 
 is difficult to determine whether the truth or the stupidity of this remark 
 preponderates. It is true, I have not led our people to their present condi 
 tion. But when you see whither they have been led, is it not strangely 
 stupid for any man to refer to such leadership as an achievement for boast 
 ing ? No, my friends, I have never led you. During the whole time of my 
 connection with politics you have been rushing wildly down a declivity, and 
 I have done nothing but labor to avert your fall. No man can have an 
 humbler estimate of my abilities than myself. When I have so often seen 
 so clearly, evil after evil coming upon you, and remember how unable I have 
 been to avert it, I feel humble and insignificant. But your fall is complete. 
 Let it be at an end. We must win again. And if God would commission 
 me with an intellect worthy to be a leader, I would ask no other or higher 
 ambition than to lead you from poverty back to wealth, from defeat back 
 to power, and from humiliation and sorrow back to happiness and pros 
 perity ! 
 
SPEECH DELIVERED IN UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT, IN 
 
 ATLANTA, GA., MARCH 14, 1873. 
 
 Purity of the Jury System Has any Power but the State Government the Right to 
 Prescribe the Qualifications of Jurors ? Argument of Hon. B. H. Hill. 
 
 AEGUMENT. 
 
 May it please your Honor : The question now to be decided cannot be 
 of more importance to the prisoner at the bar than to every other man and 
 woman in the State, and in the United States. I rejoice that I am to engage 
 in its discussion before one who possesses the ability to discern, and the 
 courage to declare the law as it is. 
 
 The motion challenging the array affirms that this is a legally incompe 
 tent jury, because the order or rule of court of the last September term, 
 under which the qualifications of the jurors, in the box from which this jury 
 was drawn and brought here, were ascertained and fixed, ignored and disre 
 garded the laws of the State of Georgia on the subject, and therefore vio 
 lated the statutes and laws of the United States. 
 
 A proper discussion of this question, especially in view of its treatment 
 by the learned gentlemen who have argued against the motion, will bring 
 into review what I have always regarded as one of the most beautiful 
 features of our system of double governments State and Federal. 
 
 The district attorney (Mr. Farrow) and the ex-attorney general (Mr. 
 Akerman) treat as a monstrous absurdity the proposition that the great 
 government of the United States has left its courts, sitting in the several 
 States, dependent upon the laws of those States for the qualifications of their 
 jurors. Because such a proposition is, as it appears to them, so very prepos 
 terous, therefore, they conclude, such cannot be and is not the law. 
 
 I most respectfully suggest that such a proposition can be considered 
 absurd only because of the distempered passions of the times. Neither in 
 the light of the language of the Federal Constitution, nor in the purposes 
 and objects of its framing, nor in the spirit which animated its framers, is 
 this proposition absurd. On the contrary, it is exceedingly natural, wise, and 
 becoming. A mere casual reading of that Constitution will show us that not 
 only in this respect, but in other respects, and to a much greater extent, was 
 the Federal Government and each of its departments left by our fathers 
 (dependent, indeed, leaning in trust and confidence upon the States, the 
 people of the States, and the government of the States. The first work of 
 the framers of the Constitution was to frame a legislative department for the 
 Federal Government. The second section and second sentence they wrote 
 in this work was in the following words : 
 
 The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second 
 year by the people of the several States, and the electors in each State shall have the 
 qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State Legislature. 
 
 Thus the work of qualifying voters for members of the House of Repre 
 sentatives of the United States was left, by Constitutional provision, solely 
 
 367 
 
368 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 to the several States, aiid the Government of the United States, now so 
 boastingly called great, was left without the power to prescribe a single 
 qualification for a single voter at such elections ! And this power of quali 
 fying voters is still exclusively in the several States each State for itself 
 and the power is unabridged save only by the Fifteenth Amendment, which 
 prohibits a discrimination in such qualifications " on account of race, color, 
 or previous condition of servitude." 
 
 So, again, the senators in Congress are chosen solely by the Legislatures 
 of the several States, which Legislatures are chosen solely by the qualified 
 voters by the laws of the State. So that for every member of its legislative 
 department the Government of the United States is required by the Consti 
 tution to lean upon the States and upon voters qualified solely by the laws 
 of the States. 
 
 And here let us note the difference between qualifying an elector and 
 holding an election. The Constitution provides : 
 
 Section 4. The times, places, and manner of holding elections for senators and repre 
 sentatives shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof, but the Congress 
 may at any time by law make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choos 
 ing senators. 
 
 The power to qualify electors is left exclusively and absolutely with the 
 States. In this work Congress has neither power nor discretion. But Con 
 gress may have a hand in the ministerial work the manner of holding the 
 elections. 
 
 The second work of the f ramers of the Federal Constitution was to pro 
 vide an executive department for the Government of the United States. 
 The executive power was vested in a president. This president and a vice- 
 president were to be chosen by a body of electors. These electors were to 
 be chosen by the States each State for itself " in such manner as the 
 Legislature of the State may direct." The power of qualifying voters to 
 choose these electors was left exclusively in the State. South Carolina chose 
 her electors by the Legislature. 
 
 Thus, again, we find that for a person to be her chief executive, the Gov 
 ernment of the United States was required by the Constitution to lean on 
 the States, and Congress was left without the power to prescribe a single 
 qualification for a single voter for those who, as an Electoral College, should 
 designate the President. Here let us note again, that the ministerial work, 
 especially the counting of the votes of the Electoral College, was given to 
 Congress. 
 
 We next come to the third work of the framers of the Constitution, that 
 of providing a judicial department for the Government of the United States. 
 
 The judicial power is vested in certain courts. The judges are not 
 elected, but to be appointed by the President, by the advice and consent of 
 the Senate. It is provided that, " The trial of all cases, except in cases of 
 impeachment, shall be by jury." As to what power or authority shall pre 
 scribe the qualifications of jurors to compose the jury, the Constitution is 
 silent. It was not given to Congress, and, under the rule of interpretation 
 of the fathers, could not therefore exist in Congress. It certainly could not 
 exist except as a resulting or implied power. Various clauses of the Consti 
 tution strengthen the position that the framers of the Constitution intended 
 that the courts of the United States should depend, for qualified jurors, upon 
 the same powers upon which the legislative and executive departments 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS, 369 
 
 depended for qualified voters, upon the laws of the several States in which 
 the courts should sit. Thus, in the original Constitution the language is, 
 " The trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury, 
 and such trial shall be held in the State where the crimes shall have been 
 committed." Of course by juries in that State, and by juries composed of 
 jurors made such by the law of that State. 
 
 In the early amendments of the Constitution we find these provisions : 
 
 No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime, unless 
 on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or 
 naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger ; 
 nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or 
 limb ; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself; nor 
 be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law ; nor shall private 
 property be taken for public use without just compensation. 
 
 In all criminal prosecution, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public 
 trial, by an impartial jury of the State and District wherein the crime shall have been 
 committed. 
 
 In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, 
 the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, etc. 
 
 The jury must be a jury in the State, and can only be such when com 
 posed of persons qualified as jurors by the laws of the State. 
 
 These clauses of the Federal Constitution are precious. They are the 
 sacred civil jewels come down to us from an English ancestry, hallowed by 
 the blood of a thousand struggles, and stored away by our fathers for safe 
 keeping in* the casket of the Constitution. It is infidelity to forget them. 
 It is sacrilege to disregard them. It is despotism to trample upon them ! 
 
 But, sir, whether Congress has the power or not to prescribe the qualifi 
 cations of jurors for the United States courts, we need not now further dis 
 cuss. It is very certain that Congress has never exercised nor proposed to 
 exercise such a power. Nor has Congress authorized any court to exercise 
 such a power. On the contrary, Congress, by its legislation, as I shall pres 
 ently show, has always relied, and exclusively relied, on the laws of the sev 
 eral States to fix the qualifications of jurors, as the Constitution itself relies 
 exclusively on the laws of the States to fix the qualifications of voters. And 
 from the formation of the government to the present time neither the Gov 
 ernment of the United States nor any department of that government has 
 ever qualified or proposed to qualify a voter or a juror, except in that ab 
 normal work of Reconstruction, which its own authors have sought to justify 
 only on the pretense that a portion of the States themselves were in a power 
 less and abnormal condition. 
 
 I have thus brought in brief review these features of the Federal Consti 
 tution to show that the learned gentlemen who represent the government in 
 this argument are not justified by anything in the Constitution itself for ex 
 hibiting such loyal horror at the idea that the United States Government 
 should depend on the States and the laws of the States for anything. Sir, 
 it depends on the States and on the people of the States for everything. If 
 the people of this generation would only read this Constitution in the same 
 spirit which animated those who made it, this reign of discord, of hatred, of 
 jealousy, of strife, and wrong between the general and State governments 
 would die and be buried in the universal ignominy it merits. The framers 
 of the Constitution were citizens of the several States. They had come out 
 pf a common struggle for a common liberty won by the States. They 
 
370 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 desired to form a government of union between the States to perpetuate the 
 liberties so won. Thus, sir, the Federal Constitution was framed by the 
 States, and the government of the Union under that Constitution became the 
 child of the States, begotten by the sovereignty of the States in the sweet 
 embrace of the chaste Goddess of Liberty ! Was it not natural that the 
 child should lean upon the parents? Was such an idea shocking them? 
 Nay, sir, the nurses did lay that child, with beautiful trust and confidence, in 
 the arms of its fond parents, and bid it rest there and grow. It was well 
 nourished. It has grown. It is vigorous. Shall it scoff at leaning now ? 
 Shall we have in this Union another Goneril, plethoric with a too liberal 
 patrimony, and mocking the sorrows of the parent who gave her being and 
 strength ? Sir, to this child of the States more earnestly than to any born 
 of woman should the solemn admonition be addressed : " Honor thy father 
 and thy mother, that thy days may be long in the land which the Lord thy 
 God giveth thee." 
 
 I proceed now to show that Congress has never attempted to prescribe the 
 qualifications for jurors in the States, nor authorized the United States courts 
 to prescribe such qualifications ; but, on the contrary, has always directed 
 that the qualifications prescribed by the States shall be accepted and ob 
 served by the United States courts sitting in the respective States. 
 
 The first enactment by Congress on this subject is to be found in the 
 great Judiciary Act of 1789, and in the 29th section of that act we find the 
 following language : 
 
 And the jurors (in the United States courts) shall have the same qualifications as are 
 requisite for jurors by the laws of the State of which they are citizens, to serve in the 
 highest courts of law of such State. 1 United States Statutes at Large, 88. 
 
 It is worthy of notice that this is the exact language employed in the 
 Constitution itself on the subject of the qualification of electors for mem 
 bers of Congress, and, under it, no person can be qualified as a juror in the 
 United States courts, who is not qualified as a juror in the State courts by 
 the laws of the State. 
 
 I pass over other legislation by Congress on this subject (all like the 
 above), and come directly to the last act, which was approved July 20, 1840. 
 This act provides : 
 
 That jurors to serve in the courts of the United States, in each State respectively, shall 
 have the like qualifications and be entitled to the like exemptions as jurors of the highest 
 courts of law of such State, now have and are entitled to, and shall hereafter, from time 
 to time, have and be entitled to, and shall be designated by ballot, lot, or otherwise, ac 
 cording to the mode of forming juries now practiced, and hereafter to be practiced there 
 in, in so far as such mode may be practicable by the courts of the United States or the 
 officers thereof; and for this purpose the said courts shall have power to make all neces 
 sary rules and regulations for conforming the designation and empaneling of juries in 
 substance to the laws and usages now in force in such State, and further, shall have 
 power by rule or order, from time to time, to conform the same to any change in these 
 respects which may be hereafter adopted by the Legislature of the respective States for 
 the State courts. 5 United States Statutes at Large, 394. 
 
 In considering this statute, let us first note the difference between a 
 "juror" and a "jury." A juror is a person, and must have certain personal 
 qualifications to render him competent. A jury is a body of persons so 
 qualified, and must be empaneled. Qualifications to be possessed by a juror 
 must be prescribed, fixed by legislation. The drawing, summoning, and 
 empaneling a jury is mere ministerial work, and may be done by the court 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 371 
 
 or its officers, and the drawing or designating of the persons to compose a 
 jury at any given time of the court, may be by "ballot, lot, or otherwise." 
 
 By the language of this act of Congress it is very clear that the qualifica 
 tions of jurors as declared, prescribed, and fixed by the laws of the State, are 
 adopted, prescribed, and fixed as the qualifications for jurors in the courts 
 of the United States. 
 
 The word " like r in this act is the word " requisite " in the Constitution 
 and in the act of 1789, and both words are interchangeable with the word 
 "same." The word "same" is used in the act of 1789. This court, there 
 fore, has no power to fix the qualification of the persons to serve as its jurors 
 nor to authorize its officers to fix such qualifications. This court is com 
 manded by Congress to respect and observe the qualifications fixed by the 
 laws of this State. The laws of this State, for this purpose, became the 
 laws of the United States. No person, therefore, is qualified to sit as a juror 
 in this court, who is not qualified to sit as a juror in the courts of the State. 
 I will not say that the name of every person found in the jury-box of the 
 counties composing the northern district of this State, must be found 
 in the jury-box of this court, though this would be better, and is, especially 
 as far as convenient and practicable, but I do affirm that the name of no 
 person can be placed as a competent juror in the jury-box of this court, 
 which has not been placed as a competent juror in the jury-box of some one 
 of those counties of this State. And this court has no power, authority, or 
 discretion to place, order, or recognize a name in its jury-box which can 
 not also be found in the jury-box of the State. 
 
 In the ministerial work of designating from the jury-box, so made up, the 
 persons to serve and constitute a jury at a given term, and of bringing these 
 persons to the court and empaneling them into a jury, this court must act 
 and use its own officers ; but even in this designation, drawing, summoning, 
 and empaneling, this court is required by this act to " conform as nearly as 
 practicable " to the modes practiced by the State courts in doing the same 
 ministerial work. And this court has power to make orders and rules to 
 secure this conformity as far as practicable, and power to change your rules 
 to conform to the changing modes practiced and adopted in the State. You 
 can make no rule or order to evade that conformity, and much less to put 
 an unqualified juror in your panel. In fact, even in this ministerial work, 
 you are commanded to conform to the modes of the State if you can con 
 form, and as far as you can. 
 
 There can be no other logical, fair, or just analysis of this Act of 1840. 
 
 But I will not rest the case here. The courts of the United States have 
 given this very construction to this act. In the case of the United States 
 vs. Wilson, the court presided over by that very able judge, McLean, after 
 quoting this act as above, unanimously proceed to say : 
 
 By the first clause of this statute, the enactment is positive in its requirements, that so 
 far as the qualifications and exemptions of jurors in the Federal courts are concerned, 
 they should be the same us those of the highest courts of law of the State, and that the 
 mode of forming juries should, so far as practicable, conform to the mode of the State. 
 So far as relates to the qualifications and exemptions of Federal juries, the courts have no 
 iiscretion. The law is positive that they shall have the like qualifications, and be entitled 
 to the like exemptions, as jurors of the highest courts of law of such State had at the time 
 of passing the law, or should thereafter have in such State. 
 
 Can language be more unmistakable ? And I affirm, there is not a decis 
 ion, or dictum, or intimation, or order to the contrary, in all the decisions 
 
372 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 and proceedings of the United States courts, save in the order now here 
 being discussed. 
 
 Now, then, here is the conclusion : Your Honor has no jurisdiction, no 
 discretion in the work of making, fixing, or modifying the qualifications of 
 persons to serve as jurors in your court. On this subject you can pass no 
 order or rule. Your order, your rule, is the law of the State. The State 
 qualities her jurors, and out of the jurors so qualified you may designate, 
 draw, summon, and empanel your jury ; and in doing even this much, you 
 must designate, draw, summon, and empanel in the same mode, as nearly as 
 possible, as the State does, and you can pass orders and rules to compel 
 your officers to conform to the modes of the State. 
 
 The ex-attorney general (Mr. Akerman) says the State may abolish jury 
 trials and have no qualified jurors ! The only reply needed to this is to say 
 that the State of Georgia has a jury-box full of the names of well-qualified 
 jurors in every county. 
 
 The district attorney (Mr. Farrow) says the clerks in the several counties 
 may refuse to send up the lists of the qualified jurors when called on. The 
 only reply needed to this is to say, the clerks have never refused to send up 
 such lists, and this court has never been without a well-filled jury-box of 
 well-qualified jurors until that box was emptied of such names, and refilled, 
 under this order, with the names of unqualified persons to serve as jurors. 
 
 The learned gentlemen hasten to violate the laws of Congress, and tram 
 ple on the laws of [the State, and to place the lives, the liberties, and the 
 property of our people in the hands of unqualified jurors, upon the pretext 
 that a State which has never been without a jury might possibly abolish 
 jury trial, and that officers of the State, who had always promptly and 
 cheerfully filled your Honor s jury-box with qualified jurors, might possibly 
 not fill them! 
 
 In the next place, let us examine the law generally on this subject of the 
 qualification of jurors, and then the law of this State, and ascertain who are 
 qualified by law to serve as jurors in Georgia. 
 
 The annals of the Anglo-Saxon race, perhaps, contain nothing more inter 
 esting than the history of juries, the qualification of jurors, and jury trial. 
 It has often been said that the right of trial by jury is the palladium of our 
 liberties. It may, with equal truth, be said that intelligence and virtue con 
 stitute the palladium of the jury system itself. Trial by jury would be a 
 weak palladium of liberty if ignorance and vice did not disqualify persons 
 from serving as jurors. The jury-box holds more directly in its keeping the 
 life, the liberty, and the property of the citizen than the ballot-box, and 
 it needs to be watched with equal if not greater and more sleepless vigilance. 
 
 In the reign of Henry IV., an act was passed declaring that grand juries 
 should be selected " from the King s liege people," who had not been out 
 lawed, " nor fled to sanctuary for treason or felony." The selections were 
 to be made by the sheriffs and bailiffs of the franchise. Heavy penalties 
 were prescribed for the introduction of unqualified jurors in the jury-box. 
 The courts of England always held that the presence of an unqualified juror 
 in the panel vitiated the entire panel, and rendered every indictment found, 
 void. 
 
 The Court. Can you show authority for that position ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I can, sir, and am now prepared to do so. 
 
 The case of Hovey vs. Hobson, Taunton, is a leading authority for construing the act, 
 and declares that the mischief was, that persons were put on the jury who were not 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 373 
 
 qualified to serve ; that they had no right on the jury, and that their presence vitiated 
 the whole panel, and rendered their action void ; and for the plain reason that the bill 
 must be found by at least twelve, and the disqualified juror might be one of the twelve. 
 6 McLean R. 610. 
 
 The rulings have been equally rigid in America. In the case of The Com 
 monwealth vs. Parker, 2 Pickering, and of Doyle, 17 Ohio, the same doctrine 
 is laid down. " The principle established is," says the court " that if a per 
 son is on the panel not having the qualification of a juror as required by 
 law, the action of the whole jury is vitiated, and an indictment found by 
 them would be void." 
 
 Thus we see, sir, what value the law places upon the proper legal qualifi 
 cation of a juror. One unqualified voter does not vitiate an election. No 
 number of unqualified voters will vitiate an election if there be a sufficient 
 number of qualified votes to fix the result. But one single unqualified juror 
 in a panel will vitiate the entire action of the panel, though all the other 
 jurors be qualified. And this is right. The office of a juror is a high trust. 
 The juror does not pass upon his own life, or liberty, or property, but he 
 does pass upon the life, the liberty, and the property of his fellow. How 
 indispensable is it to justice, then, that the jury should be composed of men 
 of uprightness, of intelligence, and a correct sense of right ? No man is a 
 juror from natural right. The law makes him a juror to execute the highest 
 trusts. 
 
 In every State of the Union the qualifications of jurors are prescribed by 
 law. In some of the States, a freehold qualification was prescribed. This 
 was so in South Carolina always. Education is required in other States. In 
 some States the qualifications of electors and of jurors are the same except 
 as to age. In all the States which have made their own laws, the upright 
 and intelligent are included among the jurors, and the idiotic and criminal 
 are excluded. 
 
 These views applied with peculiar force to the condition of Georgia at 
 the time the present Constitution of 1868 was adopted. 
 
 A large portion of our population had but recently been emancipated 
 from slavery. The chief purpose of the Convention in framing this Consti 
 tution, Avas to clothe these people with equal civil and political rights and 
 privileges. The great body of them were not educated. It cannot be 
 charged upon that Convention that its members intended to exclude them 
 from the jury-box " because of their color, race, or previous condition of 
 servitude." There was no such intention. But there was a desire with 
 some to save the jury-box from ignorance and vice, whether black or white. 
 One of the ablest members of that Convention did make known to me his 
 anxiety on this subject. There is no reason for endangering the rights of 
 all citizens, in order to confer powers on the black race. The gentleman 
 alluded to did submit to me the clause now in the Constitution before it was 
 submitted to the convention. It was afterward submitted and adopted, and 
 I take this occasion, in the name of our people, to thank the gentleman for 
 proposing it, and the convention for adopting it. It has secured our State 
 from much of the injury suffered by other Southern States. Here is the 
 clause of the Constitution in question : 
 
 The General Assembly shall provide by law for the selection of upright and intelli 
 gent persons to serve as jurors. 
 
 The purpose of this clause was not to delegate to the General Assembly 
 the power to prescribe the qualifications of jurors. That power already 
 
374 SENATOR #. IT. HILL, OP GEORGIA. 
 
 existed. The purpose was to place limitations on that power. Three propo 
 sitions fully analyze this clause : 
 
 1. Persons, to be qualified as jurors, must be upright and intelligent. 
 
 2. They must have been selected as persons of uprightness and intelli 
 gence. 
 
 3. This selection must have been made in a manner authorized by law 
 legislative enactment. 
 
 by Mr. Akerman says, every upright and intelligent person in the State is a 
 qualified juror. Here is the mistake. Only those who have been selected 
 as upright and intelligent selected in a manner provided by law are 
 qualified jurors. Who is upright ? Who shall decide ? It is a matter of 
 opinion. Does not every man think himself upright ? Did not the Pharisee 
 thank God he was better than his neighbor ? Did not Satan himself, in the 
 sulphurous lake of Pandemonium, boast loudly of the " wearied virtue of 
 his fallen fiends ? So again, who is intelligent ? Who shall decide ? It is 
 a question of opinion. Do not fools parade their wisdom ? Do not lunatics 
 insist that all men but themselves are crazy ? Do we not all know that the 
 chief feature of this age is the energetic impudence with which incompetents 
 push themselves into positions whose heavy duties demand all the strength 
 of the ablest intellects ? Truer now than when the English poet wrote 
 them are the words : 
 
 Fools rush in where angels fear to tread. 
 
 There must, then, be a standard a legal standard for making these 
 opinions adjudicated facts. Therefore the Constitution requires the General 
 Assembly to provide by law the manner, the way, the tribunal for selecting 
 upright and intelligent persons to serve as jurors. 
 
 The General Assembly did make the provision. Here it is, an act 
 approved February 15, 1869 : 
 
 That it shall be the duty of the ordinary in each county in this State, together with 
 the clerk of the Superior Court and three commissioners appointed for each county by 
 the presiding judge of the Superior Court, removable at his pleasure, to meet at the 
 court-house on the first Monday in June, biennially, whose duty it shall be to select from 
 the books of the receiver of tax returns " upright and intelligent persons" to serve as 
 jurors, and to make out tickets with the names of the persons so selected, which said 
 tickets shall be put in a box to be provided at the public expense, which box shall have 
 two apartments, marked number one and two. 
 
 Now, sir, who is a qualified juror in Georgia ? Is it not he, and he only, 
 who has been selected as upright and intelligent in the manner provided by 
 this law, and whose name is found on a ticket in the jury-box ? Let us 
 apply a test : If a juror were challenged on the ground he was not upright 
 and intelligent, what would be the issuable fact to determine the question ? 
 Would it not be whether he had been selected as such by this legal board, 
 and his name placed in the jury-box ? Suppose, again, a person offered as a 
 juror were challenged on the ground that he was not qualified, in that he 
 had not been so selected by this board, and his name was not in the jury- 
 box ? Would it be an answer to say he was upright and intelligent, and 
 ought to have been selected ? Sir, there can be no two views of this ques 
 tion. And there can be no evasion of the conclusion that he, and he only, 
 is a qualified juror in Georgia who has been selected, in the manner provided 
 by law, as an upright and intelligent person, and his name placed in the 
 jury-box. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 375 
 
 Let us now apply this law to the rule of this court now under discussion. 
 That rule says : 
 
 The court shall appoint three of the United States commissioners residing in the 
 Northern District of Georgia, and the said commissioners, with the marshal for the dis 
 trict of Georgia and the clerk of the court, shall, within ten days after the adjournment 
 of this court, select from the body of the Northern District of Georgia five hundred 
 upright and intelligent persons, citizens of said district, between the ages of twenty-one 
 and sixty years, without regard to race, color, or previous condition, to serve as jurors. 
 
 Now, sir, in the first place, is this new board thus directed to say who is 
 upright and intelligent, authorized by law, by act of the General Assembly ? 
 Does not the Constitution say " the General Assembly shall provide by law 
 for this selection ? ; 
 
 If this court can provide this legislative act in Georgia, is there any 
 other legislative act it cannot provide ? We say this board, thus authorized 
 by this order to qualify persons to serve as jurors, is in the teeth of the law 
 of the State, and in the teeth of the law of the United States which adopts 
 the law of the State. Again, in the second place, from what body does this 
 order empower that board to select its jurors ? Not from the jury lists of 
 the counties. If so, the error might be largely cured. But they are to 
 select from the " body of the district," doubtless to evade the legal jury- 
 box. Under this order this board could select persons rejected as neither 
 upright nor intelligent by the legal county boards. They could select 
 upright and intelligent women to serve as jurors if they could find any over 
 twenty-one years of age. We say the jury-boxes of the several counties 
 contain the only qualified jurors for this court under the laws of the United 
 States. 
 
 Let us look next at the result. " A tree is known by its fruit ! I will 
 forbear to say many things of this list of five hundred which I might justly 
 say. Your clerk I know well, and he is an honest and true man. Your 
 marshal I know slightly, and have nothing to say against him. Your three 
 commissioners are, doubtless, " all honorable men." I have examined their 
 selections. In some of the counties I know intimately the population. The 
 district attorney said if they were required to send to the clerks for the jury 
 lists of the several counties, some wag might answer the letter with a false 
 list. Well, sir, if there is a wag in this country who can send a worse list 
 than this of five hundred, he would certainly deserve the premium for 
 waggery ! More than half of them, whites and blacks, are not to be found 
 in the jury-boxes of the State. In the list are the names of some good men 
 thrown in to give character to the whole, and shining, like gas jets at long 
 intervals, in a general darkness. 
 
 Are not the boards of commissioners authorized by law in the several 
 counties more competent to judge of the uprightness and intelligence of the 
 citizens in their respective counties than this board appointed under this rule ? 
 They live in the counties and know personally the citizens. The ordinary 
 and county clerk are chosen by the voters of these counties. The other 
 commissioners are appointed by the judges of the Superior Courts presiding 
 in the respective counties. These gentlemen comprising the board appointed 
 under your rule were never even in many of the counties, and perhaps do 
 not personally know a single citizen in them, and doubtless have no knowl 
 edge of the uprightness or intelligence of many who are returned by them 
 to serve as jurors in this court. 
 
 But the district attorney says there was a necessity for this new rule, 
 
376 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 because, under the old rule, which required qualified jurors, he could not 
 enforce the laws of the United States he could not convict prisoners, we 
 must infer, as he desired. He objects to the old rule because it required that 
 application should be made to State officers to furnish lists of persons from 
 which jurors were to be selected, and they might not furnish them. Have 
 they ever failed? Has the court ever failed to get a jury ? 
 
 He objects again, because it will cost something to get these lists. Does 
 it -cost more to draw your juries from lists already made up of qualified 
 jurors, than it does to appoint a board to make up such lists and then draw 
 your juries from them? 
 
 But he also objects, and earnestly, that the old rule requires him not 
 only to select from the jury lists upright and intelligent persons, but the 
 "most upright and intelligent." Is it possible the laws of the United States 
 cannot be enforced before the most upright and intelligent jnries? And do 
 the United States demand ignorant and vicious juries to enforce their laws? 
 What a confession ! No, sir ; there is no trouble with the government. The 
 trouble, perhaps, is that the learned district attorney cannot be gratified, by 
 upright and intelligent juries, with convictions according to his own desires, 
 and therefore this demand for the ignorant and vicious. 
 
 Again : assuming, for the sake of the argument, the discretion allowed by 
 the act of 1840 to the court in drawing and empaneling juries, applies also 
 to the work of qualifying jurors, yet, even then, this court is required by 
 that act to conform " as nearly as practicable : to the laws and usages of 
 the State. Did your Honor ever find the old rule impracticable or inefficient 
 in obtaining juries ? Does this new rule, which utterly ignores and disre 
 gards the jury lists of the State, conform more nearly to the laws and usages 
 of the State than the old rule adopted at the March term, 1871 ? View this 
 question in any light, and the conclusion is irresistible that this order or 
 rule of the last September term violates, in language and substance, the laws 
 of the State, and fills your jury-box with unqualified jurors, in direct and 
 palpable violation of the laws of the United States. I respectfully submit 
 it should be abandoned, sir, and at once. And it should be the more readily 
 abandoned because Congress, so far from manifesting a disposition to repeal 
 or weaken the laws on this subject, has actually enlarged the rule. By the 
 act of June 1, 1872, this court is required to conform, as nearly as may be, 
 even its practice, pleadings, and modes of proceeding, other than in equity 
 and admiralty causes, to the practice, pleadings, and mode of proceedings 
 in the courts of the State. And why should it not be so ? Is not your bar 
 filled with the same attorneys ? Are not your juries and officers supplied 
 from the same citizens ? Do not your judgments operate upon the property, 
 the liberties, and the lives of the same people ? And why should all these 
 be denied the forms to which they are accustomed because they come, and 
 are brought into your Honor s court ? 
 
 If, may it please your Honor, I have been fortunate in making myself 
 understood, I have established by the argument the following propositions : 
 
 1. That it is neither unusual, nor unnatural, nor unwise, that the govern 
 ment of the Union should trust, confide in, and lean upon the government 
 of the respective States in executing its functions in those States. 
 
 2. That, from the beginning until now, the government of the Union has 
 always left with the States the exclusive legislation for the qualification of 
 jurors, as also did the Constitution itself the legislation for the qualification 
 of voters. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 377 
 
 3. That the acts of Congress now in force, expressly require the United 
 States courts, sitting in the respective States, to empanel their juries exclu 
 sively of persons qualified as jurors by the laws of the States. 
 
 4. That the order under review ignores and disregards these State laws, 
 and brings into this court persons to serve as jurors who have not been 
 qualified as such by the laws of this State, and is therefore in contravention 
 of the laws of the United States. 
 
 The learned gentlemen who have argued to sustain this rule, have pre 
 sented no reason to your Honor which was not based on the assumption of 
 some antagonism between the government of the Union and the government 
 of the States. A stranger to our institutions, listening to these gentlemen, 
 would necessarily conclude that these governments were not only rival, but 
 actually, inimical. Nor are these gentlemen singular in this respect. They 
 represent a too current sentiment and feeling. They are but creatures of the 
 ideas they advance and defend. How common is it now to find those in 
 office and out of office who claim to be immaculate in their devotion to the 
 Union, and who furnish no evidence of that devotion but in abuse of the 
 States ? So, also, how often have we found those who claim to be immacu 
 late in their devotion to the States, and who furnished no evidence of that 
 devotion but in abuse of the Union ? Sir, this spirit was not born in the Con 
 stitution. It is enmity to the Constitution. These two extremes are equally 
 the enemies of the State and the Union. There is nothing in the nature or 
 functions, or purposes of the government of the States and of the Union to 
 justify collision. Neither was ever intended to be either under or over the 
 other. They execute different functions in the same great work of preserv 
 ing the liberties of the same people. Distempered passions and selfish ambi 
 tions alone brought them into collision and would keep them in collision. 
 The sword of revolution has severed many of the ligaments of confidence be 
 tween the Union and the States, but that one confided to the judiciary re 
 mains untouched. Let the sword be sheathed. Soil not your records with 
 an order that finds no plea for its justification but in the spirit which bred 
 and would continue these collisions. Sir, I will use no word of regal coinage 
 in speaking of republican institutions ; but utter a sentiment which should 
 fill every heart, and in language which should be written upon every fore 
 head in America, when I say, He is truest to the Union who is most faithful 
 to the States ; while he is most faithful to the States who is truest to the 
 Union. How long, God of reason, how long ? shall they only be trusted as 
 patriots who decry the dignity and oppress the people of the States ? How 
 long shall they be denounced as rebels who only cling with fondness to the 
 Constitution of their fathers ? How long shall the people of this country 
 suffer the multiplied and ever multiplying horrors which mad antagonisms 
 breed, before they learn the simple lesson that he is no friend of the Union 
 who is an enemy to the States ; that lie can neither strengthen nor preserve 
 the Union who weakens or destroys the States ; that a Union without States 
 is a country without freemen, an empire without citizens, and a court with 
 out juries. 
 
 Irif 
 
SPEECH DELIVERED BEFORE THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF 
 THE STATE, AT ATLANTA, GA., JANUARY 16, 1873. 
 
 This speech was delivered in response to requests made by members of the Legisla 
 ture. A United States senator was to be elected to succeed the Republican, Joshua Hill, 
 and Mr. Hill s friends desired to present his name for the position. He had been the 
 subject of many bitter and unjust assaults by press and politicians since he wrote his let 
 ter of December, 1870. The shadow cast upon his political career by the Delano banquet 
 and State Road lease had not fully lifted. Besides, he had been an earnest: advocate 
 of the Greeley movement, which had met with such a disastrous failure. The beautiful 
 allegory with which he begins his address, is intended to typify the injustice of his critics. 
 He reviews the history of Reconstruction, and arraigns the Republican party for its viola 
 tions of the Constitution. The address also contains an exhaustive statement of the great 
 undeveloped resources of the South, and suggests plans for their development. In read 
 ing the speech at this day, in the light of Mr. Hill s service in the Senate, one cannot help 
 but regret that the opportunity for such service was not given to him in 1873. 
 
 Gentlemen of the General Assembly and Fellow-citizens : There is a beau 
 tiful Eastern allegory that runs in this wise : A celebrated artist painted 
 a picture, and declared there was not a subject in the kingdom who could 
 tell its true color. The king selected what he considered his most expert 
 servant, and sent him to examine the picture. The artist exhibited it, and 
 it was solid green. The servant returned to the king and said : Your Ma 
 jesty, the picture is green green as the fresh foliage of the full-fledged 
 spring-time. If it be not so, your servant is willing not to live till the trees 
 shall bud again." That the king might be assured his first servant was 
 right, he sent another trusty servant, and the artist exhibited to him the 
 picture, and the color was perfectly yellow ; and the servant returned to his 
 master and said : " Your Majesty, the picture is yellow yellow as the 
 seared leaves of the full-frosted autumn. If it be not so, your servant is 
 willing to fall when those leaves shall fall." The king, perplexed, sent a 
 third servant, and the artist exhibited the picture to the servant, and it was 
 solid blue. And the servant returned to the king, and said : " Your Majesty, 
 the picture is blue blue as the azure heavens when there is not a fleece of 
 cloud to darken its eternal beauty. If it be not so, your servant is willing 
 never again to look upon those blue heavens." And so the king continued 
 to send one after another, until he had sent six servants, and each reported 
 a different color. The king, greatly perplexed, commanded that the artist 
 should bring the picture before him, in the palace. And the artist brought 
 the picture and he showed it to the king, and behold, the picture was still 
 another color a perfect red ! And the king said : " All my servants have 
 reported falsely, and they shall die ! " Wait," said the artist, and he 
 showed the picture again, and, true enough, it was a solid green. " One of 
 my servants has reported truthfully then," said the king, and shall live. 
 But the others shall die. " Wait," said the artist, and he showed the picture 
 again, and it was a beautiful yellow. And again, and it was a solid blue; 
 and again and again, till he went through all the colors. The king, more 
 than ever perplexed, offered a reward to any subject of his kingdom, who 
 
 378 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WHITINGS. 379 
 
 would explain the mystery of the picture, and tell its true color, declaring 
 he should be received into the royal family and have the king s beau 
 tiful daughter in marriage. " Then," said the artist, " I claim the reward," 
 and he exhibited the picture in all its lights at once, and the picture was a 
 true transparent white. And the king made a decree that no subject should 
 ever report upon the color of a picture until he had seen it in all lights and 
 from all directions. 
 
 The lesson of this picture is exceedingly instructive. There is scarcely a 
 subject of human thought that any man can correctly comprehend by look 
 ing at it from one standpoint or in one light. And as the artist explained to 
 the king that color was the creature of light, and therefore he had so painted 
 the picture that it would be of any color with a given light, so it is true in 
 human experience, that opinions are often the mere creatures of the feelings 
 of prejudice, of passion, hate, affection, all ! Gentlemen, I invite you to dis 
 card from your minds and feelings everything that can possibly prevent a 
 fair and honest conception of the truth, the real truth not a one-sided view, 
 not a prejudiced view, not a view in the light which represents only one con 
 dition of feeling. But let us look at it in every light, without any prejudice, 
 or passion, or predilection ! Of all subjects presented for human study, the 
 science of government is the most difficult. The wisest statesmen of the 
 world, for six thousand years, have debated and debated, and experimented 
 and experimented, and yet the problem as to how government shall be best 
 formed to protect the people from their own passions on the one hand, and 
 from the encroachments of power on the other, is a problem still ; and the 
 remarkable fact strikes us at the outset that there are no two countries in 
 civilized Christendom, even in this enlightened age, that have adopted ex 
 actly the same government to accomplish the same end. All the king s ser 
 vants that reported upon the picture were sincere ! They were truthful as 
 they understood it ! And so it often happens, that men have the most in 
 correct views who are honest, and indeed sometimes very honest ! As a 
 general rule, it is true that men who look at a subject from but one standpoint, 
 through the prism of their prejudices, of their feelings, talk not only of con 
 victions, but they become bigoted, egotistic, and intolerant to all who differ 
 with them. Whereas, those who look at the whole subject, in all lights, are 
 tolerant of others opinions. Each of the servants who reported to the king 
 was willing to stake his life upon his report ; yet none of them reported the 
 truth. 
 
 Revolution means change. A revolution in government means a funda 
 mental change in the political organization. Revolutions are of two kinds. 
 They are peaceful and violent. Some have an idea generally, that when 
 you speak of revolution you speak of violence. Revolutions may be peace 
 ful. Often, unfortunately, they are violent, and the sad fact is that the 
 majority of revolutions in governments have been accomplished by violence. 
 A revolution by peace, a revolution by consent, a revolution as the result of 
 argument and reason, is one of the rarest occurrences in human experi 
 ence. It is so ! It is sadly so ! Leaving out the displacement of the 
 Indians in this country, and the establishment of colonies by European 
 sovereigns, there have been three revolutions in the American government 
 since our history began. The first commenced in 1776, when the colonies 
 changed the character of their government from dependency upon England, 
 to independence, resulting in the establishment of the several States. That 
 was a revolution accomplished by violence. True, it ended in a treaty, as 
 
380 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 almost all wars do end, but, nevertheless, he would be a singular statesman who 
 would say that the revolution of 1776, by which England lost her dominion 
 over the colonies, and the thirteen colonies became independent States, was 
 a peaceful revolution. It was a revolution of force. And this single illus 
 tration impresses upon our minds the truth that these revolutions by vio 
 lence are sometimes right, though often wrong ; and that revolutions by 
 violence become permanent and established as well as revolutions by peace 
 ful means. If the sword can settle no question of right, we are all still sub 
 jects of Queen Victoria, because, sure, it required a seven years struggle to 
 cast off the dominion of that power. 
 
 The second revolution was that of 1787. The States, after declaring 
 their independence of Great Britain, for the purpose of making that declara 
 tion good, by a common struggle, uniting their energies for a common pur 
 pose, entered into what are generally known as Articles of Confederation, 
 and under those articles they prosecuted the war. But when peace came, 
 they found that those articles were incompetent to preserve the general 
 government, to accomplish its purposes, or preserve its own existence. I 
 will not go into specific reasons why they were defective. They are known 
 to all lawyers, and ought to be at the tongue s end of every American states 
 man ; but, suffice it to say, those defects became manifest. The general 
 government had no power to enforce its own laws ; no courts to administer 
 them, and no executive to execute them. The confederation had no power 
 to collect its own revenue, and it failed. Well, our fathers were wise enough 
 to revolutionize by peaceful means, and they sent delegates to a convention 
 of the several States, and those delegates, in convention at Philadelphia, 
 agreed upon a constitution. That constitution was submitted back to the 
 States. It was ratified by the States, and became the government estab 
 lished between the States, and it was a radical or fundamental change of 
 the political organization from the Articles of Confederation, many 
 features preserved, many features changed, but it was actually, according 
 to the definition of publicists, a revolution, because it was a material or 
 fundamental change in the organic law of the government. That, I say, 
 was a revolution that was peacefully accomplished, by peaceful means alone, 
 and its eulogy is this : it lasted, with immaterial changes, for seventy years, 
 and the people who were citizens under it had more thrift, more prosperity, 
 and increased more rapidly in population and power, and in all the elements 
 of happiness, than can be found in any country, among any people, in the 
 same length of time, in the world s history. 
 
 But for reasons which I am not going to discuss, a revolution began in 
 1860, and though asserted on our side, I think correctly asserted, that we had 
 the right to make the revolution peacefully, that right was denied by our 
 enemies, and what we intended to be a peaceful revolution became one of 
 very great violence. That revolution has gone on for twelve years, and I 
 come now, fellow-citizens, to analyze its true character before you. It is im 
 possible that any man should understand his duties now as a citizen of this 
 country, who fails to understand the direct and controlling causes now influ 
 encing the state of public opinion and public conduct. You must understand 
 the causes. You must see the dangers, and you must study and apply the 
 remedy. Some people think, it is a very common idea, that the greatest 
 feature of this revolution was the war. We had a wonderful struggle. We 
 had brave troops and great generals and large armies ; great slaughters, 
 devastations, burnings, sufferings and losses. These were certainly great, but 
 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WHITINGS. 381 
 
 they were temporary in one sense. Time will repair them. Some think the 
 revolution is wrapped up in secession, and it is the habit of the Northern 
 people to charge all its fault and misfortune on secession. Others, on our 
 side, think the great fault was the assertion of the doctrine of coercion, by 
 which the general government made war upon the sovereign States. 
 Others, that the great fault was in Reconstruction. All these think that 
 they are correct. But he poorly understands the real character of this revo 
 lution who stops to take any one or all of these opinions. The worst, the 
 most dangerous feature of this revolution is yet behind is yet to be told. 
 
 After the formation of the Constitution of 1787 soon thereafter there 
 sprang up two parties in this country, and those parties were divided, not so 
 much upon the character of the government indeed, not at all upon the 
 character of the government, for it was admitted upon all hands that it was 
 a federal republic. But when they came to subdivide and to fix the limits 
 of the federal power on the one hand, and the rights reserved to the States 
 on the other, the country \livided into two parties. Those parties were not 
 always consistent with themselves, and they were divided then upon the sub 
 ject of the interpretation of the Constitution. One party contended that 
 there were certain implied powers in the Federal Government. The other 
 party contended that there were no implied powers. One party contended 
 for a more latitudinarian construction ; another for a strict construction ex 
 clusively. And there were various gradations and shades of opinion among 
 them, but the fact I wish to impress upon your minds now is, that all parties, 
 Whig, Democratic, Republican, all the Presidents from Washington to 
 Buchanan, all Congresses, all judges, all courts, State and federal, aye, 
 and all statesmen, conceded as common ground the one grand idea that the 
 Federal Government was a government of limited powers, and the States had 
 an uncontrolled right of self-government, outside of it. 
 
 That is the great fact I wish to impress upon you, in order to a correct 
 understanding of the argument which I am going to present to you to-night. 
 The very first breach of that idea of all parties before the war, is contained 
 in a most remarkable announcement by the President elected in 1860. The 
 announcement was made in 1861, early in that year, by Mr. Lincoln, on his 
 way to Washington City, and it was this it was a suggestion, whether the 
 States of the Union did not bear the same relation to the general govern 
 ment that a county in a State bears to a State. Fearful idea ! I say, that 
 was the first announcement of this heresy to which I am going to call your 
 attention. Mr. Lincoln was elected President, and the country was in a 
 very excited condition. He followed up this very significant suggestion con 
 tained in one of his speeches, soon after hostilities commenced. In fact, the 
 very beginning of hostilities ought to be considered an act in accordanee 
 with the idea which he had advanced, for, up to that period, it was not the 
 theory of any party, or of any class of statesmen, in this country, that the 
 uvneral government had the right to use coercion upon a sovereign State. 
 Therefore the determination to make war itself upon the States was a very 
 remarkable stretch of the Constitution, as construed up to that day. But 
 for the first time the idea was then broached that self-preservation was the 
 first law of governments as well as of individuals, and that it was an inhe 
 rent right in all governments to preserve themselves from destruction. 
 
 Well, Mr. Lincoln soon followed this up (for these encroachments came 
 first from the executive department of the general government) by the sus 
 pension of the writ of habeas corpus, arresting citizens without warrant, 
 
382 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 depriving citizens of life, liberty, and property, without due process of law, 
 and various other acts which I cannot stop to mention, because I want you 
 to keep in view the principle. The judiciary department of the government, 
 headed at that time by that noble Roman, and true statesman, and honest 
 man, Chief Justice Taney, raised its feeble arm and voice to arrest these en 
 croachments of the Federal Executive, and declared that the President had 
 no right to suspend the writ of habeas corpus without the authority of Con 
 gress. But the armed minions of power mocked the ermine of the judge 
 disregarded it, and marched along without respecting it. Congress soon 
 after assembled, and it is remarkable that Congress, at that time, was rather 
 tender-footed about these encroachments. They had some conscience. 
 They did not rely on the innate correctness of the acts of Mr. Lincoln. 
 They did not consider them constitutional, and they manifested that convic 
 tion in the most emphatic manner, by passing what they called the " healing 
 act," to make that constitutional which was not constitutional before an 
 act that itself was remarkably unconstitutional. 
 
 / 
 
 Soon after, Congress itself embarked into this idea, that self-preservation 
 is the first law of nations, and, therefore, that the general government had 
 all power inherent in it necessary to protect itself. The Congress then exer 
 cised more absolute power than the Executive. Congress passed bills very 
 soon abnegating the fugitive slave law, and declared the negroes in some 
 portions of the country free. Mr. Lincoln himself issued a proclamation 
 emancipating all the slaves in the rebellious States. He himself doubted 
 the justification of such a proclamation, and spoke of it as a bull against the 
 comet. But there was soon accord between the departments of the govern 
 ment ; and the judicial department, whatever might have been its will to 
 stay this unconstitutional exercise of power, became utterly insufficient for 
 the purpose. These extraordinary exercises of power, as well as the princi 
 ple upon which their justification was sought to be rested, were placed upon 
 the ground that I have stated that the necessities of war made it necessary 
 to preserve the integrity of the government. They were not justified by 
 any rule of construction known to the lawyers, or to the statesmen, or to 
 the publicists, or to the courts, or to any rule of logic, or to any law of 
 reason, but they were placed upon the ground that the necessities of the 
 war justified this monstrous exercise of power. The natural conclusion 
 would be that when the war ended, the principle would be abandoned. But 
 the real fact is that that is not true, and it shows the dangerous character of 
 the encroachment. For when the war ended, Congress invoked the same 
 system of interpretation, and now placed it upon the idea that the States 
 which had attempted to secede, had disjointed themselves from the body 
 politic, and needed to be reset. That there was no power in the general 
 government thus to take charge and reconstruct them is most manifest, from 
 the fact that a quarrel at once sprang up between the Executive and Con 
 gress, as to which had this power. It was clear that neither had it, for each 
 denied it to the other. President Johnson claimed it, and at first exercised 
 it mildly. But Congress asserted that Congress alone had the power, and 
 they commenced its exercise. Thus, fellow-citizens, under the Constitution 
 as our fathers made it, all those extraordinary powers were exercised both 
 during the war and afterward, even to the extent of overturning State 
 governments, and setting up other governments ; in a word verifying, even 
 as to the States, the remarkable assertion of Mr. Seward, during the war, 
 that he had as much power as the Czar of the Russians, which was true. 
 
HIS LIFE. SPEECHES. AND WRITINGS. 383 
 
 I hasten on. Congress itself was not satisfied that these acts of power 
 would long remain if they rested for their preservation upon the Constitution 
 as it stood. Determined to accomplish the purposes, however, announced in 
 these acts of Reconstruction, they then went to work to devise schemes to 
 lift their work above the future adjudication of the courts, above the re 
 actions which the subsidence of passion must, sooner or later produce, and 
 the idea, therefore, was adopted of making amendments to the Constitution 
 by which the work of Reconstruction could be put into the fundamental law. 
 That, itself, the very existence of these constitutional amendments, as 
 deemed by them necessary to accomplish these ends, is a most remarkable 
 admission of the unconstitutionality of the previous legislation ; because 
 there is nothing in the world in any one of these amendments that had not 
 been previously accomplished by one of these acts, especially as to our 
 Southern States. 
 
 Now, fellow-citizens, if you have kept up with me, you have arrived at 
 the point at which you will comprehend the one grand political idea of this 
 era the one upon which all your destinies and mine hinge an idea more 
 dangerous than war, and more to be dreaded than pestilence. We thought 
 that the system of interpretation invoked by the necessities of war would 
 pass away with those necessities ; but they did not. We thought the system 
 of interpretation invoked for the purposes of Reconstruction would pass away 
 with Reconstruction. We thought that when that work was^made permanent 
 and secure in the estimation of its authors, by the incorporation, even by 
 force, of the amendments into the fundamental law, that surely now the 
 system so dangerous, that had worked such results, would be abandoned, and 
 all parties would return either to the one or the other theory of construction 
 entertained by the different parties before the war. 
 
 Now I will put in your minds what you are not to forget while you live. 
 Your children will see its power and force if you do not. It is this : so far 
 from abandoning that system of construction, Congress asserted the remark 
 able purpose to apply that same system of construction to the amendments 
 themselves, and to the Constitution as amended. There is the danger ! It 
 is the danger of all dangers ! I will show you : The amendments, while 
 odious from the manner in which they were forced upon the country, are in 
 themselves, if subjected to the well-established rules of construction con 
 ceded and known by all statesmen and courts and parties before the war, 
 would really have made a very immaterial change in the fundamental law 
 itself certainly no change from what had been accomplished already by 
 congressional legislation. But, I impress it upon your minds, it is the begin 
 ning of a new danger. You must see its character ; you must measure its 
 extent ; you must weigh its purpose ; you must comprehend its dangers ; 
 you must seek the remedy. It is that the system of construction applied to 
 the Constitution, invoked only by the necessities of war and justified only 
 by the power of the sword, is now to be applied as the system of construc 
 tion for the amendments, and the powers of the Federal Government are to 
 be deduced from the Constitution, according to that system of construction! 
 
 Now, I want you to understand this, friends. Let us apply this system 
 of construction to the Fourteenth Amendment. I have it before me. The 
 only material part of the amendment outside of the disabilities, paying the 
 Confederate debt, etc., is what is called that portion that secures civil rights 
 to the colored population. Now let us read that. It is in these words : " No 
 State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or 
 
384 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 immunities of citizens of the United States ; nor shall any State deprive any 
 person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, nor deny to 
 any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Now, 
 mark you ! The Radical, the disciple of the party now in power, when he 
 comes to interpret the powers in the Federal Government, vested by this 
 amendment, says that it is intended to protect the life, the liberty, and the 
 property of the citizen, and therefore that the right to regulate the laws and 
 to make the laws, and to administer the laws that secure and protect life, 
 liberty, and property, is vested in Congress. Why, always ! right from the 
 beginning, the fundamental, cardinal idea was that the right to regulate 
 civil rights, provide laws for the protection of life, liberty, and property, 
 existed in the State, belonged to the State, each State for itself, in its own 
 way. It never was denied, because that at least makes up the idea of State 
 Government. Nobody can deny that this purpose is wholly at war with the 
 original character and design of the Federal Government. 
 
 But the disciple of the new school of interpretation says that the Con 
 stitution contains a clause that no State shall pass laws that impair these 
 rights ; therefore Congress has power to take jurisdiction of all those rights. 
 Now they apply the same system of construction to the Fifteenth Amend 
 ment. That amendment reads in this wise : " The rifjht of citizens of the 
 
 O 
 
 United States to vote shall not be abridged by the United States nor by any 
 State on account .of race, color, or previous condition of servitude." The 
 disciple of the school to which I refer says that, as that amendment now in 
 the Constitution declares that the right to vote shall never be interfered 
 with on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude, the power 
 is vested in the Federal Government to take charge of elections, regulate 
 the question of suffrage, and supervise the elections in the States, to see 
 that these rights are not impaired. You see at once to what dangerous 
 tendencies this assertion of power goes. You see at once it is putting the 
 ax to the root of the tree, and if the theory be correct, there must be an 
 inevitable and hopeless subversion of the entire sovereignty of the States. 
 
 Now, I h ave brought you thus far in my argument, to the very point 
 which induced me to write a letter in December, 1870, which you have 
 heard much of, and of which, I assure you, you seem to understand but 
 little. This very idea as a dangerous one, which I have now presented to 
 you growing out of the application by the party in power of their theory, 
 or system of interpretation, to the Constitution, as amended, resulting in 
 the destruction of the States, and conferring upon Congress the supervision 
 of the States, is the simple idea of that letter, and I wish to call your 
 attention to it. Please, understand, that I am not here to vindicate my 
 record, but I am here to impress the idea upon you, and I call attention to 
 this letter for that purpose. 
 
 In that letter I use this language : " The first changes I notice are, 
 perhaps, the only ones which the popular mind seems to be aware of as 
 accomplished at all. The amendments, in the order named, establish, with 
 a qualification, the freedom, civil equality, and political equality of the 
 races all races and colors. 
 
 " But, in truth, these changes in the relative status of the different races 
 are the most insignificant effects of these amendments. Not only has the 
 civil and political status of the negro race been changed, but, what is inex 
 pressibly far more, the jurisdiction over the civil and political status of all 
 the races in all the States will be held to have been transferred by thoso 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 385 
 
 amendments from the States severally to the general government. This 
 effects a great change in the character of the general goverment greatly 
 increasing the national, and as greatly lessening its Federal features. 
 Indeed, language cannot express ideas more intensely national than are the 
 ideas covered by the words * jurisdiction over the civil and political status of 
 the citizen. These powers being conferred, it will be difficult to say what 
 power has not been conferred. While State governments may remain as 
 convenient regulators of limited local interests, it will be held that, under 
 these amendments to the new national Constitution, the general government 
 has acquired revisory powers over the entire State government, and over all 
 legislative, executive, and judicial departments of the State governments." 
 
 Now, fellow-citizens, I remind you that there, twice, I explicitly say that 
 this is what will be held, and yet the whole State, for a long time clamored 
 with the thought that what was then intended and expressed as a warning, 
 was intended to be the expression of my own convictions, that that was 
 a correct interpretation of these amendments. There is no such thing in the 
 letter. I was warning you of a coming evil of what, in my opinion, was 
 the greatest danger that had yet presented itself to the American people, 
 and that was the application of this system of construction to these amend 
 ments. By whom ? Of course by the party in power. They would hold 
 the party in power would hold that that was the proper construction of 
 the amendment, and thereby acquire this power to the distraction of the 
 States. And this is made manifest in another place most remarkably 
 manifest. I say there : " In view of the thorough changes thus wrought by 
 these amendments in the whole character of the general and State govern 
 ments, the next question becomes of exceeding great importance. Have 
 these amendments become, in fact, fixed parts of the national Constitution, 
 and will they be so held ? After giving this subject, not only a careful, but 
 a most anxious consideration, I have been driven to the conclusion that these 
 three amendments are in fact, and will be held in law, fixed parts of the 
 Constitution, as binding upon the States and people as the original provis 
 ions of that instrument." 
 
 I never admitted that they were anything but accomplished facts. That 
 I stated. I drew the distinction that they are amendments in fact, but will 
 be held by others to be amendments in law, of course, by the party in power. 
 It is with very great pleasure that I call the attention of gentlemen to that. 
 I was warning you of a coming danger ; telling you what would be, so that 
 you might prepare to meet it. Well, was the warning true ? That is the 
 main point. If the warning was true, surely there is no criminality in 
 making it. If the warning was false, I am willing to be considered weighed 
 in the balance and found wanting. The highest office of a statesman is to 
 discern early, forecast clearly, and proclaim fearlessly the evil he sees 
 coming. The invariable office of the mere demagogue is to wait until the 
 evil comes, see which way the majority is going, and float into office with 
 them. I thought I saw the evil. I believe I saw it. Not that I claim any 
 prescience or gift of prophecy for myself, but it is by reason, by argument, 
 by logic, that I arrived at the conclusion. I was familiar with the history 
 of this country during the war, and, indeed, from its very birth. I have 
 been seeing that these claims of power by this party were more dangerous 
 than the tread of armies. This I have been watching. When thev arrived 
 
 V 
 
 at the point that this system of construction was to be applied to these 
 amendments, I at once saw the danger to the States and liberties of the 
 
3 SO" SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 people, and I announced it, and I did it fearlessly, and thank God, I 
 had the courage to do it. Is it true ? That is the main question. Why, I 
 can take the principles of any party, by the well-established rules of con 
 struction, well known to all constitutional lawyers, and I can work out a 
 result. Who, that is accustomed to reason, cannot take premises and work 
 out conclusions cannot take doctrines and work out consequences? Who 
 can take this system of construction and apply it to these amendments, and 
 arrive at any other result than the one I announced two years ago ? Within 
 a short time after I published that letter, Congress passed the Ku-Klux bill. 
 That Ku-Klux bill is founded upon this very clause of the Fourteenth 
 Amendment. That is its only authority in the Constitution, and that Ku- 
 Klux bill is framed throughout upon the sole idea that the powers that I 
 have described are vested by these amendments in the Federal Government 
 that is, that the Federal Government has the right to enter a State and take 
 jurisdiction of controversies between the citizens of the States, and try them 
 in the United States courts, and punish them in their own prisons. Under 
 that claim of power, South Carolina, to-night, has hundreds of citizens lan 
 guishing in dungeons at the North. And you see your own citizens brought 
 to this city in handcuffs. Under this bill, any vagabond can go before a 
 United States commissioner, and swear that you interfered with his right of 
 liberty or property because of his political opinion, and you are arrested and 
 brought away, without warrant or bail, to some United States court, perhaps 
 a hundred miles away. 
 
 So, again, in less than thirty days after that letter was written, an amen 
 datory enforcement act was introduced into Congress, under the Fifteenth 
 Amendment, by which the right to supervise elections, the right to control 
 elections, and the right to determine questions of voting are all transferred 
 to the United States Government, and are absolutely lodged in a measure in 
 United States officials. Under that bill, any vagabond can swear that you 
 interfered with his rights to vote, and you are arrested and spirited away for 
 trial hundreds of miles away, before the courts of the United States. And 
 is not the language I used strikingly true, when I told you that under this 
 power they will claim that the jurisdiction over the civil and political status 
 of the citizen has been transferred to the general government, and in the 
 exercise of that power, they will supervise your State governments and every 
 department of the State legislative, executive, and judicial? Here they 
 have done it ! Nay, more ! The most startling exercise of this power has 
 recently occurred in the State of Louisiana. There a controversy arose as to 
 the authority of two boards of canvassers, and a most remarkable and 
 astounding picture is now presented to the American people that a United 
 States district Judge took jurisdiction to determine not only whether one 
 member was elected to the Legislature, but to exclude by injunction a whole 
 Legislature, elected by the people, and put in another by the United States 
 marshal. Nay, more ; he has claimed the right, by interlocutory order, to 
 remove one governor and to put in another a negro as governor, who 
 never had a single vote of the people. Think of it, my countrymen ! A 
 United States district judge, by an interlocutory order at chambers, upon an 
 ex parte application, without notice to the other side, absolutely turning out 
 one Legislature, or enjoining it from assembling upsetting one government 
 and setting up another. Why, such an exercise of power would startle the 
 Czar of Russia. It would shock the Pasha of Egypt or of Turkey. Yet you 
 see it occurred, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 387 
 
 If the arrest of your citizens, if the handcuffing of your citizens, upon 
 no charge, does not alarm you, pray tell me what means this continued 
 march of the Federal power, by which we have arrived at the point that 
 States can be subverted by the interlocutory decree of a judge, and the 
 decree enforced by a telegram from the President ? It is startling ! Where 
 is Louisiana to-night ? Why, the interference in Alabama, though not so 
 important, on account of its extent and the effects of it, still is just as glar 
 ing. There a controversy arose between different parties of the Legisla 
 ture, as to who held a right to a seat. Why, all those questions had to be 
 settled by the States and by the members, necessarily. True, it came as a 
 mild suggestion from the attorney-general, but they accepted it because they 
 knew an order would follow the suggestion if they did not accept. Think of 
 it ! Who is safe ? What State is safe ? I am arguing principles to their 
 conclusions. I am not talking about men. I want this country to under 
 stand the principles that underlie the political situation. And will you not 
 understand ? Look across the Savannah ! There, " each new morn, new wid 
 ows howl, new orphans cry, new horrors strike heaven in the face," because 
 freemen are chained at the midnight hour, and hurried away to pine and 
 perish in Northern dungeons ! Stretch your vision to the banks of the Mis 
 sissippi ! Behold commerce languishing : trade prostrated ; business dam 
 aged ; property unsafe ; life insecure ; a negro seizing the office of gov 
 ernor without a single vote of the people ; State s sovereignty in the dust ; 
 liberty in chains ; aye, miscegenating baccanalians, guarded and protected 
 by Federal bavonets, rioting in usurped dominion over the fairest city of 
 the South. When is this thing to end ? What is to be the result ? There 
 is nothing else worth your consideration but to see the evil, and, if possi 
 ble, provide the remedy. I tell you, my friends, if a remedy is not pro 
 vided, the time is coming when you will have no power to regulate, to pro 
 tect, to make laws, either for the life, liberty, or the property of the citizens 
 of your own State. Your labor will not be under your control. Your 
 system of industry will not be regulated by your Legislature. Your social 
 rights will be transferred to the dominion of another power ! And this 
 country will pass into contempt, and become uninhabitable by decent 
 people ! 
 
 I do not say these things to alarm you ; but the greatest danger of a 
 people is that they refuse to see the danger in time to avert it. 
 most remarkable feature in human experience, that men will not look at the 
 danger as soon as thev should. They will not believe it is coming, and 
 
 O / * _ I 5* 
 
 M v y %*t i v *~ I ^f i v^ * v j - *-* -> PW W ^- * 1 
 
 still you sleep, and you will sleep on, and power is marching on am 
 growing, absorbing, crushing as it goes, and ere long the whole nation wi 
 be waked from its slumber, and by the startling cry, A king ! a king 
 Our ruler is a king ! Who dreamed, who thought of such a tiling : 
 
 Well, what is the remedy ? You see the evil. I have endeavored, 11 
 my feeble way, to point to the danger. I trust you will not do as you < 
 two years ao- o , because I told you of the danger, say that [ am in favo rt 
 the danger s coming. I hope, if I have the kindness to warn you that 
 you will go in a given direction, robbers will assault and assassins will , 
 Vou, vou will not conclude that I am in favor of your robbery and deatl 
 ThaVis the very kind of charity I have received for two years 
 
388 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 some virtuous protector of his country s rights says, " Oil ! Ben Hill is so 
 inconsistent that you cannot rely on him." I suggest, in all kindness, the 
 inconsistency may be in your mistake instead of in me. Doubtless you are 
 honest in it. Like the picture, it is all green, or all black nothing but 
 black, because you look at it from your own standpoint. You charge it on 
 me ! That is unkind ! I told you two years ago you would be ashamed of 
 this. I think you are now. I say this in kindness, but I have cause to 
 
 say it. 
 
 Now, what is the remedy ? Fellow-citizens, it is as simple as the right 
 is. There is not a particle of difficulty in understanding the right of this 
 question and how to begin the work. What is the true construction of these 
 amendments? To that I call your attention. Now let us apply the system 
 of construction that obtained before the war, with all parties. I am will 
 ing to go before any tribunal in this country executive, legislative, or judi 
 cial and take the theory of Clay, or of Webster, or of Jefferson, or of 
 Calhoun, or take the theory of any pure statesman before the war, and I 
 will establish certain propositions as inevitable, demonstrable, from the 
 language of these amendments ! What is it ! Now understand, that pre 
 viously to the war, according to the Constitution and the practice of the 
 fathers for seventy years, the States had the right to pass all laws regulat 
 ing the life, liberty /and property of the citizens, each State for itself. You 
 all understand that the question of civil rights under the old Constitution 
 was vested absolutely in the States, with a few exceptions, such as requiring 
 excessive bail and some things of that sort. 
 
 Now, what does this amendment do? 
 
 No State shall make or enforce any laws which abridge the privileges or immunities 
 of citizens of the United States ; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, 
 or property without due process of law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction 
 the equal protection of the laws. 
 
 Now, you see, that is simply an inhibition upon the State. It is not at 
 all a delegation of power to the general government. To qualify the power 
 of a State is not to delegate that power to the general government. If I 
 deny a right to one man, that does not convey the right to another ; and for 
 the Constitution to say that a State shall not do a thing, does not mean to 
 say that it delegates to the general government power to do so. By no 
 means. What, then, is it ? Here it is : The States still have the right to 
 control civil rights absolutely by their own Legislature, without interference 
 by the Federal Government, except that in controlling them, you shall not 
 violate this provision. You shall not make distinctions on account of color. 
 Pass any law you please in relation to civil rights ; regulate life, liberty, 
 and property, as you please, by your State legislation, but do not make dis 
 tinctions, in that legislation, on account of race, color, or previous condi 
 tion of servitude. That is all. And I defy the most astute lawyer in 
 Christendom to controvert the position. So take the Fifteenth Amend 
 ment. What is that? "The right of citizens of the United States to vote 
 shall not be denied, or abridged, on account of race, color or previous con 
 dition of servitude." Previous to the war, the whole question of suffrage 
 was with the States. Each State could regulate suffrage as it pleased, and 
 discriminate as it pleased, and each State did have the right to discriminate. 
 This amendment makes only this difference: Go on, you still have the right 
 to regulate your own suffrage ; you still have the right to regulate your own 
 
SIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 
 
 elections, to order and supervise your elections, as you please. But, take 
 care. In fixing the right to vote, don t you discrimate on account of race, 
 color, or previous condition of servitude. Prescribe any condition you please 
 to the white man, but prescribe the same to the black. And I affirm, to 
 night, there is not a particle of authority in the whole annals of jurispru 
 dence, settling the canons of construction, to justify this extraordinary 
 claim that, because the right of a State is qualified, the whole power is 
 delegated to the general government, therefore ! 
 
 ^j d3 
 
 Now, each of these amendments has this clause : "Congress shall have 
 power to enforce this amendment by appropriate legislation." What 
 docs that mean ? Just this ; you have the right to enforce the amendment. 
 What is the amendment? Why, that the State which shall regulate anv 
 
 * * O * 
 
 civil rights, shall not discriminate on account of color ; that the State, in 
 fixing the right to vote, shall not discriminate on account of color. If a 
 State should undertake to discriminate, in the matter of civil rights or 
 suffrage, Congress would have the right to come in and provide a remedy 
 for the party aggrieved, and the only appropriate legislation would be 
 to provide a remedy whereby the party aggrieved might apply to the 
 courts. That is the whole of this amendment, and that is exactly 
 what Mr. Greeley said in his letter of acceptance, which has been so 
 strangely criticised by some people. Now, hear what he said : 
 
 That, subject to our solemn constitutional obligations to maintain the equal rights of 
 all citizens, our policy should aim at local self-government, and not at centralization, 
 .... and that there shall be no Federal supervision of the internal polity of the 
 several States and municipalities ; but that each shall be left free to enforce the rights and 
 promote the well-being of its inhabitants, by such means as the judgment of its own 
 people shall prescribe. 
 
 What is that ? What does that mean, about which so much strange 
 noise has been made ? It means that, subject to the single qualification, that 
 you shall not discriminate in voting on account of color ; subject to that 
 single qualification, that you shall not discriminate in civil rights on account 
 of color, the States shall be left free to regulate their own internal polity 
 without Federal interruption. He recognizes the rights of the States, and 
 that is the correct interpretation. Now, my kind friends, I hold, if it is 
 material to say what I hold I hold that the Fourteenth Amendment has 
 not changed the right of the State to regulate its civil affairs, save only to 
 qualify its exercise by saying you must not discriminate on account of 
 color. I hold that the Fifteenth Amendment has not affected the right of 
 the States on the subject of suffrage, except that in exercising the power 
 they always had, they must not make a discrimination on account of color. 
 
 Now I pass on. What is the difference between these two systems of 
 construction ? Why, under the first, the construction of the present party 
 
 * .i.l T"l T _ 1 /""I _ -* 4- i i i t , . i i i . > 111 Oil / I %* 1 I 
 
 U1*V,V C* I ^ 4*H W YT ^ V4. UV/*\-/l. ***** A "11 
 
 Under the other theory, we hold that the general government is i 
 ernment of limited power, and that the States have still the right of 
 government, and that subject to these qualifications, made by these amend 
 ments in fact, the States are still as supreme, and have just as much ngli 
 regulate their internal affairs, as they had before the war Now ^ 
 to this trouble, under the depressing effects of a very bad cold, \ 
 
390 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 pose of setting before you to-night the distinctive issue between the two 
 parties of this country. The Grant party hold that the government is a 
 goverment of unlimited powers, that they have the right of exercising these 
 powers absolutely. Or if they allow the States to do it, they do it subject 
 to the supervisory power of Congress, that the States are mere provinces or 
 proconsulates. 
 
 On the other hand, the Liberal Democracy, assuming these amendments 
 to be parts of the Constitution, still hold that these amendments have not 
 made the Federal Government a government of unlimited powers, but that 
 that government is still one of limited powers, and that States are States 
 still, without interference by the Federal Government. I was astonished, 
 startled, in talking with one of the most learned gentlemen of the State the 
 other day, who was talking about the Cincinnati movement as the abandon 
 ment of principle. When I told him that this was the distinctive difference 
 between the two parties " Oh," he said, " he did not know there was such 
 language in that platform." Why, that is all that was worth anything in it. 
 All the rest is policy. The only principle in the whole concern is intended 
 to antagonize the great absorbing, swelling power asserted by the Radical 
 party, that the Federal Government is a government of unlimited power. 
 We say it is a government of limited power, that the States have the right 
 to self-government, without interference by the Federal Government. Now, 
 which party do you belong to ? You talk about principle ! Did you ever 
 see a bigger principle than that a greater principle than that ? 
 
 Now, where is the error of our Straight friends ? I want you to see it 
 so clearly that you will never forget it. Where is the error of our Straight 
 friends ? for I speak of you kindly. I know you are going to be brethren 
 very soon. Here is your error : You refuse to make issue with the Radical 
 party unless we will stop first and define the extent and theory of the limi 
 tations. You refuse to make common cause with us, unless we will stop 
 and say whether we will do it on the theory of Calhoun, or on the theory 
 of Jefferson, or on the theory of Clay, or on the theory of the moon ! That 
 is all. You don t intend to save the rights of the States. You refuse to 
 join in an attempt to save the rights of the States unless we agree to save 
 them on your idea. Now, what is common sense ? What is our idea ? 
 Now, there were men before the war, all of whom admitted that the States 
 had the right of self-government. Clay had a theory of the government ; 
 Webster had a theory ; Calhoun had a* theory ; but all these men had the 
 theory of State rights. Here comes a new party, however, and says that 
 Clay was wrong, and Webster was wrong, and Calhoun was wrong ; and 
 they assert themselves the enemies of all those parties, and assert the broad 
 ground that there are no State rights. That is the whole of it. And you 
 refuse to join us in fighting that common enemy unless we will swear before 
 hand that we will go your way. That is the whole of it. Why, my Cal 
 houn friend, my Jeffersonian friend, my Clay friend, my Webster friend, there 
 is no use for you and me to be quarreling about our theory of State rights, 
 about the extent to which they go. Why, look here! *Here is a great 
 combination that is denying the right to all of us, and they make war upon 
 us all at once. Let us all at once join to whip them. That is all. And 
 that is the Cincinnati-Baltimore movement. That is the Cincinnati plat 
 form. Two men owned a house, and they differed as to what use that 
 house was to be put, or as to how it should be furnished. One said it 
 should be for a wholesale establishment the other, for a retail establish- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 391 
 
 ment ; and while they were controverting that point, here came a common 
 enemy, denying their right to have the house at all. One said : " Here, 
 let s stop this quarreling between ourselves, and whip this man who denies 
 the right of both of us." " No," says the other, " I won t help to fight for 
 the house unless you agree to use it my way when we get it." And that is 
 the way you all do. When we made this fight when the great army of 
 Democrats, reinforced by Liberals, marched out to fight a grand battle 
 against the common enemy, alas, alas ! so many staid in the camp and 
 grumbled and roasted potatoes nay, even fired volleys into our rear at 
 every step we took. And when we were defeated and came back, these 
 fellows came with their hurrahing, right up from the fireside, with their 
 guns smoking, and said : " Yes, I told you so." Yes, you did ; no mistake 
 about that. You told us so, and you helped so, too. 
 
 I don t say this in any spirit of unkindness. The whole point of the 
 contest was clear to me all the time. True, some things done at Cincinnati 
 I did not like. True, I would have made different nominations. True, 
 when I wrote that letter, I expected to make the fight under the flag of the 
 glorious Hendricks, of Indiana, or some such leader ; that was my expecta 
 tion. Still, keeping the great purposes in view keeping the great principle 
 to be maintained in view" I did not refuse to go into the battle because it 
 was not according to the plan I preferred. To whip the enemy was the great 
 purpose ; to save the Constitution ; to save the right of the States to regu 
 late their own affairs, without interference by the Federal Government. 
 Save that, and you save the ark of your safety. Lose that, and your are 
 silly to be quarreling about the consequences to subordinate theories. If 
 the States be lost, there can be no Jeffersonian theories left. 
 
 Well, we were defeated, you say. So we were. Well, now, what are 
 you going to do ? lam going to keep fighting. On what line? On the 
 line that will bring everybody, of every shade of opinion, that holds to the 
 doctrine that the general government is a government of limited powers ; 
 that holds to the States right to local self-government. I want to whip 
 that battle, to establish that principle. Then we will talk about how we 
 shall use the house, whether for wholesale or retail. Drive away the common 
 enemy. Save the common property. Then we will regulate its use ! 
 am not discouraged, I am sad and mortified, I confess. At one time 
 thought very probably we would succeed. Very early in the canvass, ] 
 thought we would not in this last election. After the battle is over and 
 the smoke has cleared away, we can see more clearly and understand what 
 before we could not understand, and we see now that 800,000 Democrats 
 either staid in the camp, or fired in our rear. If they had gone with us to 
 battle, the enemy would have been routed. I won t abuse you. 
 human nature. One man sees an evil quicker than another. Some men 
 will insist on looking upon a picture from only one standpoint longer 
 than another. That is all. But I take it for granted that you will take the 
 picture and look at it in all lights, from all directions. You will find it is 
 the simple truth we vindicated. You can go nowhere else. It is utterly 
 impossible, in the very nature of political logic, to organize a party in this 
 country and carry it to victory, upon any one theory of State rights, when 
 you go to war with an enemy who denies all theories of State rights. 
 Don t you see that? Isn t it palpable and plain? 
 
 I see by a statement in the papers I have not looked carefully at the 
 count myself that the majority of the whites voted for Greeley. Then Mr. 
 
392 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Grant was elected because the negroes voted for him, and the Democrats 
 did not vote for Greeley. Then we had the whole patronage of the gov 
 ernment to fight. That, itself, was equal to half a million of votes. And 
 even with all these disadvantages, Mr. Greeley received more votes than did 
 Mr. Seymour in 1868. Now, therefore, what can you do? My friends, I 
 tell you, stand ! Hold to your principles ! Hold to your organizations ! 
 Hold a high purpose ! Don t be discouraged ! Few parties, in this country, 
 ever won their first battle ! We must win, or liberty is lost ! We must 
 succeed, or the States are blotted out ! We must triumph, or empire is a 
 certainty ! I invoke you, do not divide the ranks because of a subdivision 
 of theory ; do not refuse to fight by the side of your comrades, because you 
 do not like the plan of battle. Come in to a common struggle, to a common 
 purpose. Right or wrong, there has been a revolution. Right or wrong- 
 that revolution has worked changes. Right or wrong, those changes breed 
 new questions. Right or wrong, for weal or woe, the wise or unwise solu 
 tion of these questions settles your destiny forever ! 
 
 Georgians, representatives of Georgia, I am afraid many of you do not 
 appreciate the weight of responsibility on you in this question. Fortunately 
 for us, we, for the first time since the war, occupy a position from which we 
 can be heard. And up to this last campaign, we were charged with stand 
 ing consolidated on the theory of government under which we went into 
 secession. That very fact inflamed and kept enraged the passions of the 
 Northern people. We could not, therefore, be heard, because they were 
 blinded and believed we wanted to establish the doctrine of secession, and 
 ultimately put the negro back into slavery and destroy all the results of the 
 war. But this campaign has left us upon higher ground. The South, the 
 white people of the South, almost unanimously indorsed this position, and it 
 has lifted you up at once. Now, you have the right to be heard. Oh ! 
 what a proud picture it was. I have sometimes thought of it with rapture. 
 The world says we went to war for slavery, or in a factious spirit, because 
 we lost power. A great many reasons have been ascribed for it. We have 
 said we went into secession because we believed it was the onl} T plan to pre 
 serve a Constitutional government. And here, in this last campaign, the 
 South presented the sublime spectacle slavery gone, property gone, her 
 cause lost, armies scattered, her pride humbled ; but from the ashes of her 
 poverty, she lifted high to the gaze of the nation the scroll of Constitutional 
 liberty, and said : "for this alone will we shake hands and be friends again." 
 
 That great principle is dearer to us than slavery, dearer to us than property, 
 dearer to us than prestige and power, oh, dearer to us than independence ! 
 Give us that ; meet us upon that common ground where our fathers stood. 
 We won t stop to say that you must come to the ground of Calhoun, or to 
 the theory of Jefferson or of Clay. We only say come to the common 
 ground that Constitutional government shall be preserved, and that the 
 States shall have the right to regulate their affairs without any interference 
 by the general government. Grand position ! Are you going back on 
 it ? The Radicals charge that we were not sincere ; that we did not intend 
 to do it. They said a few gentlemen who differed with us down here were 
 the only representatives of the public mind, and that it was all a trick to 
 get power, and that we would then return to secession, and put the negroes 
 back into slavery. Don t you see now that if by any act of yours you go 
 back on this platform, you verify their charge of insincerity*? Don t you 
 see you put your friends at the North to shame for having said you were 
 
777,9 LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 393 
 
 And yet you are asked to do that thing ! Importuned and 
 do that thing ! The cry goes forth, " To the camp, ye of the 
 
 sincere ? 
 
 urged to do uiai ruing: me cry goes lortn, " 10 tne camp, ye 
 Jeffersonian Democracy! as you call it. Why, the question is still 
 pending, whether you have a right to go anywhere. 
 
 The true question is, whether the government is a government of limited 
 powers, and whether the States have any right of self-government. I say to 
 you, in all kindness and frankness, if you go back upon this record, if you 
 repudiate the principles of the people who sent you here, if you verify the 
 charges of your Northern enemies that you were insincere in taking this 
 position, you bring the whole Democracy of the North to shame ; you strike 
 a fatal stab at the movement, and you will enrage again the war passions of 
 the North, and you will tighten your own fetters ! All this party in 
 power want is for you to just offer some pretext for their interference. 
 They are anxious to believe that you are insincere. When you have 
 come up to this grand principle of the Constitution, where all lovers 
 of the Constitution can stand, you get free from this charge of seces 
 sion, free from this charge of going back into power to put the negroes 
 into slavery, and you will be heard, and you will have the right to be heard. 
 It is a high public trust you have to execute. No general assembly of 
 Georgia ever stood in as responsible a position. The grandeur, the wisdom, 
 the patriotism, the immense interest represented in this move, are now more 
 and more developing themselves to the people. Everything you have rests 
 on it. You will have no right directly to regulate your own labor, except 
 this theory be established, and I exhort you, my countrymen, stand by the 
 principles of the people that sent you here ; for Georgia has at least 
 redeemed herself, by taking this high position. And the responsibility is 
 increased upon you, because the other sister States are in manacles. North 
 Carolina spoke her feeble voice. The Democrats had a small majority in 
 the Legislature, but was so sn.all they have been defeated in their first choice. 
 Alabama has been compelled to accept the kind suggestion, which is such 
 as the spider gave the fly ; and by accepting it, will be forced to send a 
 Radical to the Senate. Louisiana made a gallant fight and redeemed her 
 self, but a Federal judge, without the slightest jurisdiction in the case, has 
 reforged her chains. That is the most unmitigated usurpation in the history 
 of Reconstruction, by which Louisiana is manacled. Georgia alone is free, 
 at least free enough to express her honest conviction. Free enough to send 
 to Washington the representatives of her real wishes and opinions. What 
 will you say? Will you send the representative of the principle upon 
 which you were elected ? Will you send a representative commissioned to 
 tell the Northern people that Georgia is still wedded to Constitutional 
 government, and that is what she demands, and that is all ? Or will you 
 send a representative who will go to Washington to talk about the theory 
 of Calhoun, or the theory of Jefferson, thereby making the whole Northern 
 people believe that you are still insisting upon the rights of secession ; rtll 
 insisting 
 
 negr 
 
 no man 
 
 abler. I look alone to the public question, 
 
 have upon this move. You owe it to yourselves, you owe it to the great 
 
 . f. _ -.! . *l,^v XT/-t.+ li tr/~kii r\i n it. to t!rmst itll- 
 
 movement, you owe it to your friends at the North, you owe it to Constitu 
 tional State government, local self-government, you owe it to everyt 
 valuable, to select a senator pledged to the principles upon which you we 
 
394 SENATOR R. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 sent here. It is not a personal question ; it is not the time for personal 
 sympathies, for predelictions or prejudices. People who talk about getting 
 oV conferring offices now for the salaries and honors, are like nurses who 
 abandon their watching and go to dress themselves in trinkets and 
 gewgaws around the couch of dying liberty. Will you do it ? I lift this 
 question high out of the region of personality, and put it upon the dis 
 tinct issue of public safety, which says you must abandon the passionate 
 rush to despotism through sectional hate, and return to the good old land 
 mark of a Union of equal States and Constitutional limitation. I know how 
 this election is looked upon elsewhere. I know how anxious the Radical 
 party is for the only State in the South at liberty to speak her free, unfettered 
 voice to give some evidence of insincerity in this late move. I know how 
 anxious you are to utter the most distinct and sounding note possible of 
 your determination to continue the battle upon the platform of limited 
 government. On this hinge hangs the happiness of your children. On this 
 basis stands every prosperity in your country. Everything is involved. 
 
 I will hasten on. There are many things on this subject I would like to 
 say. I would like to give you my reasons why I think we shall succeed in 
 the next campaign. We are obliged to succeed. I concur with Judge 
 Benning, in the opinion that he delivered in his able address the other 
 evening, that some of our people were so unfortunate as to get their war 
 passions aroused again. Upon this same naked, isolated proposition, that 
 this government is a government of limited powers, I believe that the 
 North will agree with us. I have no doubt that the West will agree with 
 us upon that point. The great difficulty is to get them to look upon the 
 picture in all lights. The great difficulty is to get them away from their 
 prejudices and passions the war passion which prevents them from seeing 
 the truth ! Now is the time to begin the work. You can t accomplish 
 anything after a campaign begins. You might send among them the finest 
 orators of the earth during a campaign, and they would not listen to you. 
 But send them now, and to Washington, and let the nation be the audience 
 in the conflict of intellect, and you will see who will win the fight. You 
 have not been heard since the war. Why, the most remarkable feature of 
 this whole process of reconstruction was that when it was first entered 
 upon, the very first thing done was to chain the intellect of the South. The 
 very men that have inflicted these outrages upon you, set about their work 
 by first getting rid of all Southern intellect. What is your first duty? 
 You complain of the disabilities upon your people. You apologize for your 
 weakness in representation, because, you said, your able men were chained. 
 Well, most of them are unchained. Have you a use for them or not? Oh, 
 my countrymen, I invoke you, as you love liberty, as you love your 
 children and would leave them a legacy worth receiving, renew the strug 
 gle, the intellectual struggle, in the grand arena, in the nation s coun 
 cils, where, before the war, the South never knew defeat, and where, 
 the war, they have never known victory. It is here, I have 
 the slightest doubt, you will in four years wake up a public sen- 
 iment at^the North that is now completely kept down by the war 
 passion. That sentiment will arise in accord with yourselves. The 800,- 
 Jemocrats that would not go with us in the last election will then 
 ome with us. We shall not have the patronage of the Federal power 
 O tight Our principles will be better understood, prejudice will be laid 
 aside, and I tell you when the nation meets to celebrate the one hundredth 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 395 
 
 anniversary of American independence from foreign tyranny, she will cele 
 brate the grand rescue of that same liberty from the "clutches of domestic 
 subversion. Do not, then, be discouraged. I take it we shall have trouble, 
 and we shall have coldness. And we have had losses and we have had follies. 
 True, there are dangers around us. We are in a valley overcast witli gloom 
 and sorrow. But far away through that gloom and sorrow, I can see the 
 sunlight of hope still playing upon the Teneriffe of our political future ! 
 Let us bury our dead get rid of the cumbersome weight of prejudices that 
 so beset us, and toil on, and toil up, and ere long we will sing the song of 
 triumph in the noontide splendor of the summit ! It is a subject, fellow- 
 citizens, I dislike to leave, I am so anxious for the people to understand it 
 everywhere ; I have such abiding faith in its ultimate triumph. Oh, I 
 have such a profound sense of the obstacles in the way ! I know the 
 lion is in the path ; I have heard it roar ! I know that all that is dear 
 to us and our children is wrapped up in the struggle, and I am loth to give 
 it up ! 
 
 There is another subject, outside of this one grand political theory, that 
 I desire to bring before you. I had the good fortune, a few weeks ago, to 
 meet a very intelligent Englishman, who was sent over to this country bv 
 
 V ^J ^J V 
 
 capitalists in Liverpool for the purpose of examining the mineral resources 
 of our country. He had been several weeks in this mission. He had seen 
 an address I had delivered on this subject, and about which also you did 
 strangely cavil. He came and sought an interview with me, and I don t 
 know when I have been more interested. He was intelligent, learned, 
 and perfect master of his subject. He described to me the mineral con 
 dition of England and the Continent. How their coal and iron were de 
 creasing ; how far they had to go into the earth to get them ; how 
 dangerous it was ; how expensive it was ; how the demand increased and 
 the supply diminished, and how important it was for all England and all 
 Europe to look out for new fields for coal and for iron. And for that reason 
 lie had been sent here. Said he, "Mr. Hill, I have studied this country from 
 beyond Chattanooga this way, including East Tennessee and South Tennes 
 see, North Alabama and Northwest Georgia, and there is more wealth 
 for the world in that space than on any other portion of the globe. That 
 wealth," lie said, " must be made available some day. There is no^ reason 
 why you should not be as prosperous as any country on the earth. England 
 must have that coal, that iron. The North must have it," said he. 
 is an exhaustless supply, for over a hundred years, for all England and 
 Continent. Its treasure is measured only by billions, sir. Why don t your 
 people develop it?" "Why don t they? said I. They 
 things capital, muscle, and transportation." Supply these things, 
 
 and we, my fellow-citizens, have the finest country on earth at 
 with all these deposits, we have a good climate and a good soil, and i 
 tages that no other people possess. Yet, such is our political condition 
 
 a vain enort to try to cii<? up vesierua\. ^^ , i~ 
 
 and enrich to-morrow ! 1 hope some of my friends who talk about 
 
 theory, won t quarrel with me. Now, I say, in view of the importance ol 
 
 this grand development to this country, we ought to have aid 
 
 government that has taken our substance, to develop our power. 1 
 
 has expended over a hundred millions of dollars on one work in n, 
 
396 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 and hundreds of millions on all the works of the North. Well, now, my 
 friends, are you so afflicted with a theory that, in the midst of all our sor 
 rows and tronblesJif you can get an appropriation or assistance in any other 
 form, of a few millions to help develop this country and give us cheap 
 transportation to the seaboard, will you refuse it ? I assure you I will not. 
 In this Fourteenth Amendment they say they will not compensate us for 
 our slaves. This war, and the extraordinary measures exercised after the 
 war, have destroyed us to the extent of $5,000,000,000. Now, I do say, if 
 you will cease waking these war passions, if you will go to work upon the 
 grand idea of building up your own country, and present your views as they 
 ought to be presented, to the Congress of the nation, there is every reason 
 to believe you will wake up a spirit of justice for the South by which they 
 Avill send you, in some form, the restitution you ought to have, which they 
 so justly owe. I believe if we discharge our duty now, and enter upon this 
 great work in the right spirit, men listening to me to-night will see the 
 waters of the Tennessee flowing into the Atlantic through the Savannah, or 
 the Altamaha, or both. You will find your land quadrupled in value, your 
 population five-fold increased, Savannah the great commercial seaport of the 
 South, and you will find Atlanta the St. Louis of the South. You can do it. 
 Virginia is moving in this matter. Other States are moving in this matter. 
 Why not you ? 
 
 Two ideas have absorbed my soul. One is to get the right once more 
 established to manage our own affairs in our own way, and we will make 
 no discrimination on account of race, color, or previous condition of servi 
 tude. Let the negro vote ! Let him sue and be sued. Let him have office 
 if the people elect him to office. We can t help that. In every other re 
 spect, in every other purpose we are free, sovereign, and independent 
 States ! We have the right to pass our own law, elect our own Legislature, 
 choose our own governor, and build up our own interest ! Get that estab 
 lished, and then you will see this country develop. You will see fur 
 naces, and foundries, and factories, and smelting works all over this coun 
 try ! Why not ? Land that is now selling for only $5 an acre, will then 
 be worth $100 an acre ! Why not ? Lands less valuable, in other parts of 
 the earth, sell for as much. Why can t we do it ? Because you, my theory- 
 ridden friends, refuse to accept salvation, unless you get it upon your own 
 terms. The prospect is bright for us. I am in favor of prudence, I am in 
 favor of wisdom. Thank God, we have got our own governor, and a good 
 governor. He will be true to you, in every sense, and worthy of you in 
 every trial. You have got a Legislature, a Legislature I trust that will 
 stand to your principles ; a Legislature that will keep the great questions of 
 equal and peaceful reunion before them ; that won t repudiate the senti 
 ment of the people that sent them here ; a Legislature I trust that will not 
 go back upon its first onward march to redemption. Wisdom, prudence, 
 moderation ! Now add to the picture please leave me out of view now 
 add to the picture, by selecting whoever may be your best men, your ablest 
 men, in sympathy with your principles, and send them once more to repre 
 sent you in the councils of the nation. " Oh ! we don t want a man of 
 intellect there ! You don t ? What do you want then ? Why did you 
 ask that their disabilities be removed then? "We don t want a constitu 
 tional lawyer there, a man of debating powers ; we are in a minority and 
 can do no good." Pray, when was it the South was not in the minority, in 
 the days of Clay, in the days of Calhoun, in the days of Jefferson ? And 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AM) WlilTIA US. 397 
 
 are you going to wait until you get a majority in that body ? If there is 
 anything established, it is that mind is superior to matter, and God has 
 placed physical power under the dominion of intellect. The North is our 
 superior in physical power, and in nothing else. But from the very origin of 
 the government, as long as we had freedom, as long as we had the right to 
 send our representatives to Congress, such as we chose, from the adoption 
 of the Constitution up to 1860, not the material power,not the physical pow 
 ers, not the numbers, but the intellect of the South shaped and directed legis 
 lation and controlled the government. You can do it again, and it is 
 the only means of securing yourselves from these continued encroach 
 ments. 
 
 Fellow-citizens, and especially gentlemen of the General Assembly, I 
 hesitate, and yet, perhaps, it is my duty to do what I have never done 
 before, on an occasion like this, and that is to make a few personal allusions. 
 Friends, I do not know who I really do not have placed rny name before 
 you, and I do not feel at liberty to withhold it. I know, I feel keenly, the 
 very great, cruel injustice that has been done me by many people, and I 
 admit that an expression of your confidence would be very gratifying to 
 me, especially in view of those wrongs. I hear men talking about inconsist 
 ency or changeableness, where there is no foundation on earth for it, and I 
 could take up charge by charge and make you ashamed of them. Sometimes 
 I am almost tempted to go into some of them, but I will forbear. I have en 
 deavored to lift you above all personalities in this contest, and let me tell 
 you from the sincerity of my heart, that I have no personal ambition to in 
 terpose in the way of the publicgood. I have no desire, in this critical con 
 dition of the country, to hold the office to the exclusion of any better qualified 
 to fill it. Theologians have never been able to settle definitely, to their own 
 satisfaction, the locality of purgatory, but if I were in the council of the 
 nation from the South, and drew a salary, and listened, day after da} , to the 
 insolent slanders of my people, without the power to repel them, that would 
 be purgatory to me ! I distrust my abilities. God knows I would measure 
 the weight of the task. I know the power that a man ought to possess, to 
 discharge that task, as it ought to be discharged, and T confess, I distrust my 
 abilities, and, if you believe there is another in the State better qualified, I 
 invoke you, by the high trust which the people have confided to you, that 
 you throw away all personal considerations of every kind and character, 
 whether of predilection or of prejudice, and execute that trust as you shall 
 deem best for the interest of the State. I may have committed errors cer 
 tainly not the errors that you charge against me. Daily I hear men making 
 charges that, if they Avould only look at them in all lights, they would 
 ashamed of. It was onlv because they have not seen the picture from my 
 standpoint. But let them pass. I confess to you I have an ambition. 
 Sometimes it stirs me to my very soul. I am not responsible for our humil 
 iation and that is my comfort. "l would be responsible for our exultation ; 
 and that is my ambition. I would wake the pride of the Southern people 
 once more, and under its benign influence I would recover the lost property 
 and restore the lost power of the Southern States. When I remember what 
 this country has been, and see what it is ; when I look to the counci 
 nation as they used to be, and see there Clay, and Calhoun, and Forpyth^iu 
 Berrien, and Crawford, and Grundy, and Benton, and AlACon, and 
 dolph, the whole host of glorious statesmen that ruled the country in pi 
 and in power, and look upon it now, and see how proud Southern men us< 
 
398 
 
 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 be in those lobbies, and their humility now when I hear the slanders from 
 flippant lips, who know no impulse but malice, against a people that is too 
 noble for their love, I feel that if I could be the instrument, under Providence, 
 of lifting up this people once more, I would rather do it than wear the dia 
 dem of the Ca3sars. "In Deo, in hoc spe vivo" Under God, in this hope 
 I live ! 
 
ADDRESS DELIVERED BEFORE THE SOUTHERN HISTORI 
 CAL SOCIETY, AT ATLANTA, GA., FEBRUARY 18, 1874. 
 
 This address was intended to present the side of the South in form for history. It 
 contrasts in forcible language the policy of secession with the policy of coercion. The 
 one the mistake of the South, the other "the crime of the North. The eulogy on Robert 
 E. Lee is, in the opinion of many, the finest ever delivered on that incomparable hero. 
 The defense of President Davis in his administration of his great and delicate trust, his 
 unselfish and devoted patriotism, is full, eloquent, and exhaustive. It was this address 
 that gave rise to the bitter controversy between Hon. A. H. Stephens and Mr. Hill over the 
 Hampton Koads conference. The address closes with practical suggestions for the im 
 provement and elevation of the politics and statesmanship of the country. 
 
 Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen ; The object of this meeting is to 
 organize, in Georgia, an auxiliary branch of " The Southern Historical 
 Society." The object of this society is to collect and preserve authentic 
 materials for a full and correct history of the Confederate States. I have 
 accepted the flattering invitation to address you on this occasion, and now 
 proceed to perform the part allotted me, as both a duty and a pleasure. 
 
 When the war between secession and coercion ended, the Southern 
 States were under every obligation which defeat could imply or surrender 
 impose, to abandon secession as a remedy for every grievance, real or sup 
 posed. Whatever might have been their convictions touching the abstract 
 right of secession, or the sufficiency of the causes which provoked its exer 
 cise, surrender was a confession of inability to maintain it by the sword, 
 and honor and fair dealing demanded that the sword should be sheathed. 
 But defeat, in a physical contest, does not prove that the defeated party 
 was in the wrong. It is certainly no evidence of criminal motive. It is a 
 confession of weakness, not of crime. Were it otherwise, the robber is a law- 
 abiding citizen, and his victim a thief. Socrates was a felon and the mob 
 that sentenced him to death were patriots. In a wicked world innocence 
 and right are not at all incompatible with failure, sorrow, and humiliation. 
 Else the man who fell among thieves on his way from Jerusalem to Jericho 
 
 i "i i i i j * j 1 J1 j * I 
 
 gentlem 
 
 and nothing more, was the confession of surrender, and the obligation to 
 remain in the LTnion and discharge all its duties under the Constitution 
 necessarily resulted. 
 
 So, on the other hand, the Northern States the asserters of the right of 
 
 no right political, moral, or honorable to enlarge the issue after the contest 
 had ended, and the issue made by the contest was exhausted and deter 
 mined. 
 
 The Southern States and people accepted, in a frank and liberal it, * 
 
 399 
 
400 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 the just consequences of their defeat. They abandoned secession, and the 
 doctrine of secession, as a practical remedy for all grievances, past or future, 
 and for all time. They did more. Property in slaves was not the cause of 
 the war. It was not the great fundamental right for which the Southern 
 States went into secession. It was only an incident to that right. The 
 right of the States to regulate their own internal affairs, by the exercise of 
 the powers of government which they had never delegated, and the con 
 viction that independence was necessary to preserve that right of self- 
 government, was the great, moving, inspiring cause of the seceding States. 
 There was not a day of the struggle when the Southern people would not 
 have surrendered slavery to secure independence. But slavery was the 
 particular property which, it was believed, was endangered without inde- 
 
 pation was issued finally, and a movement was made to amend the Federal 
 Constitution as if to make this emancipation effectual. But this was 
 avowedly done as a threat to induce a surrender to avoid such a result. 
 Yet promptly after surrender, the Southern people waived the discussion of 
 all technicalities on this question, and relieved their late enemies of all 
 necessity to enter upon such discussion, and, in conventions assembled, each 
 State for itself, most solemnly abolished slavery in their borders. To pro 
 tect the negro in his freedom was more than a corollary to this emancipa 
 tion. It was a duty which the preservation of society made necessary in 
 each State, and by each State for itself. 
 
 But the Northern States and people were not satisfied with these prompt 
 and manly concessions by our people of every legal, necessary, reasonable, 
 and even incidental result of defeat in the war. The war being over, our 
 arms surrendered, our government scattered, and our people helpless, they 
 now determined not only to enlarge the issues made by the war and during 
 the war, but they also determined to change those issues and make demands 
 which had not before been made, which indeed had been utterly disclaimed 
 in every possible form by every State of the North and every department 
 of the Federal Government legislative, executive, and judicial. Nay, they 
 now made demands which they had, in every form, declared they could 
 have no power or right to make without violating the Constitution they 
 had sworn to support, and destroying the Union they had waged the war 
 itself to preserve. Over and over during the war they proclaimed in every 
 authoritative form to us and to foreign governments, that secession was a 
 nullity, that our States were still in the Union ; and that we had only to 
 lay down our arms, and retain all our rights and powers as equal States in 
 the Union. We laid down our arms, and immediately they insisted our 
 States had lost all their rights and powers in the Union, and while com 
 pelled to remain under the control of the Union, we could only do so with 
 such rights and powers as they might accord, and on such terms and con 
 ditions as they might impose. 
 
 Over and over again during the war they, in like authoritative forms, 
 proclaimed that our people had taken up arms in defense of secession under 
 misapprehension of their purposes toward us, and that we had only to lay 
 down our arms and continue to enjoy, in the Union, every right and privi 
 lege as bo fore the mistaken act of secession. We laid down our arms and 
 they declarei} we were all criminals and traitors, who had forfeited every 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 401 
 
 right and privilege, and were entitled to neither property, liberty, or life, 
 except through their clemency ! 
 
 Over and over again during the war they, in like authoritative forms, 
 proclaimed that the seats of our members in Congress were vacant, and we 
 had only to return and occupy them as it was both our right and duty to do. 
 Our people laid down their arms and sent on their members, and they were 
 met with the startling proposition that we had neither the right to partici 
 pate in the administration of the Union, nor even to make law or govern 
 ment for our own States ! 
 
 Addressing this Society in Virginia, during the last summer, Mr. Davis 
 said : " We were more cheated than conquered into surrender." The 
 Northern press denounced this as a slander, and some of our Southern press 
 deprecated the expression as indiscreet ! I aver to-night, what history will 
 affirm, that the English language does not contain, and could not form a 
 sentence of equal size which expressed more truth. We were cheated not 
 only by our enemies ; but the profuse proclamations of our enemies, before 
 referred to, were taken up and repeated by malcontents in our midst many 
 of them, too, who had done all in their power to hurry our people into 
 secession. They coupled these professions and promises of our enemies 
 with brazen assertions that the laws of the Confederate Government, 
 enacted to carry on the war, were unconstitutional and void. They scat 
 tered these documents of twin falsehood and treachery among our people to 
 prove to them that they had a right to refuse supplies to the soldiers. They 
 scattered them through the army to convince soldiers it was no crime to 
 desert. And they scattered them among our enemies to prove to them that 
 our people were dividing, that our armies were weakening, and that they 
 had only to take courage and keep up the struggle, and surrender was 
 inevitable ! Oh, my friends, we were fearfully, sadly, treacherously, alto 
 gether cheated into surrender ! If the demands made, after the war was 
 over, had been frankly avowed while the war was in progress, there would 
 have been no pretexts for our treacherous malcontents ; there would have 
 been no division or wearying among our people ; there would have been no 
 desertions from our armies, and there would have been no surrender of 
 arms, nor loss of our cause ! Never ! Never ! 
 
 But the Northern States and people having made these demands as 
 results of the war, when we could join no issue on them in battle, there 
 were only legal and political forums left in which to test their justice and 
 truth. Had sovereign States committed treason? Were eight millions of 
 people traitors? Were leaders who had only obeyed their States, and 
 served their people, criminals worthy of death ? 
 
 These were the great questions, and the most usual forums to determine 
 such issues were the courts of law. There was certainly no hindrance to 
 such a test. Our great chief was a prisonerin a dungeon in chains ! 
 He was not only ready and willing to be tried, but demanded a trial. By 
 himself he was most anxious to vindicate the innocence of his people or in 
 himself expiate their guilt by an ignominious death ! Our enemies had 
 appointment of the judges ; the formation of the court ; the selection of 
 jury ; the entire control and direction of the proceedings. Why did they 
 hesitate ? Why did they finally decline to try? Was it because of mercy 
 or a spirit of magnanimity? Ah ! we shall see directly. No, they were 
 gnashing their teeth with rage. They knew that such a trial bad no parall 
 in human history. They knew the whole world and posterity for all 
 
402 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 would review it. There was the written law, and they knew it had not been 
 violated! Eight millions of people, struggling as one man for liberty, were 
 not traitors only because power and treachery combined to defeat and 
 enslave them. To try and convict, was to commit perjuries which would 
 redden human nature with an eternal blush of shame. To try and acquit, 
 was a judgment under oath, by their own courts, that the war of coercion 
 was itself but a gigantic crime against humanity, and a wicked violation of 
 their own form and principles of government. 
 
 Here was the terrible dilemma which confronted our accusers, and it was 
 so palpable that all the insolence of recent triumph could not hide it ; and 
 they were left no resource but to pretend a mercy, whose necessity they 
 despised, and turn the prisoner loose, after a long and most cowardly 
 delay. 
 
 The next forum in which our people had a right to be heard, was the 
 Congress the national councils. By every protest and profession of our 
 enemies, before and during the war, the Union was preserved, and by the 
 plain terms of the Constitution each State was entitled to representation in 
 both branches of Congress. The refusal to test the crime of secession before 
 the courts increased, if possible, the obligation to recognize this clear right 
 of representation. This was a rare opportunity for vindication. The forms 
 of government had afforded it to few defeated parties in history, and to 
 none on such terms of fairness and equality. There was never a time when 
 the intellect of a people was so needed for their vindication, and no people 
 ever possessed grander intellects for the work. We had trained statesmen, 
 constitutional lawyers, skilled debaters, who were perfectly familiar with 
 every fact and learned in every principle involved. And the very ablest 
 and best of these there was no reason to doubt every Southern State would 
 at once, and with unanimity, return to Congress. If this had been done, not 
 only would the South have been vindicated, but the present horrible sectional 
 acrimony, with all the black record of reconstruction, would have been 
 avoided. The reunion would have been made cordial, with secession 
 abandoned and slavery abolished. The Southern States would already have 
 been far advanced in the work of material recovery, of social order, and 
 political contentment ; and all the States co-equals in a common Union 
 would be rejoicing in a manifest new lease of Constitutional government and 
 republican liberty. 
 
 But the very reasons which made the return of our ablest men to Con 
 gress a glorious opportunity for us, made it a dreaded one for our adver 
 saries. Victors as they were in a physical contest, they were not willing to 
 meet the vanquished in intellectual gladiatorship. To protect themselves 
 from this collision of mind, they determined to add yet further crimes to their 
 cowardice. And now we approach the analysis of the most stupendous series 
 of crimes ever perpetrated in human history, by individuals or States, 
 civilized or savage. Unwilling to risk their own judges and juries to pass 
 legally upon the treason charged, our adversaries determined to punish with 
 out conviction. Unwilling to hazard the power of equal debate upon the 
 minds and consciences of their own people, they determined to condemn 
 without a hearing. And why not ? Their victims were unarmed and help 
 less, ^and the luxury of vengeance could have easy, safe, and unrestrained 
 gratification. 
 
 The first act was for Congress, composed chiefly of men who had been 
 borne into their seats on the bloody tide of sectional hate and strife, to seize 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 403 
 
 all legislative powers into their own hands, and exclude the Southern States 
 not only from actual representation, but from the right of representa 
 tives. 
 
 To justify this enormous usurpation, they declared the Southern States 
 needed reconstruction. As this idea was wholly unknown to the Constitu 
 tion, they boldly put themselves outside of the Constitution they had sworn 
 to observe. To make the work of reconstruction effective, they resolved 
 that it belonged exclusively to Congress the legislative department and 
 that the executive department could not and should not participate, except 
 to furnish the military to aid in holding the victims still while the punish 
 ment was being inflicted. To prevent any embarrassing review of their 
 measures, they further resolved that all questions arising under reconstruc 
 tion were political and not judicial, and that, therefore, the courts could not 
 and should not pass upon their constitutionality. Thus fortified in their 
 usurpations, and goaded by rancorous, blind, long-nurtured hate, they com 
 menced the work of dissolving governments ; destroying States ; robbing, 
 insulting, and oppressing already impoverished and helpless peoples, and 
 humiliating the white race ! They entered each Southern State, and declared 
 all existing governments to be illegal. They outlawed and set aside all ex 
 isting constituencies the constituencies which originated State governments, 
 and participated in forming the Federal Government. They created new 
 constituencies composed chiefly of ignorant negroes. They offered to include 
 in these new constituencies such of the resident whites as would consent that 
 the usurpations were legal, and these punishments were just ; and it must 
 ever be a sad recital, for all time, that some of our people were willing to 
 barter their section, State, race, and blood, for the privilege of aiding in this 
 work of destruction, degradation, and infamy. The future historian will 
 weep bitter tears when he finds himself compelled to record this darkest 
 exhibition of human treachery and depravity, and he will close up the chap 
 ter as, with nervous energy, he shall write the withering judgment of all 
 decent humanity for all future ages : Cursed, thrice cursed forever, be the 
 memories of such unnatural monsters among men ! 
 
 These motley constituencies of ignorance and vice, having no conception 
 but in hate ; no birth but in strife ; no nursing but in usurpation, and no 
 strength but in crime and treachery, were placed, in each State, under the 
 appropriate lead of adventurous vagabonds, bankrupt in fortunes and hungry 
 for the spoil of their victims ; paupers from birth in every sentiment of 
 honor, and enjoying with keen relish the humiliation of their superiors ! 
 And these formed the government under which we have been dying, 
 rant negroes have been made masters; proud, educated masters made slaves 
 Robbers have been made rulers ; thieves have been made detectives, all 
 protected by Federal power; while humble submission to the remorseless 
 demands of this insatiate wickedness has been made the only test of loyalty 
 and devotion to that Union which our fathers helped to form in order to 
 secure the blessings of liberty to them and their posterity 
 
 Many of the effects of this policy of reconstruction, the future 
 will have no difficulty in discovering. 
 
 The millions of taxes we have had to pay to feed these vampires upc 
 our substances, and sickening eye-sores to our pride and honor ; 
 of debt piled up for our posterity to pay in bonds issued by 
 gamblers upon the property, life, and hope of the people of these 
 the miscegenating orgies of loyal legislators and reckless plunder 
 
404 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 carpet-bag governors ; the readiness with which criminals were turned loose, 
 and the equal readiness with which good citizens were arrested without 
 warrant, tried without law, convicted without evidence, and hurried off to 
 foreign prisons without mercy, only because they were suspected of having 
 too much manhood to bear their wrongs with unmurmuring submission ; how 
 our lands were depreciated, our society demoralized, and all our most intelli 
 gent and virtuous citizens were denied all right to provide remedies. These, 
 and many more of like character, the future historian will easily see, and 
 must see, though every glance create nausea. But there are other facts 
 and incidents, not so patent to the world and not on record, which may be 
 found in every neighborhood, and which we ought to gather up as far as we 
 can. Rich men have been made poor ; proud men have been made humble ; 
 noble women have been insulted ; innocent men have been imprisoned ; 
 many, very many, have been too weak to bear their sorrows and the sorrows 
 of their country, and kind death has brought them a refuge from grief. 
 And yet the authors of all these wrongs boast of the great magnanimity 
 and generosity they have exhibited to a fallen foe ! They did not hang and 
 exile our leaders, nor confiscate our property ! What conqueror was ever 
 before so manly and liberal ? But they made slaves of masters, and masters 
 of slaves; law-makers of vagabonds; rulers of strangers, and tax gatherers of 
 robbers. They declined to take life, only that they might make life a 
 lingering death. They did not drive us from home, only that they might 
 make home the abode of sorrow and poverty. They failed to confiscate our 
 property by the usual act of government, that it might remain to be taken 
 by negroes, thieves, and strangers, as their own lawful spoil ! Death, exile, 
 confiscation would end the punishment too soon. Such vengeance craved 
 longer revel and slower torture ! And if we, who have been the witnesses 
 to these horrors, and the victims of these wrongs, will only gather up and 
 preserve the unwritten outrages, and unrecorded griefs of the last seven 
 years, all posterity will, with one voice, declare that the punishments inflicted 
 by our adversaries upon the Southern States and people under the name of 
 reconstruction, for vindictiveness of hate, for meanness of oppression, for 
 cool, prolonged relish of torture, and for insatiate extravagance of plunder, 
 are without parallel in precedent, civilized or heathen ! 
 
 It must be admitted that our enemies were wisely wicked. They well 
 knew it would never do to admit Southern intellect into the national coun 
 cils, until their work was fully completed and had been made part of the 
 fundamental law. Even when reconstruction had reached the point that 
 the doors of Congress must be opened, they were only allowed to be opened 
 to such as were participants in, and products of the infamy. The caressing 
 fathers took only to their arms the dirty children their vengeance had 
 begotten. In 1872, alarmed by what seemed to be a returning sense of jus 
 tice at the North, aided by most remarkable concessions for peace and 
 deliverance at the South, Congress removed the illegal disabilities imposed 
 upon most of our leaders, though upon many even yet these disabilities remain. 
 In the mean time, most of our greatest men, who were most familiar with 
 the facts of the past, so essential to our vindication, had passed away, or 
 were rapidly passing away. A very few of these were released from these 
 bonds upon the use of their intellects. But, most manifestly, a better oppor 
 tunity had returned at last to the Southern people, and it was expected by 
 our enemies and the world, that this opportunity would be improved, and our 
 very ablest men everywhere chosen to Congress. And now comes the most 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 405 
 
 curious chapter in our history. It will puzzle the future historian. Not a 
 single man who was in full sympathy and accord with the Confederate 
 administration, and who was intimate in the councils and, daily as it pro 
 gressed, familiar with the policy of that administration, has been called by 
 our own people to a single prominent position, State or national ! While 
 many who gave aid and encouragement to the enemy, by disaffecting our 
 people to that administration during the war of coercion, and refused to give 
 counsel, or counseled consent, during the baser war of reconstruction, have 
 received high marks of confidence from our enemies, and high positions of 
 honor from our people ! Crowds of intellectual imbeciles, like flocks of noisy 
 blackbirds in harvest time, rushed forward to secure, by personal scramble 
 and trade, those positions of heaviest trust and responsibility, and thus mur 
 der all hope of having any vindication of our dead, or justice for our livino- in 
 the councils of the nation. 
 
 When such a State as Virginia, in such a crisis as this, for such a place as 
 the Senate, repudiates such a statesman as Hunter familiar with every fact of 
 the Federal history, intimately familiar with every fact in Confederate councils, 
 trained in debate, learned in Constitutional law, courteous iifmanner, accu 
 rate in statement, powerful in logic, and respected even by our enemies I 
 think it is time to despair of doing anything, in this generation, to lift the 
 South to her former position of influence and power in the Congress of the 
 United States. To feed our people on frothy declamation now, however blown 
 
 /%* * 1 1 / T * i-* 
 
 of Northern representatives, as compared with those they sent to Congres s 
 before the war, but increased the chances for Southern statesmen to remove, 
 by proper debate in the national councils, the false theories and impressions 
 which have been crowded into the minds of the Northern people, and thus 
 return the general government to its Constitutional limitations, restore to 
 the States the free exercise of their reserved rights, and rescue from de 
 struction for our enemies as well as for ourselves, those great principles of 
 Constitutional government which every purpose of the Confederates sought 
 to maintain, and which every feature of coercion must logically tend to 
 destroy. 
 
 Thus, denied by our enemies the opportunity of silencing, by the solemn 
 judgments of their own courts, the fierce accusations of criminality in seces 
 sion ; and denied, by our enemies and the follies of our own people, the 
 glorious chance of vindicating our cause in high debate, and face to face with 
 the chosen champions of our accusers, we have but one resource left us for 
 defense or vindication. That resource is history impartial, and impas 
 sioned, un-office-seeking history ! It is to secure a fair trial before this 
 august tribunal that this society has been organized to collect, prepare, and 
 perpetuate the evidence. Our enemies are exceedingly active in their 
 efforts to get a false presentation of the testimony for the judgment of his 
 tory. They are seeking to monopolize the possession of our own records. 
 They readily pay more money for disjointed portions of Confederate 
 archives than they did for the Madison papers, giving an account of the 
 proceedings of the" convention that framed the Constitution. It is shameful 
 to see how much assistance they are receiving in their efforts to pervert and 
 falsify our history, from those malcontents who kept up such restless assaults 
 on the Confederate administration. The men who quareled more with their 
 
406 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 own side than with the enemy during the struggle, are among the first, after 
 the war, to rush to writing books to give their account of the government 
 they did so much to break down. We owe it, therefore, to our dead, to out 
 living, and to our children, to be active in the work of preserving the truth 
 and repelling the falsehoods, so that we may secure, for them and for us, 
 just judgment from the only tribunal before which we can be fully and fairly 
 heard. 
 
 If the full truth can be secured and preserved, we shall have nothing to 
 fear in the comparison with our enemy which history will make. The 
 courage of our troops is beyond perversion. The fact that we killed, 
 wounded, and captured a greater number of the enemy than we had soldiers 
 in our armies, is a tribute to our gallantry and skill which the records of no 
 civilized war can surpass. With inferior arms and limited resources, shut 
 up from supplies from the outside world, and with unfortunate and fatal 
 divisions between the Southern States and among ourselves, we made a fight 
 for independence which no people on earth ever yet equaled. 
 
 Equally wonderful were the achievements of our statesmanship. In the 
 beginning we had neither government, nor army, nor navy, nor treasury. 
 All these we had to improvise in the very hearing of an arming foe, who had 
 an established government, an organized army, a powerful navy, and all the 
 sinews and appliances of war in extravagant abundance. And yet, when the 
 enactments and measures of the Confederate Government shall be critically 
 examined, they will be found to have sprung into existence with a wisdom, 
 a vigor, an aptitude for the crisis and a strict conformity to all the principles 
 of free institutions, which must challenge the admiration of publicists and 
 statesmen for all time. 
 
 No people, ancient or modern, can look with more pride to the verdict 
 which history will be compelled to render upon the merits and characters of 
 our two chief leaders the one in the military and the other in the civil 
 service. Most other leaders are great because of fortunate results, and 
 heroes because of success. Davis and Lee, because of qualities in them 
 selves, are great in the face of fortune, and heroes in spite of defeat. 
 
 When the future historian shall come to survey the character of Lee, he 
 will find it rising like a huge mountain above the undulating plain of 
 humanity, and he must lift his eyes high toward Heaven to catch its summit. 
 He possessed every virtue of other great commanders without their vices. He 
 was a foe without hate ; a friend without treachery ; a soldier without cruelty; 
 a victor without oppression, and a victim without murmuring. He was 
 a public officer without vices ; a private citizen without wrong ; a neighbor 
 without reproach ; a Christian without hypocrisy, and a man without guile. 
 Ie was Caesar, without his ambition ; Frederick, without his tyranny ; 
 Napoleon, without his selfishness, and Washington, without his reward, 
 rle was obedient to authority as a servant, and royal in authority as a true 
 king. He was gentle as a woman in life ; modest and pure as a virgin in 
 thought ; watchful as a Roman vestal in duty ; submissive to law as 
 Socrates, and grand in battle as Achilles ! 
 
 There were many peculiarities in the habits and character of Lee, which 
 are but little known and which may be studied with profit. He studiously 
 avoided giving opinions upon subjects which it had not been his calling or 
 training to investigate ; and sometimes I thought he carried this great virtue 
 too far. Neither the President, nor Congress, nor friends could get his 
 views upon any public question not strictly military, and no man had as 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WltfTIXGS. 407 
 
 much quiet, unobtrusive contempt for what he called "military statesmen 
 and political generals." Meeting him once in the streets of Richmond, as I 
 was going out and he going in the executive office, I said to him : " General, 
 I wish you would give us your opinion as to the propriety of changing the 
 seat of government, and going further South." 
 
 "That is a political question, Mr. Hill, and you politicians must deter 
 mine it. I shall endeavor to take care of the army and you must make the 
 laws and control the government." 
 
 " Ah, General," I said, " but you will have to change that rule, and form 
 and express political opinions ; for, if we establish our independence, the 
 people will make you Mr. Davis s successor." 
 
 "Never, sir," he replied, with a firm dignity that belonged only to Lee. 
 " That I will never permit. Whatever talents I may possess (and they are 
 but limited) are military talents. My education and training are militaiy. 
 I think the military and civil talents are distinct, if not different, and full 
 duty in either sphere is about as much as one man can qualify himself to 
 perform. I shall not do the people the injustice to accept high civil office, 
 with whose questions it has not been my business to become familiar." 
 
 " Well, but General," I insisted, " history does not sustain your view. 
 Caesar, and Frederick of Prussia, and Bonaparte, were all great statesmen 
 as well as great generals." 
 
 " And all great tyrants," he promptly rejoined. " I speak of the proper 
 rule in republics, where, I think, we should have neither military statesmen 
 nor political generals." 
 
 " But Washington was both, and yet not a tyrant," I repeated. 
 
 And with a beautiful smile, he said : " Washington was an exception to 
 all rule, and there was none like him." 
 
 I could find no words to answer, but instantly I said in thought: "Surely 
 Washington is no longer the only exception, for one like him, if not even 
 greater, is here." 
 
 Lee sometimes indulged in satire, to which his greatness gave point and 
 power. He was especially severe on newspaper criticisms of military move 
 ments subjects about which the writers knew nothing. 
 
 " We made a great mistake, Mr. Hill, in the beginning of our struggle, 
 and I fear, in spite of all we can do, it will prove to be a fatal mistake," he 
 said to me, after General Bragg ceased to command the Army of Tennessee, 
 an event Lee deplored. 
 
 " What mistake is that, General? 
 
 "Why, sir, in the beginning, we appointed all our worst generals to 
 command the armies, and all our best generals to edit the newspapers. As 
 you know, I have planned some campaigns and quite a number of battles. 
 I have given the work all the care and thought I could, and sometimes when 
 my plans were completed, as far as I could see, they seemed to be perfect. 
 But when I have fought them through, I have discovered defects, and occa 
 sionally wondered I did not see some of the defects in advance. When it 
 was all over, I found, by reading a newspaper, that these best editor-gener 
 als saw all the defects plainly from the start. Unfortunately they did not 
 communicate their knowledge to me until it was too late ! Then, after^a 
 pause, he added, with a beautiful, grave expression I can never forget : 
 have no ambition but to serve the Confederacy, and do all I can to win our 
 independence. I am willing to serve in any capacity to which the authon 
 ties may assign me. I have done the best I could in the field, and have not 
 
408 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 succeeded as I could wish. I am willing to yield my place to these best gen 
 erals, and I will do my best for the cause editing a newspaper ! " * 
 
 Jefferson Davis was as great in the cabinet as was Lee in the field. He 
 was more resentful in temper, and more aggressive in his nature than Lee. 
 His position, too, more exposed him to assaults from our own people. He 
 had to make all appointments, and though often upon the recommendation 
 of others, all the blame of mistake was charged to him, and mistakes were 
 often charged by disappointed seekers and their friends which were not 
 made. He also made recommendations for enactments, and though these 
 measures, especially the military portion, invariably had the concurrence of, 
 and often originated with Lee, the opposition of malcontents was directed 
 at Davis. It is astonishing how men in high position, and supposed to be 
 great, would make war on the whole administration for the most trivial per 
 sonal disappointment. Failures to get places for favorites of very ordinary 
 character have inspired long harangues against the most important measures, 
 and they were continued and repeated even after those measures became 
 laws. "Can you believe," he said to me once, "that men statesmen in a 
 struggle like this, would hazard an injury to the cause because of their per 
 sonal grievances, even if they were well founded ! " Certainly," I replied, 
 " I not only believe it, but I know it. There are men who regard them 
 selves with more devotion than they do the cause. If such men offer you 
 counsel you do not take, or ask appointments you do not make, however 
 you may be sustained in such action by Lee and all the cabinet, and even 
 the Congress, they accept your refusal as questioning their wisdom, and as 
 personal war on them." "I cannot conceive of such a feeling," he said. 
 I have but one enemy to fight, and that is our common enemy. I may 
 make mistakes, and doubtless I do, but I do the best I can with all the 
 lights at the time before me. God knows I would sacrifice most willingly 
 my life, much more, my opinions, to defeat that enemy." 
 
 We all remember the fierce war which was made, in Georgia, against 
 certain war measures of the Congress, and against Mr. Davis for recom 
 mending them. Conscription and impressment, especially, were denounced 
 as unconstitutional and void, and not binding on soldiers or people. And 
 then, the limited suspension of habeas corpus was made the occasion for a 
 concerted movement on the Legislature, assembled in extra session, to array 
 the State in hostility to the Confederate administration. It failed. This 
 was in the dark days of 1864. On returning to Richmond after thitf, I 
 
 pie of Georgia will cordially sustain you in all your efforts to achieve our 
 . independence." " And I thank you, sir, for that information, and I have 
 never doubted the fidelity of Georgia." " The people of Georgia sustain 
 you," I added, "not only because they have confidence in you, "but chiefly 
 because it is the only way to sustain the cause." And with an expression 
 sincerity glowing all over his countenance, and with a reverential pathos 
 1 can never forget, he said, " And God knows my heart, I ask all, ALL for 
 the cause ; nothing, NOTHING for myself." Truer words never fell from 
 lips, nor warmed from the heart of a more devoted patriot. These 
 
 ^Since making this address, I find that I repeated this same anecdote in the speech at 
 La Grunge, m March, 1865. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 409 
 
 words express in language, the soul, the mind, the purpose, aye, the ambi 
 tion of Jefferson Davis. It was his misfortune, and the misfortune of the 
 Confederacy, that this was not true of all who were in authority. It was 
 his fault, perhaps, that he did not use his authority to deprive such of their 
 power to do evil. 
 
 I am speaking in Atlanta, and it is all the more proper, therefore, that I 
 should speak for the first time in public of the removal of General John 
 ston from the command of the army of the Tennessee. 
 
 I have heard it said that I advised that removal. This is not true. I 
 gave no advice on the subject, because I was not a military man. You have 
 all heard it said that Mr. Davis was moved by personal hostility to General 
 Johnston, in making this removal. This is not only not true, but is exceed 
 ingly false. I do not know much on the subject of this removal. I was the 
 bearer of messages from General Johnston to the President, and was in 
 Richmond, and sometimes present, during the discussions on the subject. 
 I never saw as much agony in Mr. Davis s face, as actually distorted it, 
 when the possible necessity for this removal was at first suggested to him. 
 I never heard a eulogy pronounced upon General Johnston by his best 
 friends, as a fighter if he would fight, equal to that which I heard from Mr. 
 Davis during these discussions. I know he consulted with General Lee 
 fully, earnestly, and anxiously before this removal. I know that those who 
 pressed the removal, first and most earnestly, in the cabinet, were those 
 who had been most earnest for General Johnston s original appointment to 
 that command. All these things I do personally know. I was not present 
 when the order for removal was determined upon, but I received it imme 
 diately after from a member of the cabinet, and do not doubt its truth, that 
 Mr. Davis was the very last man who gave his assent to that removal, and 
 he only gave the order when fully satisfied it was absolutely necessary to 
 prevent the surrender of Atlanta without a fight. 
 
 The full history of the Hampton Roads commission and conference has 
 never been written. I will not give that history now. Much has been said 
 and published on the subject which is not true. I know why each member 
 of that commission, on our part, was selected. I received from Mr. Davis s 
 own lips a full account of the conversation between himself and the commis 
 sioners before their departure from Richmond. 
 
 You have heard it said that the President embarrassed the commissioners 
 by giving them positive instructions to make the recognition of independ 
 ence an ultimatum a condition precedent to any negotiations. This is not 
 true. Mr. Davis gave the commissioners no written instructions and no ulti 
 matum. He gave them, in conversation, his views, but leaving much to their 
 discretion. They could best judge how to conduct the conference when 
 they met. His own opinion was, that it would be most proper and wise, so 
 to conduct it, if they could, as to receive rather than make propositions. 
 While he did not feel authorized to yield our independence in advance, and 
 should not do so, and while he did not desire them to deceive Mr. Lincoln, or 
 be responsible for any false impressions Mr. Lincoln might have, yet, he was 
 willing for them to secure an armistice, although they might be satisfied that 
 Mr. Lincoln, in agreeing to it, did so under the belief that re-union must, as 
 a result, follow. "l may add that Mr. Davis had no hope of success, or of 
 securing an armistice, after he learned that Mr. Seward was to accompany Mr. 
 Lincoln. Mr. Lincoln," he said, " is au honest, well-meaning man, but 
 Seward is wily and treacherous." 
 
410 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 I could detain you all night correcting false impressions which have been 
 industriously made against this great and good man. I know Jefferson 
 Davis as I know few men. I have been near him in his public duties ; I 
 have seen him by his private fireside ; I have witnessed his humble Christian 
 devotions ; and I challenge the judgment of history when I say, no people 
 were ever led through the fiery struggle for liberty by a nobler, truer pa 
 triot ; while the carnage of war and the trials of public life never revealed 
 a purer and more beautiful Christian character. 
 
 Those who, during the struggle, prostituted public office for private gain; 
 or used position to promote favorites ; or forgot public duty to avenge pri 
 vate griefs ; or were derelict or faithless in any form to our cause, are they 
 who condemn and abuse Mr. Davis. And well they may, for of all such he 
 was the contrast, the rebuke and the enemy. Those who were willing to 
 sacrifice self for the cause ; who were willing to bear trials for its success ; 
 who were willing to reap sorrow and poverty that victory might be won, 
 will ever cherish the name of Jefferson Davis, for to all such he was a glo 
 rious peer and a most worthy leader. 
 
 I would be ashamed of my own unworthiness if I did not venerate Lee. 
 I would scorn my own nature if I did not love Davis. I would question my 
 own integrity and patriotism if I did not honor and admire both. There are 
 some who affect to praise Lee, and condemn Davis. But, of all such, Lee 
 himself would be ashamed. No two leaders ever leaned, each on the other, 
 in such beautiful trust and absolute confidence. Hand in hand, and heart to 
 heart, they moved in front of the dire struggle of their people for independ 
 ence a noble pair of brothers. And if fidelity to right, endurance of trials, 
 and sacrifice of self for others, can win title to a place with the good in the 
 great hereafter, then Davis and Lee will meet where wars are not waged, and 
 slanderers are not heard ; and as heart in heart, and wing to wing they fly 
 through the courts of Heaven, admiring angels will say, What a noble pair 
 of brothers ! 
 
 The saddest chapter in Confederate history which the future historian 
 will be called upon to write, will be that one in which he will undertake to 
 define the real cause of our failure. For the truth must be told. 
 
 Five millions of people, in such a country as we possess, were not con 
 quered because our resources were inferior, or our enemies were so powerful. 
 All physical disadvantages are insufficient to account for our failure. The 
 truth is, we failed because too many of our own people were not determined 
 to win. Malcontents at home and in high places took more men from Lee s 
 army than did Grant s guns. The same agencies created dissensions among 
 our people, and we failed to* win independence because our sacrifices ceased, 
 our purpose faltered, and our strength was divided. Kind judge, let this 
 sad chapter be short ! 
 
 But above all things we have least to dread in history on the merits of 
 the issues which divided the contending parties. The Southern States and 
 people must stand before the bar of history responsible for secession. The 
 Northern States and people must stand before the same bar responsible for 
 coercion and reconstruction. Weighed upon principle, by authority, and by 
 effects and consequences, which of the two positions is the more inimical to 
 the Union, the Constitutional government, and to liberty ? 
 
 When the States formed the Union, several of them, especially New 
 York and Virginia, expressly reserved the right to withdraw as a condition 
 of ratification. This reservation, by a well-established rule of construction, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 411 
 
 inured to all the parties to the Union. But no State recognized coercion to 
 preserve the Union as a right or power in the Federal Government, either 
 express or resulting. So, in the very stipulations which made the Union, 
 secession finds a justification, and coercion none. 
 
 From 1787 to 1860, the ablest statesmen in America, both in the North 
 and in the South, conceded the right of secession to the States. Some in 
 sisted it was a Constitutional right, inherent in the sovereignty of the States, 
 and conditioned in the terms of the compact. Others denied it was a Con 
 stitutional right, but said it was only a revolutionary right, to be exercised 
 for cause, and that infidelity to the terms, or the purposes of Union, would 
 be sufficient cause to justify the act. But no accepted statesman, North or 
 South, Whig or Democrat, ever contended or claimed that coercion was a 
 right, either constitutional or revolutionary, during all that period. So, 
 upon the authority of all our great statesmen, including the very framers of 
 the Constitution, secession will stand in history acquitted and justified, while 
 coercion, upon the same authority, must be condemned as criminal and with 
 out excuse. 
 
 Secession, consummated, would have divided the Union ; the seceding 
 States forming a new Union, and leaving the old Union in undisturbed en 
 joyment of the States remaining. Coercion, consummated, would first 
 destroy the chief character of the Union, by making it a Union of force, 
 instead of a Union of consent. In the next place, coercion, consummated, 
 would destroy the Union and substitute consolidation instead. The very 
 word, union, implies the combination of separate wholes for a common pur 
 pose. The moment you destroy the separate identity of the members, that 
 moment union ceases, and unity consolidation is accomplished. To 
 destroy, is a greater crime than to separate or divide, and therefore, coercion 
 is a greater crime against the Union than secession. 
 
 Again : Secession did not interfere with the rights, or attack the 
 sovereignty, or lessen the dignity or importance of the States. Its real 
 great purpose was to rescue all these from the consequences of threatened 
 
 consolidation. But coercion, in its very nature, asserts dominion over the 
 
 > 1 1 
 
 btates, 
 destr 
 
 But I have shown that coercion destroyed the Union as well as the 
 States. Then, again, the Union of the States was formed to secure the 
 blessings of liberty. Secession could not even impair the liberties of the 
 people. It interfered in no way whatever with the rights or privileges of 
 the Northern States and people. It sought only to make more secure the 
 rights, liberties, and privileges of the Southern States and people, 
 coercion, in destroying the Union, and making a consolidation, and m de 
 stroying the States, can have no logical result but in the destruction of all 
 the liberties of all the people North and South. Will our people never per 
 ceive the patent truth, that coercion must work consolidation, and that con 
 solidation must destroy the identity and powers of the States and 
 liberties of the people ? To coerce a State is necessarily to enslave the e, 
 and to enslave the State is necessarily to enslave the people of the 
 Nothing but the roar of cannon, in the hands of unreasoning physical power, 
 
 ^j * 
 
 can silence this logic of Liberty. 
 
 Here, then, great impartial judge of the future, we rest the law of 
 case. Secession did not destroy the Union, nor the States, nor the liberties 
 
412 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 the Union of States was formed to secure. It only proposed to divide the 
 Union, in order to rescue the States and the liberties of the people from 
 destruction and overthrow. But coercion is the ruthless criminal which has 
 consolidated the Union, enslaved the States, and destroyed the liberties of 
 the people ! 
 
 Secession invaded no State interfered with no right lessened the 
 privileges of no man. Coercion laid waste the States, enslaved the people, 
 murdered their sons, despoiled their daughters, desolated their homes, and 
 burnt up their property ! 
 
 And what is Reconstruction ? It is the practical application of coercion. 
 It is logic turning to facts. It is coercion at its work. It is the torch of 
 the incendiary ; the knife of the assassin ; the fire-arm of the bandit, send 
 ing death-blows to the life of the State, to the heart of society, and to the 
 hopes of civilization, that ignorance and vice may be exalted, and intelli 
 gence and virtue degraded ! 
 
 Do I exasperate ? Look at South Carolina and answer. See the land 
 
 ~ ^j 
 
 of Marion and Sumter ; of Rutledge and Pinckney ; of Calhoun and Butler, 
 the prey and sport of rioting thieves and gluttonous plunderers, whose 
 orgies continue days, months, and years in the face of the nation and under 
 Federal protection ? 
 
 Look at Louisiana ! Behold a sovereign State sentenced to the chain- 
 gang by telegram from Washington, to work at hard labor under negro 
 and carpet-bag drivers ! 
 
 This ! this, is the fruit of coercion ! These are the works of recon 
 struction ! 
 
 Have the people of America no shame ? Has the God of Heaven no 
 wrath ? If coercion and reconstruction shall continue, their fruits will mul 
 tiply until all the people, in agonized remorse, shall cry out : "Surely, 
 several unions were better than one empire, and divided liberty more to be 
 desired than concentrated despotism ! 
 
 Is there a possible remedy for these evils ? I should be uncandid if I 
 did not confess to you, I doubt it. There is no resurrection for dead repub 
 lics, and few have ever been restored to vigor and health after reaching our 
 present state of decline. I fear our people have not more intelligence and 
 virtue than those whose histories we are but repeating. But for one I am 
 willing to make the effort, and I exhort our Southern people to cherish no 
 feeling inimical to success, and omit no duty that may promote it. We 
 have more interest in restoring Constitutional government than any other 
 people, for, if despotism shall come over all, North and South, there is rea 
 son to fear that serfdom of the South to the North will be our darkest por 
 tion. 
 
 You know I never regarded secession as wise in act, for, however legal 
 or just it may, or may not, have been as an abstract right, I never believed 
 it would prove practicable as a remedy. I have never doubted that a bellig 
 erent collision between centralism and Constitutional federalism would, sooner 
 or later, come. But, by the States, in the Union, and/or the liberties of the 
 people, was always my favorite plan to make the fight. But for the sensi- 
 :iveness of slavery we might have made that fight only in the Union. Let, 
 therefore, secession and slavery be buried out of sight, and, though late, let 
 us make one more determined effort, in the forum of reason, and at the 
 ballot-box, to save the treasures we are losing. We should not pull down 
 the temple our fathers built, because thieves and money changers desecrate 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 413 
 
 it. Rather under the inspiring memories of 1776, let us wake up the sleep 
 ing god of patriotism, and cast out the despoilers, and consecrate the tem 
 ple anew to the equality of the States and to the liberties of our children. 
 
 There is but one beginning for this work. We must elevate the states 
 manship of the country. In all republics an imbecile statesmanship has 
 succeeded a civil war, and we have not escaped the scourge. It is because 
 men, at such times, rise into power on passion and hate, and not by 
 merit and worth. If you would purify statesmanship, you must elevate it. 
 Men of intellect, alive with ambition to lift up a falling State, are more apt 
 to be moral, patriotic, and honest, than hypocritical imbeciles, who, dead to 
 the capacity of this higher ambition, are alive only to trade and barter in 
 blood, religion, and prejudice, in order to reap puffs, perquisites, and sala 
 ries ! 
 
 In order to elevate our statesmanship, two things, in my opinion, are 
 indispensable. In the first place, our people must abandon the insane habit 
 of placing men in high civil positions, simply because of military talents or 
 success. Lee was right. It is contrary to the very genius and safety of 
 republican institutions, to place their civil administration in the keeping of 
 men of military aptitude and training. Brave fighting is no evidence of 
 able statesmanship. It is usually evidence of the very contrary. Other 
 wise Captain Jack was the foremost statesman of this age, and, instead of 
 being hanged, ought to have been made President or senator for life. If 
 this habit shall not cease, we shall not have a civil statesman for President 
 this generation. In Congress, too, we have generals, and colonels, and cap 
 tains, and lieutenants, sufficient to make a small army, and scarcely states 
 men enough to form a good committee. I will not allude unkindly to 
 General Grant. However much wrong he may have done otherwise, we, in 
 Georgia, owe him a debt of which I have personal knowledge, and I shall 
 never speak of him unkindly. But I am speaking of a principle, and if 
 General Grant had adopted and acted upon the grand truth uttered by Lee, 
 he would have lived deeper in the affections of his people, and higher in the 
 esteem of mankind, than all the battles he has won and all the Presidential 
 terms he can receive, can ever secure for his name. 
 
 The second thing indispensable to the elevation of our statesmanship, is 
 the reduction of congressional salaries. Upon principle, the legislators of 
 a country, who have in their hands the purse of the people, ought not to 
 have the power to help themselves. I believe Franklin was right, when he 
 desired, by Constitutional provision, to prohibit compensation to members 
 of Congress. I am very sure the propositions of others in the convention, 
 to fix the amount of the compensation in the Constitution, so that the mem 
 bers could not increase their own pay, was full of wisdom. Madison uttered 
 a truth when he said it was an indecent thing for members to fix their own 
 compensation. 
 
 Then, again, high congressional salaries are wrong and hurtful in policy. 
 They excite the merely mercenary with desires to secure the seats, 
 begets scrambling and trading *in every election. Men of high ability 
 will not be parties to such contests. Thus, mercenary men get con 
 trol of the Congress, and, as they are chiefly moved by a passion that is 
 insatiate, if the salary were a hundred thousand dollars, they would use the 
 office to double the sum. This will finally reduce our statesmanship to one 
 governing standard : use money to get office, and use office to get money. 
 With few exceptions, Congress is now but a sad congregation of negroes, 
 
414 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 knaves, and imbeciles, and no people ever won, or preserved, or recovered 
 either liberty or right under such civil leaders. You cannot scatter a flock 
 of carrion birds by railing at them, but if you burn up the stinking carcass 
 that attracts them they will scatter themselves. So, we shall never get rid 
 of these creatures from Congress by portraying their characters. They 
 cannot see the mischief they are doing, and, if they could, they have not 
 manhood enough to be made ashamed. But abolish the high salaries that 
 tempt and feed them, and they will leave the places that furnish to them 
 no other allurements. If high salaries continue, the greatest age of Ameri 
 can statesmanship is in the past. We shall never have another Clay, or 
 Webster, or Calhoun, in the national councils. These great men served 
 willingly on a salary of fifteen hundred dollars and less. The Butlers and 
 Chandlers, with their negro and carpet-bag allies all but the spawn of a 
 mad revolution need seven thousand five hundred dollars to support their 
 dignity ! It is sad to see a republic dying, as other republics have died, 
 and the people still unable to see the evils which work death until life is 
 extinct. 
 
 But one comfort the Southern people and their children must ever have. 
 Whether Constitutional government shall continue or fail ; whether the 
 States shall remain, or be obliterated.; whether liberty shall be recovered, 
 or die the death that knows no waking we shall be vindicated ! If the 
 Union of the States, under Constitutional government, and securing the 
 blessings of liberty, be recovered and perpetuated, the work can only be 
 done by returning to the great principles for which we struggled. The 
 general government must be restrained within the limitations of its Consti 
 tutional delegated powers, and the States restored to the unrestrained con 
 trol of their domestic affairs under their reserved rights, or Union, States, 
 and liberty must perish. If this glorious work shall have success, then, the 
 rejoicings of according States and happy millions from the Atlantic to the 
 Pacific, and from the Lakes to the Gulf, will syllable forever the hallelujahs 
 of Southern triumph ! 
 
 But if blindness, madness, hate, and ambition shall continue coercion 
 and reconstruction as accepted and approved principles of Federal adminis 
 tration, then the wail that shall come up from the universal wreck of 
 Union, States, and liberty, will drown the thunder in loud vindication of 
 Southern wisdom and fidelity. The graves of Davis and Lee will become 
 Meccas for journeying, sorrow-stricken pilgrims of right for ages to come ; 
 and the future historian, reviewing the records your care shall have pre 
 served, will write the epitaph for the Confederate dead : These were the 
 last heroes of freedom in America ! 
 
SPEECH DELIVERED IN THE HALL OF THE HOUSE OF 
 REPRESENTATIVES AT ATLANTA, ON THE EVENING 
 
 OF JANUARY 20, 1875. 
 
 As a preface to this speech, the writer copies a portion of an editorial from the 
 Atlanta Herald : " We present in a complete and authoritative shape this morning, the; 
 speech delivered by the Hon. Benj. H. Hill, before the Georgia Legislature, at the request 
 of a large number of its members. On such a speech as this, any statesman might be 
 willing to go before the country. It is pure and splendid in its diction ; faultless in its 
 sentiment ; absolute in its logic ; grand in its statesmanship, and resistless in its eloquence. 
 Dealing with a subject that would overthrow the equipoise of almost any speaker, we have 
 in this speech, though it rushed impromptu from imprisoned lips, nothing that the most 
 prudent man could wish unsaid. In a brave and convincing way it counsels a calm but 
 not cowardly treatment of the Louisiana question, and it pleads for a patience that shall 
 be born of fortitude and not of abasement. No speech made within our remembrance 
 ever had such an enthusiastic reception ; none ever created a profounder impression. Mr. 
 Hill is the hero of the day." So great was the enthusiasm aroused all over the State by 
 this speech, that there went forth from press and people a unanimous appeal for his elec 
 tion to Congress from the Ninth District in the ensuing election. This appeal of the 
 State was responded to by the people of the Ninth District in spite of the determined 
 effort on the part of politicians to defeat it. In this speech Mr. Hill shows who was a rebel. 
 
 Ladies and Fellow- Citizens : I feel the compliment of the call to address 
 you. It not only implies, but it expresses confidence. Their confidence is 
 the only favor I have ever asked of the people of Georgia. To that I am, 
 and ever have been, entitled, and most entitled when most denied. I feel 
 most profoundly the responsibility that devolved upon me in accepting this 
 call to address you. I would be insincere if I professed to be surprised at 
 the events which have recently seemingly startled the country. I have not 
 been surprised, but I would have been agreeably surprised if those events 
 had not transpired. I shall be still more agreeably surprised if those events 
 do not repeat themselves on a larger scale. I feel embarrassed, however, 
 because I arn confident that the great duty of averting the evils which these 
 events threaten, is with the Northern people. There the issue must be solved. 
 I know, too, that the intelligence and virtue of that people will be sub 
 jected to the severest test. I feel, also, that the discussion which must 
 enlighten their intelligence, and which must awaken the patriotism of that 
 virtue, must take place in the councils of the nation. ^here the different 
 sections, through their champions, meet face to face. There the oppressor 
 and the oppressed look at each other eye to eye, and he who has the truth, 
 must show his manhood to vindicate it. 
 
 The Northern people are not likely to look with much favor upon wl 
 are called ex parte utterances, especially in the Southern States, t am sure 
 that I desire in every possible way to contribute to the success of bhe great 
 issues which I know are now to be precipitated upon the country in t 
 next two years. It would pain me exceedingly for anything to drop from 
 me that could be used for aiding the enemy and discouraging our friends. 
 Nevertheless, my friends, there are some things which I think can 
 erly said here and profitably be said now. And while I feel constrame 
 
 415 
 
416 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 my efforts to address you, and shall make something of an effort to confine 
 myself within the sphere of a limited talk, I shall nevertheless endeavor to 
 make myself perfectly understood in what I shall say. 
 
 The greatest difficulty in the way of saving a people from a threatened 
 danger, is to make that people conscious that the danger is approaching. 
 There is not a sadder feature of the world s history than this, that all people 
 who are destroyed, are destroyed chiefly by their refusal to see the dangers 
 approaching. The word which has been oftener spoken during the last 
 fourteen years than any other word in the English language is, in my opin 
 ion, the word that is least understood by the American people. In Ameri 
 can politics who is a rebel ? Now in Germany, in Russia, in France, even 
 in England, where we get the most, it is true, of the great principles of 
 government, the word rebel has a well-defined signification. The definition 
 in either one of those countries is wholly inappropriate in this. There 
 a rebel is one who resists the government there, government is represented 
 in the king or in the emperor. Here government is the mere machinery, the 
 mere organization for the administration of the laws. Government is not 
 the king ; is not the power, is not the sovereign in America. The question 
 recurs then, in American politics, who is a rebel ? A real rebel ? When 
 the frame rs of the Constitution were about to conclude their work, the ques 
 tion naturally occurred to them, as it did on several occasions during their 
 labors, in what way should they bind those who should undertake to admin 
 ister the government to be faithful to their obligations ! There was some 
 discussion, but finally it was determined that the President and every officer 
 of the government, State and Federal, should take an oath to support the 
 Constitution. Now the inquiry is pertinent, why not take an oath to sup 
 port the Union ? Why not take an oath to support the government ? Why 
 did they not require them to take an oath to preserve liberty? Yet of all 
 these propositions not one of them was adopted. Various suggestions were 
 made. One distinguished gentleman who had taken a large part in framing 
 the Constitution, suggested there should be no oath at all, and he gave this 
 significant reason for it : If the government is administered by good men, 
 no oatli will be necessary ; if by bad men, no oath will be regarded. But it 
 was agreed on all hands, after various suggestions, that there should be an 
 oath. Then what sort of an oath should it be ? Finally, one conclusion 
 was arrived at, adopted, and that was that every officer of this government, 
 State and Federal, should be required to take an oath to support the Con 
 stitution ! 
 
 Now, why, why, why that oath in preference to all others ? Because 
 when they took an oath to preserve the Constitution, and kept that oath, 
 they supported everything else. The Constitution was ordained and 
 established as the means by which the Union was to be made perfect, by 
 which domestic tranquillity was to be secured, by which justice was estab 
 lished, public welfare provided for, and by which the blessings of liberty 
 should be secured to them and their posterity. Therefore they required 
 an oath to support the Constitution, as the terms on which, and the means 
 by which the Union was to be preserved, domestic tranquillity secured, and 
 the blessings of liberty and justice perpetuated. In addition to this 
 requisition to take an oath to support the Constitution, they also provided 
 that this Constitution, and the laws passed in pursuance of it, should be the 
 supreme law of the land ; that is, the only king whose authority all power in 
 America was required to obey, was the Constitution of the country. That 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 417 
 
 was the supreme law. What Constitution ? The written Constitution as 
 adopted, to be supported as the means by which all the other ends of gov 
 ernment were to be secured and perpetuated. 
 
 Now answer me the question, who in American politics is a rebel ? I 
 answer, he, and he only, who is faithless to the Constitution ! Who in 
 American politics is a patriot ? I answer, he, and he only, who is faithful 
 to the Constitution. 
 
 Our fathers exhibited immense wisdom in requiring this oath to support 
 the Constitution. There were two parties in the convention that framed 
 the Constitution from the beginning one represented the extreme idea of 
 a strong centralized government ; the other represented the opposite 
 extreme idea of a loose uncentralized government, with all power obliga 
 tory power in the States. The Constitution is the result of a compromise 
 between those two extremes. Now, it is remarkable that our fathers fore 
 saw, witli wisdom, that while this Constitution was adopted as a compromise 
 measure, the probabilities were that the disciples of the respective theories 
 in the future might seek to impress their several constructions even to the 
 final subversion of the Constitution itself. What was called the States 
 Right party became satisfied, because while the Constitution did incorporate 
 some national features, yet the system of government established was a 
 federal republic. But when the Constitution was submitted to the States 
 for ratification, some of them, to remove doubts on this point, ratified it on 
 condition that a number of amendments should be adopted, one of which 
 was an express declaration that all the powers not delegated to the general 
 government were reserved to the State. From that day forth the govern 
 ment was fixed as a constitutional federal government. 
 
 But there were in that early day men in favor of establishing what they 
 called a strong central government, and the greatest advocates of strong 
 central government camu from New England, because it was the peculiar 
 theory of Puritanism to have the right to meddle in everybody else s busi 
 ness. The idea of living in a government without the right to meddle with 
 everybody s business was contrary to their principles of religion and 
 notions of propriety. Therefore the real enemies of the Constitution came 
 from this school. . . . They have produced nearly all the fanatics of the 
 world anyhow. They have never attacked the Constitution directly. They 
 have labored from the beginning of the government indirectly to centralize 
 it. I mean by indirectly, they have always seized upon subjects of public 
 interest, and sought by the use of those questions to inflame the minds of 
 the people, so as to secure power, and by their power centralize the govern 
 ment. I am not going to give you a detailed history of the struggle nor 
 take up the questions that were raised by this party, for the purpose of 
 using them to accomplish the end proposed. I will say simply here that the 
 one they found most suited to their purpose, was the institution of domestic 
 slavery in the Southern States. That question they made a question of con 
 science, and attacked the institution of slavery vigorously at an early day, 
 and sought to interfere with that institution through the agency 
 Federal Government. But the South always replied to their assaults, 
 is the Constitution that gives the Federal Government no right to interfere 
 with our institution." Our forefathers defended domestic slavery on that 
 ground alone ; it was a matter left to the States. For more than ty year, 
 that question was discussed at various times, and at every favorable oppc 
 tunity the centralists never failed to use it for their purposes. 
 
418 SENATOR 13. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 were always defeated just so long as the Southern States stood squarely by 
 the Constitution, and offered that as a reply to all their assaults. They 
 were sustained by an overwhelming majority of the people of both the 
 South and the North. For the Northern people, though opposed to slavery 
 in the abstract, still reverenced the Constitution and insisted that that was a 
 question to be referred to the States solely for themselves. Several cases 
 arose in which the contest became heated. The Missouri compromise, in 
 1820, is familiar to you all. The question was inflamed to a great deal of 
 heat when we acquired new territory from Mexico. 
 
 You remember the contest in 1851 and 1852, during which time this 
 fanatical party, these enemies of the Constitution, used every effort possible 
 to get power in the government, not so much for the purpose of destroying 
 slavery as for the purpose of centralizing the government and destroying the 
 Constitution, as I will prove directly. Unfortunately, without any just 
 legal reason, yet actually the first advantage which the enemies of the Con 
 stitution acquired upon this subject, was upon the repeal of the Missouri 
 compromise in 1854 and 1855. They got their advantage in this wise ; 
 they charged that slavery, which had hitherto been on the defensive, had 
 now taken the aggressive, and they acquired much influence over the Northern 
 people on that account. . . . But this party acquired its great strength 
 when the Southern people, provoked by the infidelity of the Northern States 
 to the Constitution upon this subject, seceded from the Union. When we 
 seceded, why, of course, we left the government in the hands of these its 
 enemies, and we left our friends in the hands of these enemies also. In all 
 revolutions, so in this the extreme men took the lead. They had learned to 
 hate the South, because the South had so often held up the Constitution as 
 its shield and protection against interference ; and they hated the Constitu 
 tion the more because it was the shield and protection of the South. They 
 had declared it a covenant with hell and a league with the devil, and ap 
 pealed to a higher law. But as soon as the South left the Union, they be 
 came the most wonderful devoted lovers of the Union ever heard of. When 
 they could not control the government they denounced it, but the moment 
 the South left the Union they raised the cry at once that the Union must be 
 preserved. Well, as I say, secession gave them a great opportunity to ac 
 complish their purpose ; therefore they declared that they would make war 
 to preserve the Union they would enforce the law. I merely give you this 
 recital to bring you to the point I am going to discuss. 
 
 They waged war against these States, not because these States had violated 
 the Constitution, for if there is anything that distinguished the Southern 
 people more than any other thing in their entire political history from 1787 
 to 1860, it was undying devotion to the principles of government as declared 
 in the Constitution. Therefore, I have often said, I would defy any man 
 living to-day to point out to me one single instance where a Southern State, 
 or a Southern leading statesman, was ever faithless to the Constitution. 
 Not one. The Southern States left the Union, or sought to leave it, only be 
 cause of the infidelity of the North, under the lead of those fanatics, and 
 they who have been unfaithful to the terms of the Union, seized the oppor 
 tunity of secession to destroy those who had been faithful and who had only 
 resented their infidelity. 
 
 Well, I am not going through the history of the war, but you know, my 
 countrymen, that it was the cry raised at the North that " Union shall be 
 preserved, that we cannot consent to a disruption of the Union," that 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 419 
 
 rallied all parties North to the war. Our friends at the North the friends 
 of the Constitution were placed in this predicament by our unwise seces 
 sion ; they were compelled to tight us, or to fight the Union, and so they 
 fought us, and they did fight. No mistake about that. But they were 
 mistaken, as they are now finding out. When they were fighting us, they 
 were fighting the only party on this continent who were ready to shed 
 blood in defense of the Constitution. Of course, all simple-minded men who 
 supposed that war was waged for the preservation of the Union, took it for 
 granted that when the Union was preserved, the war would end. Why 
 not? and therefore it was that in the Congress of the United States it was 
 over and over declared, solemnly declared, under the sanction of their oaths, 
 approved by their President, endorsed by their State Legislatures that in 
 waging the war for the preservation of the Union they had no intention of 
 impairing the Constitutional rights of the States or the property of the 
 citizens. Under such declarations, they rallied all the Northern people in 
 support of what they called the Union, and of course it was to be expected 
 that when the war ended, and the Union was preserved, everybody would 
 be satisfied. But not so. Just at the time when we began to weaken on 
 account of the unfortunate division in the South, and these infidels to the 
 Constitution saw that we were going to fail, the} - brought forward the pro 
 position that slavery must be abolished. And why ? Why, because slavery, 
 they said, was the cause of all the trouble, and if the war ended, the Union 
 preserved and slavery remaining, as slavery had provoked one war and one 
 secession, it would provoke another, and therefore they should not only 
 preserve the Union but destroy the cause that threatened the Union and 
 they abolished slavery. Of course, then, everybody supposed that when 
 the Union was preserved and slavery abolished, these good men would be 
 satisfied, now they would come to the support of the Constitution. But 
 just as soon as the Union was preserved and slavery abolished, and the 
 Southern people had agreed to both, and were ready to renew their allegi 
 ance to the Constitution, with no more secession and no more slavery, we 
 were met with the startling demand that the Southern States must first be 
 
 O 
 
 reconstructed. 
 
 Well, that was something unheard of. Who gave Congress a right to 
 reconstruct a State ? But it was no use to talk about congressional power 
 under the Constitution then. The conqueror has the power that is, the will 
 of the conqueror became the supreme law instead of the Constitution. 
 Now, as I said to my Northern friends, if the will of the conqueror has be 
 come the supreme "law of the land, certainly while they were engaged 
 in the work of reconstruction, they ought to have taken an oath to support 
 the conqueror and not to support "the Constitution. But the truth is, the 
 haters of the Constitution well knew the Constitution could still live with 
 secession abandoned and slavery abolished, and they had determined it 
 should not live. Therefore they determined to keep up the war on the 
 South by some form, and reconstruction was the form next adopted. 
 
 Well, I will not go over the history of Reconstruction. Thank God, the 
 whole world knows my opinion of "Reconstruction, that is, they would 
 if human language could express it, but human language is too feeble. 
 
 Reconstruction was but an ordeal by which they disfranchised the intel 
 ligence and virtue of the country, and authorized the ignorance and vice of 
 the country to build and control new governments for the people as the 
 only means of keeping these States in accord with Radicalism. 
 
420 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Well, after so long a time, we thought Reconstruction was over. Now 
 surely we will have peace. Surely secession abandoned ; the Union preserved; 
 slavery abolished ; slaves all freemen ; freemen all citizens ; citizens all 
 voters ; voters all rulers. Surely no\v, oh ! now you will come back to the 
 Constitution. Not yet ! But if those who provoked secession and then in 
 augurated war upon the South were satisfied with the Constitution and dis 
 satisfied only with the institution of slavery, why, when slavery was 
 abolished, were they not satisfied ? If they waged war only to preserve the 
 Union, why, when the Union was preserved, were they not satisfied ? If the 
 only object in reconstructing the States was to secure what they called the 
 fruits of the war, why, when the work of reconstruction was complete, were 
 they not satisfied ? No, my countrymen, here is the great truth, and let the 
 people see it. The real cause of dissatisfaction from the beginning has not 
 been on account of slavery or with the Southern master ; the real, under 
 lying cause of dissatisfaction with the leaders of the North in this fanatical 
 crusade has been dissatisfaction with the Constitution itself. Therefore it 
 is they have not been satisfied, and therefore it is they will not be satisfied 
 until the Constitution is absolutely subverted and destroyed. They mean 
 to have a strong government ; they mean a centralized despotism. They 
 have not the manliness to confess it, but their whole history is demonstrative 
 truth of the fact, and the people of the Union will be stupid indeed if they 
 require further proo f to convince them of the fact. 
 
 How greatly were they mistaken who advised us to accept Reconstruc 
 tion as a means of ending the demand. I never believed the demands 
 would end as long as Radicalism was in power. 
 
 So they took their own course as they saw fit, and they refused to be sat 
 isfied. They sent their miserable creatures here to take charge of the ne 
 groes, and plundered the people of the States as long as we had anything 
 to take, and then they issued bonds all over the country and put under mort 
 gage everything that our children and our children s children will be able 
 to make for the next fifty years, and still they are not satisfied. Now, what 
 does this mean ? There is no war, and yet the military is still employed. 
 Reconstruction is over, and yet the States have no freedom. And now 
 interference is as active and bigoted and as aggressive this day as it ever 
 Avas, and more so, for usurpation as it advances always increases both in 
 impudence and rascality. 
 
 You have seen a great deal lately about Louisiana that poor, impover 
 ished, insulted, down-trodden State and you seem to have a great deal of 
 sympathy for Louisiana. Well, she merits the sympathy and admiration 
 of all ; but oh, my friends, are you so thoughtless as to suppose that these 
 rebels against the Constitution have any special hatred for Louisiana? 
 Not at all. They like that State just as well as they do you. They like 
 one State just as well as they do any other State. 
 
 I tell you every stab which the assassin sends to the heart of throttled 
 Louisiana, he is practicing that he may with greater skill stab the next 
 State. They are establishing precedents", because precedents submitted to 
 become law. Now let us go a little into this thing, because it is a subject 
 going to interest this whole country. Every blow struck at Louisiana is 
 aimed at every State in the Union, because every blow at Louisiana is a 
 blow at the Constitution of the Union. 
 
 Now, briefly, in 1872, an election was held in Louisiana. It was evident 
 that the Democratic party, or at least the anti-Radical party, elected their 
 
7/7,9 LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WETTINGS. 421 
 
 governor and their Legislature. It was determined that that election 
 should not stand. But Warmouth, the governor at the time, refused to 
 countenance the movement to reconstruct Louisiana again, and give her a 
 governor and Legislature contrary to the will of the people. 
 
 This radical party does everything "under color of law," and sometimes 
 they manufacture botli law and the color, too. Every usurper in history 
 defends his usurpation according to law. As the governor of Louisiana was 
 opposed to the movement, it became necessary, in order to give the law a 
 color, to apply to another department of government. That necessitated 
 a resort to Dnrell. You have heard of Durell. Kellogg filed his bill in 
 Durell s court and enjoined McEnery from being inaugurated governor. 
 But that would amount to nothing under the lawsof Louisiana, forthe Legis 
 lature had the final count, and if the McEnery Legislature was allowed to 
 organize they would count the vote correctly, and Kellogg would fail. 
 Therefore, it was necessary to get rid not only of McEnery but of the Legis 
 lature also, and Antoine, who was lieutenant governor on the ticket with 
 Kellogg, filed a bill also for the purpose of getting an injunction against 
 what is called the McEnorv Legislature. Now it has been denied in some 
 
 *- C7 
 
 quarters that Durell even interfered with the assembling of the Legislature. 
 I have his order here, I have the bill filed by Antoine, I have the order of 
 Durell passed upon that bill, and here he enjoins one hundred and three 
 members of the House and nineteen in the Senate from taking their seats in 
 the Legislature except as permitted. It was all nonsense to secure the gov 
 ernor and let the Democrats get the Legislature, and by authority of law count 
 the votes and declare McEnery governor ; and the effective order that did 
 the work was the order that interfered with the organization of the Legisla 
 ture. Now what are these gentlemen to do, who say that Durell had juris 
 diction of this matter under the enforcement act ; for the enforcement 
 act expressly provides that it shall not apply to members of the Legislature. 
 I will read Vou what Senator Morton said on this point, because it is said 
 whatever a witness sa3^s against himself must be taken for granted. Here is 
 what Mr. Morton says : 
 
 In the Antoine case, Judge Durell not only assumes to determine who constituted the 
 legal returning board, but prescribe who should be permitted to take part in the organi 
 zation of the Legislature, and to enjoin all persons from taking part in such organiza 
 tions who were not returned by the Lynch board elected ; and this assumption was made 
 in the face of the express provisions of the act of 1870, that its benefits should not extend 
 to candidates for election for Congress or for the State Legislature. 
 
 Now, that is what Morton says. He goes on and says, " His (Durell s) 
 order, issued in the Kellogg case to the United States marshal, to take 
 possession, of the State house, . . . can only be characterized as a gross 
 usurpation." Now, I will give Morton the credit for this. He has always 
 said Durell s order was a gross usurpation. He has supported Kellogg 
 upon other grounds. He has endeavored to keep Kellogg in office, but I 
 must say that even Morton had not the face to say that Durell had juris 
 diction. On the contrary, he says he was guilty of gross usurpation, and 
 that his order can only be characterized as a gross usurpation. What is 
 the effect? You have heard it said that the President is not to determine 
 whether the court has jurisdiction or not that he must presume it to be cor 
 rect. I will give Grant the credit to say that even he never said that >ti- 
 rell had jurisdiction. Now, what is the effect ? I am not going to stop to 
 discuss t his point. What is the effect of a judgment of a court that has 
 
422 Sfi&ATOn B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 no jurisdiction of either the person or the subject matter? What would be 
 the effect of a judgment by Judge Hopkins, of the Atlanta Circuit, against 
 a man in Alabama, touching property in Alabama? What effect would a 
 judgment by Judge Hopkins have in a matter that pertains solely to the 
 Federal court ? There is a great difference between an erroneous judg 
 ment, where jurisdiction exists, and a judgment without jurisdiction. 
 
 But I will not stop to explain to you the difference, because I have tlie 
 difference expressed in one brief sentence, uttered by the greatest judge 
 that ever sat upon the bench in America. 
 
 Chief Justice Marshall, in the Supreme Court of the United States in 
 the glorious days of the Republic, when that court commanded the respect 
 of all mankind, stated the difference very clearly in a few words, and, as it 
 
 / f V 9 
 
 is directly to the point I am discussing, I will read it : 
 
 " The line which separates error in judgment from the usurpation of 
 power, is very definite. In the one case it is a record importing absolute 
 verity. In the other case " that is, in the case of a want of jurisdiction 
 "it is mere waste paper" that is, it is as worthless as a piece of paper on 
 which nothing is written at all. That is what Chief Justice Marshall says. 
 But Kellogg acquired power by virtue of that order, enforced by Grant s 
 bayonets. Of course, all the orders passed by Durell would have been dis 
 regarded if General Grant had not enforced them by the bayonet. Even 
 Warmouth disregarded these orders. He said they were nothing but waste 
 paper. He had the authority of Chief Justice Marshall to say they were 
 waste paper, and in that emergency Grant sent his troops. 
 
 Thus the Kellogg government was established, but it was said that, not 
 withstanding all these things said by the advocates of Kellogg that he 
 was really elected by the people, that they wanted him to be governor, and 
 they would support him in the office, and it was unnecessary to keep him in 
 office by United States forces, and that if the United States forces were 
 withdrawn the people of Louisiana would be satisfied with the Kellogg gov 
 ernment. Well, in September, 1874, they did withdraw the United States 
 troops, and gave the patriots of Louisiana a chance. There is one question 
 not yet settled, and that is, how long Kellogg s government did stand after 
 the United States troops were withdrawn. Some say it stood an hour some 
 say two hours, and some say just long enough for Governor Kellogg to run 
 from his office to the Custom House. But it is agreed on all hands that it 
 did not stand any longer than Kellogg. 
 
 Very well, Grant interfered again, and sent troops and reinstated Kel 
 logg. Now, fellow-citizens, here was a demonstration that the Kellogg 
 government could not stand alone could not stand an hour nobody would 
 support it. To the eternal credit of the colored people of Louisiana be it 
 said, that they had too much honor, too much decent self-respect to support 
 the Kellogg government. 
 
 Well, the people of Louisiana said, we will not resist the United States. 
 Kellogg took the office. Then they organized for another election an elec 
 tion not for governor, but for another^Legislature. They were just in the 
 fix that we were in 1870. The term of the Legislature expired in two years. 
 Kellogg held his office for four years, and they had to have a new election 
 for a Legislature. The election came off and now look at this picture ! Our 
 friends went to the polls under every disadvantage. Kellogg had his own 
 election law. Kellogg had his own officers to manage that. They were 
 assisted by the United States marshals and supervisors and yet under his 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WHITINGS. 423 
 
 own law, with his own officers, supported by United States troops, our people 
 went to the poles and overthrew his dynasty by a majority of ten thousand 
 votes ! I am stating facts that I get from the report of the congressional com 
 mittee itself, one of the most interesting papers I have ever read in American 
 history two of them Republicans, but, strange as it may seem to you, 
 exceedingly honest men ! They report that at that election, with all these 
 disadvantages, the conservatives elected their Legislature (the House of 
 Representatives) by 29 majority out of 111. That is, the Democrats elected 
 70 members, and the Republicans 41. That is what this committee say, and 
 they say that the election was fair and peaceable, and legal in all respects. 
 
 Now, there was trouble ! Why, if this Legislature went into power, the 
 idea was that Kellogg would be impeached or rendered powerless, and they 
 determined that this should never be, and they took charge of the returning 
 board. I am not going into details ; it is enough to say that after six or 
 eight weeks manipulating the returns, this board threw enough Democrats 
 out and put Radicals in, till Kellogg says the result was 53 and 53. But 
 they said he put in one Democrat who was not a "staying Democrat." I do 
 not know what kind of a Democrat that was. I reckon it was one that 
 would go on either side to get an office. I have seen a good many of them 
 myself. Another report said that the Radicals had 54 and the Democrats 
 52. Anyhow, they thought they had it, so that if they could not control it 
 they could at least prevent the dethronement of Kellogg. 
 
 Well, when the Legislature met, on the 4th of January, it turned out one 
 Republican was not there. He had been stealing something a very strange 
 thing for a Radical to steal something. Anyhow, the committee, the con 
 gressional committee, cannot say he was charged with stealing, but they 
 soften the word and say he "embezzled." That was unfortunate this fellow 
 that had " embezzled " something. When the Legislature met, he was not 
 there. The Democrats had the advantage. 
 
 The committee say there was doubt about it ; that he was arrested on a 
 warrant for embezzlement by the officer of that Radical government. By 
 this absence and superior quickness our friends secured the organization of 
 the Legislature and elected their officers, and then, having a majority, they 
 also swore in five members whom the returning board had referred to the 
 Legislature. And thus were the Democrats in power at last, by five or six 
 majority, after several weeks manipulation of the Radicals to prevent it. 
 What was to be done? After all this rascality, after their six months 
 orgies of* infamy for the purpose of defeating the will of the people, it seemed 
 at last, by the unfortunate, unheard of stealing by a Radical, the Democrats 
 got the power. That was not to be endured. The result you have heard. 
 Soon after they organized, the military was sent in, and absolutely removed 
 the Democratic members by force. Don t you see the reason of this wrong ? 
 Don t you see why it was one of the greatest usurpations in history 
 
 It is an essential feature in America, as well as in England, that each 
 house of a legislative body shall be the sole judge of the election, qualifica 
 tion, and returns of its members, else there is no independence in 
 branch of the government. If anybody else, judiciary or executive, has 
 right to revfew the actions of the Legislature, as to determine who are 
 qualified members duly elected, of course the independence of body is 
 
 gone ; and according to the Constitution of the United States each house i 
 be the sole judge of who are its members, and also, I think, a similar pr< 
 ion exists in the Constitution of every State in the Union, certainly in 
 
424 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Constitution of the State of Louisiana. Now, the question who the mem 
 bers of that Legislature were, belongs exclusively to that body. They did 
 determine ; and according to the report of this congressional committee, 
 they determined rightly on the merits of the question ; but even if they 
 did not, the military had no right to interfere ; for the moment you allow 
 the government to interfere, that moment you put the Legislature in the 
 power of the executive. 
 
 Two hundred and fifty years ago the House of Commons wrested from 
 the House of Lords and the king the right to sit in judgment, solely, on the 
 "election returns, and qualifications* of the members of that body ; and 
 from that day to this it has been conceded to be the established, Constitu 
 tional, universal right of legislative bodies. That right has been destroyed 
 in Louisiana. Their house determined its own organization. That house 
 determined its own members. The determination did not suit the powers 
 at Washington, and General Sheridan was sent there, and at Governor Kel- 
 logg*s request this Legislature was interfered with and five members taken 
 out by force. Now, if this can continue there, right there is an end of all 
 independence, and, consequently, of all power not only in the State Legisla 
 ture but in State government. For if the Legislature be not independent, 
 the State is powerless. It can have no will except as it expresses it through 
 its Legislature. 
 
 I go on. Xow tell me, my friends, did they disperse the Louisiana Legis 
 lature to save the Union ? Did Durell pass his midnight order to save the 
 Union ? Did they do it to preserve the Constitution of the country ? Did 
 they do it to complete the work of Reconstruction ? Tell me I appeal to 
 the intelligence of the American public tell me why, at this day, the gov 
 ernment at Washington, the dominant party, still finds it necessary to inter 
 fere and control the Legislatures of sovereign States? There is but one 
 answer to be given. It is to enable them to keep the power in this country 
 in a central government without regard to the Constitution of the country. 
 Xow, that is bad enough, but I am dwelling too much, for there is much I 
 desire to say. I want to give you the history briefly, and the reasons why 
 the Constitution was violated, so that you will understand it. You under 
 stand why it was unconstitutional for them thus to interfere in Louisiana. 
 But my friends, bad as is this view, there is a darker one behind. Do you 
 believe, are you stupid enough to suppose that this iniquity has been perpe 
 trated because of any special hatred to Louisiana ? No. It means you ; it 
 means all the Southern States ; it means all the Union ; and it is intended 
 as a blow to the whole country. This man, Sheridan, sent a telegram to 
 Washington City, and what is in it ? He says that the spirit of defiance to 
 the law is uncontrollable, and there is but one way to stop it. He did not 
 smy the reaction was any defiance : he said but the spirit of defiance. How 
 Sheridan could read anybody s spirit, I don t know, but mark the language. 
 He is an officer, and a high officer in the United States army ; he says he 
 would suggest that Congress pass a law declaring a large portion of tbe 
 people of Louisiana and othef States bandits, that they might be tried by 
 court-martial. And then, as if supposing Congress might not be willing to 
 pass such a law, he said that if the President would proclaim them bandits, 
 the rest might be left to him. I will not indulge in epithets, but the idea 
 that an American officer should suggest the thought that citizens could be 
 declared bandits by Presidential proclamation, then tried by him, and shot 
 by order of a court-martial ! Is it possible for language to "concentrate the 
 
HIS LIFE. SPEECHES, ASD WRITINGS. 4-2-3 
 
 essence of tyranny more strongly in words? There is nothing, I fearlessly 
 assert, in the history of Xero or Caligula more absolutely infamous. There 
 is our Constitution which our fathers framed, and which this officer swore 
 to support. And what does that Constitution say ? That no person shall 
 be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime, except by 
 indictment or presentment of a grand jury, unless in land or naval service. 
 
 He has requested, in the teeth of that, that the President shall issue a 
 proclamation declaring whole classes criminals, and leave the rest to him, 
 Sheridan. Then there is another clause that every criminal trial shall be by 
 an impartial jury, and in the State and district where committed. This 
 proposal of Sheridan strikes down the trial by jury and subjects the citi 
 zens to trial by court-martial. Can the spirit of banditti be worse ? I am 
 stating the facts and telling you the manner in which this violates the Con 
 stitution. This dispatch of General Sheridan s, followed by his letter of 
 justification, would not of itself amount to anything except to prove that 
 Sheridan knew nothing about law, and cared less ; that he knew nothing 
 about human rights, and cared less ; that he knew nothing about the Con 
 stitution of the country, and cared less for his oath to support it. But the 
 alarming feature is that the President of the United States sends in 
 a solemn official message to Congress wherein, while he does not de 
 clare his wish or right to issue the proclamation, he yet absolutely goes 
 into an argument to justify the dispatch, and apologized for it on account 
 of what he calls the outrages in the Southern States. What greater out 
 rage than this dispatch, and this approval of it, can human wickedness con 
 ceive. 
 
 It is the darkest chapter in the history of the country which records 
 that the Executive justifies a suggestion that citizens be declared bandits by 
 Presidential proclamation, and tried by court-martial, in the teeth of the 
 Constitution that Executive has sworn to support, protect, and defend. I 
 tell you, it marks the darkest era in American history. You can never com 
 prehend fully its danger or its enormity. And he goes so far as to say that 
 he has no doubt that if Congress should pass a law, as Sheridan suggests, 
 these troubles would all cease ; that is, end troubles by subverting the Con 
 stitution ! Secure peace by destroying liberty ! Punish crime by official 
 perjury, throusrh the assassination of Constitutional government ! Who is 
 the rebel ? Who shows a spirit of defiance to all law, and a reckless disre 
 gard of all rights? Sheridan, we are told, is no lawyer ; neither is Grant. 
 And here is this great curse of the country, that men are rushing into high 
 positions whose duties they do not understand, and whose responsibilities 
 they do not regard. We have an age of military stateship and civil gov 
 ernment absolutely destroyed, and eveiything, in time of peace, in absolute 
 dominion to military power. 
 
 A still more alarming fact is, that their monstrous propositions are actually 
 defended and justified by the leaders of the party, in Congress and through 
 out the United States. That lawyers like Morton and Conkling and Ed 
 munds should forget their oath, and get up before the people and justify 
 these bold, fearless, and despotic propositions passes comprehension. It only 
 shows to what extent the spirit of usurpation has gone, and ought to alarm 
 the American people of the threatening danger to their institutions, 
 is the thing to end ? Think you it will end in Louisiana ? My countrymen, 
 you cannot mistake the purpose of all this conduct. It has been manifea 
 from the beginning. It will not stop with Louisiana unless the people now 
 
426 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 frown it down by an indignation unparalleled in this country. Already a 
 special committee has been appointed to see what further repressive legisla 
 tion is necessary for the Southern States, and we are told that the committee 
 is now absolutely discussing the proposition of undoing all that has been 
 done ; that is unreconstructing Reconstruction and reconstructing again. 
 Why, you know they said when they commenced Reconstruction, that we were 
 outside of the law, and the idea is to remand us back to dependence on their 
 power. The very idea is monstrous ; it points to the end to which this 
 country, under this party, is going. It proves as clearly as can be proved 
 that this party never went into this war to preserve the Constitution ; that 
 they never went into this war solely to abolish slavery. I tell you they have 
 conducted this government, from the day the Southern people left for the 
 purpose of perpetuating themselves in power, and they are determined to 
 pepetuate themselves in power if they trample upon the Constitution and 
 every State in the United States to accomplish the result. What is the 
 prospect of success ? That is the material inquiry for you and me. I am 
 delighted to see that a great many of the more intelligent and patriotic 
 citizens of the Republican party North have taken this matter in hand. In 
 Boston the spirit of liberty is reviving. That great lawyer, Evarts, has spoken 
 words that ought to commend him to every patriot in the United States. I 
 am glad to see Republicans coming out against the subversion of the Con 
 stitution, for every blow at Louisiana is a blow at every State in this Union. 
 I have some faith that the Northern people, who have been so long the 
 victims of a raging storm of passion, are now awakening to their senses, and 
 will see that the miserable party of Constitution haters they have nursed is 
 under the lead of the greatest rebels, and the only rebels who have really 
 caused all our trouble. And yet, these men, that thus trample upon the Con 
 stitution undei* the solemnity of their oaths, which they take when they take 
 their seats in Congress, have the effrontery to get up there and, in the very 
 same breath with which they justify these enormous violations of the Con 
 stitution, talk to Southern men about being rebels. 
 
 Secession was a mistake a terrible mistake, but secession was no crime. 
 It violated no oaths ; it trampled upon no individual rights ; it dispersed no 
 Legislature ; it throttled no State ; it sought to shed no blood ; it burned no 
 cities ; it invaded no homes ! Radicalism is no mistake. It is deliberate, 
 intentional, wicked, ever increasing crime ; it has trampled upon ten thou 
 sand oaths to support the Constitution. It deified the Union as a fact that 
 it might destroy the Union as a principle, under pretense of reconstructing 
 the States. It has sworn to. support the Constitution only to seize upon 
 power to enable it to subvert the Constitution ; under pretense of restoring 
 peace, it has blighted the country with war, poverty, and sorrow. 
 
 It hns burned cities ; it has dispersed Legislatures ; it has robbed the 
 poor ; plundered the helpless ; punished the innocent, and it has chained 
 liberty to the car of tyranny. I arraign Radicalism to-night before the bar 
 of this outraged country as the only real, intentional rebel in American his 
 tory. It is a rebel against the Constitution of our fathers. It is a rebel 
 against the sovereignty of the States. It is a rebel against the domestic 
 tranquillity which the Constitution was intended to insure. It is a rebel 
 against every principle of justice, and a rebel against every blessing of lib 
 erty. Will Northern people see it? Can they wake up to see it? I be 
 lieve they can. I believe they will ; at least I have some hope of it. It 
 is time for the work to begin. The great final struggle to settle the ques- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WHITINGS. 427 
 
 tion whether Constitutional liberty on this continent shall be continued or 
 not, is to be fought in 1876. Can it be successfully fought at the ballot? 
 I warn the country now that Radicalism will never yield its grasp of power 
 at the bidding of the votes of the people, save that vote amount to a popu 
 lar revolution.* Don t you imagine, my friends, that this monster against 
 every right is going to yield its morbid appetite for power at the bidding 
 of a bare majority of the people. Never ! never ! 
 
 That is what it is now preparing for, and I tell you the same power that 
 tli rot tied Louisiana will throttle the electoral college of those States and 
 keep the government in their hands, notwithstanding the ballot, and all 
 under the color ef the law, too. I want the mind of the American people 
 directed to one inquiry it is a great inquiry, a glorious inquiry ! Oh ! I 
 look forward to the discussion with real rapture ! Who, in American his 
 tory, is a rebel ? Is it a man who tramples upon the Constitution, or a man 
 who simply resents such infidelity by seeking to get away from such a 
 party ? To what extent this rebel power may go in defying the will of the 
 people, no one can say. Look what it has done in Louisiana. Look at the 
 report of the Congressional committee. Stores and property selling for 
 taxes. Residences in that beautiful city of New Orleans selling for 
 taxes ! 
 
 In the interior, property is actually offered for taxes, and that amount 
 cannot be had. The people impoverished, the Legislature dispersed, the 
 State powerless ; in the interior counties the committee tells us the only 
 white Republicans are office-holders, and in several instances there is not a 
 single Republican but one family, and they all hold offices ! That is why 
 they are Radicals ; for the same reason that carrion crows like carrion, and 
 they care not what maybe the wrongs to others, so they get it. That is the 
 condition of Louisiana. Look at your prostrate sister, and see what Georgia 
 has escaped. Georgia narrowly escaped, in 1871, the same fate that overtook 
 Louisiana in 1872, and again the other day. It could have been done easier 
 in Georgia, for in Louisiana Governor Warmouth was opposed to it ; there 
 fore, they resorted to Durell ; but in Georgia, in 1871, the then so-called 
 governor was not only willing, but exceedingly anxious to enter upon the 
 work. Do you think Georgia was saved by accident? Such results are 
 never attained by accident. Was she saved by the ballot ? Did not 
 Louisiana have the ballot also in 1872 ? Does not the committee say she 
 elected a majority in the House of Representatives again in 1874, and yet, 
 where is she now"? The public man in America who has not understood 
 from the beginning that the whole point and power as well as danger of 
 Radicalism lies in the fact that they expect to perpetuate their power by 
 force and in spite of the ballot-box, has been a stupid public man, and not 
 fit to be a public counselor. Now, Georgia was saved in 1871 by keeping 
 off the heavy hand of Federal interference. How it was done is not now 
 proper time to say. Some have said sneeringly that I said I did it. I never 
 said I did it, but I say one thino- my slanderers did not do it. I will not stop 
 to tell what part I acted, but throughout the day of trouble my ears were 
 saluted by but one sound from the rear, and that was slander and calumny 
 from the people I served. But let that pass ; you shall have that history in 
 due time. At all events, Georgia was saved by exactly the reverse process 
 by which Louisiana was lost. Louisiana was lost by Federal interference, 
 and Georgia was saved by Federal non-interference. I will say this much. 
 
 * A remarkable prediction of the fraudulent judgment of the Electoral Commission. 
 
428 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 I was actuated by no selfish purpose and equally was not intimidated by the 
 war upon rue. I had nothing in view but the rescue of my native State 
 from the domination of Radicalism. 
 
 How Grant came to be so kind, and I admit he was kind, is the question 
 you are some day to understand. 
 
 Fellow-citizens, I look to the contest of 1876 not only as the most impor 
 tant that ever occurred in American history, but as the most important in 
 the history of the world ; for if the people of the country cannot be 
 aroused to give an overwhelming vote against this Republican party, it will 
 perpetuate itself in power in the United States by precisely the same means 
 as the President has taken in Louisiana, and the people will fc>e powerless to 
 prevent it except they go to war. If we fail with the ballot-box in 1876 liy 
 reason of force, a startling question will present itself to the American peo 
 ple. I trust we will not fail ; I hope the Northern people have had a suffi 
 cient subsidence of passion to see this question fairly. I think they will ; I 
 trust they will. The indications are in our favor. In truth, the majority of 
 the North were always in favor of the Constitution. 
 
 They were in favor of Constitutional government, they were in favor of 
 Constitutional liberty, but they have been carried away by the raging storm 
 of passion, and, by the unfortunate secession of the South, taken posses 
 sion of by fanatical leaders. Led on under the miserable delusion that they 
 were preserving the Union, and keeping down rebellion, they have been aid 
 ing and rewarding the only rebels in America in the work of destroying the 
 Constitution. 
 
 There is the point ; they must now be able to see. If they will not see 
 it ; if they will still be blind ; if poor Louisiana cannot teach them that this 
 party means the destruction of Constitutional government on this continent, 
 then, indeed, the great question, and the only question behind for their 
 thought is the one that must be propounded, and from which there is no 
 escape. That question is, is the Constitution of our fathers worth blood ? 
 Will you have war or despotism ? Will you have blood or empire? That 
 is the question. If you appeal to the ballot-box, it will fail unless the peo 
 ple rally by an overwhelming majority, such as in the majesty of its irresisti 
 ble power shall sweep rebellion from the offices of the government by the 
 very breath of its indignation. Nothing else can save it. Nothing else will 
 save it. The next Congress of the United States is in importance over every 
 preceding Congress from the adoption of the Constitution to the present 
 time. The debates of the next Congress must give shape to the presidential 
 election. They should be wise, burning, and patriotic, and in the wisdom 
 of those debates the Northern people must receive enlightened intelligence 
 that will enable them to rise and save the liberties of the country. 
 
 To this dreadful issue I have looked with earnestness for years. I tell 
 you, my friends, there is no peace for this country until Radicalism is 
 crushed ; not only crushed but despised ; not only despised but made 
 infamous forever throughout America. But oh, how r my heart in this trying 
 hour forgives all the strife of the past, and goes out with patriotic affection 
 to every Northern man who wakes to the reality of the situation, and says 
 that at last he has discovered that the only true friend of the Union is the 
 true friend of the Constitution. What an occasion for us ! What shall 
 we, of the South, do ? We are powerless in one sense, but there is much we 
 can do. Let us now, everywhere in the South, habitually speak of the Con 
 stitution and the Union under it with that old reverence and love that dis 
 tinguished us in the days that are past and gone. I say to-night, there was 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 420 
 
 not a single hour in American history when the Southern heart was not true to 
 that Constitution. When the signal of war was given in Massachusetts in 
 the first revolution, Georgia was one of the first to march to the fight of 
 Massachusetts for the liberties of all. 
 
 If we must have war ; if we cannot preserve this Constitution and Con 
 stitutional government by the ballot ; if force is to defeat the ballot ; if the 
 war must come God forbid that it should come but if it must come ; if 
 folly, wickedness ; if inordinate love of power shall decree that America must 
 save her Constitution by blood, let it come. I am ready. 
 
 But let one thing be distinctly understood, that if another war shall 
 come, we of the South will rally under the old flag of our fathers. It always 
 was our fla^. We were never faithless to it, and our enemies were never 
 faithful to it. 
 
 In 1860 some of you may have heard me in the capitol at Milledgeville, 
 when I told you then that this spirit of enmity to the Constitution would 
 one day produce war in this country. There was no escape from it. The 
 destruction of slavery was a pretext. The whole purpose was to change the 
 character of the government and Constitution of this country, and I told you 
 this, with all the earnestness of my nature, to fight first for the Constitution 
 in the Union, and if we could not save the Constitution in it, then was time 
 enough to go out. 
 
 You would not agree to the proposition. You insisted upon going out. 
 I do not chide you. You were unfortunate. You were excited. You were 
 mistaken ; you did wrong to your friends at home, to yourselves, and to your 
 friends at the North. You threw the power of the government into the 
 hands of the enemies of us all. They used that power to crush you and 
 your friends in the North, and they are determined to crush until they 
 crush out all the Constitutional liberty in the country. You know I was 
 faithful ; that I stayed by you till the last hour ; that from the time Georgia 
 seceded, till Lee s surrender, I never did an act or said a word or had a 
 thought that was not faithful to our side. 
 
 The same old enemy is still on the warpath against Constitutional gov 
 ernment and the sovereignty of the States. Under the false pretext of 
 preserving the Union, this enemy has deluded the North and victimized the 
 South; and now, insolent with success, is seeking to engulf all the liberties 
 of the North and the South. Patriots everywhere must wake up to their 
 designs, and forget and forgive all the errors, mistakes, and strifes of the 
 past. Let us have no more of slavery, no more of secession, no more sec 
 tional crimination ; let us all, who love the Constitution, unite and save the 
 country by ballot if possible ; and if force, under pretext of any kind, 
 shall attempt to defeat the voice of the people at the ballot-box, let every 
 patriot be ready to march under the old Stars and Stripes to the grave or 
 to victory. Let us of the South go where we ought to have gone at the 
 first, and where, if we had gone, we should have crushed out this monster 
 power. 
 
 In the mean time, while patriots all over the country are awaiting and 
 preparing for the ^reat deciding election of 1876, oppressions will continue 
 upon the South, and how shall we deport ourselves ? On this point I wish 
 to be distinctly understood. During the process of executing Reconstruc 
 tion, beginning in 1867, I did not advise the Southern people to resist the 
 government, but I did urge them not to consent to Reconstruction, for that 
 would have disgraced us as a people. I insisted that Reconstruction should 
 
430 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 be both the work and the infamy of our enemies. The process of Recon 
 struction fixed upon us nominal rulers, but real plunderers and robbers. In 
 1870 the time had come to consider how we should get rid of these crea 
 tures. I never wrestled with any proposition with a more earnest, unselfish, 
 even self-sacrificing purpose. I made two visits to the North to learn pub 
 lic sentiment as it was and as it was likely to be. I found a great number 
 of Republicans utterly opposed to the centralizing tendency of their party 
 under its Radical rulers. But these men would not support the Democratic 
 party because they feared, under the platform of 1868, the Democracy 
 would revolutionize backward to secession and slavery. I found also that 
 the portion of the platform of 1868 which declared Reconstruction revolu 
 tionary, null and void, was only a sentiment with the Democrats, and not a 
 principle in action. These facts put together brought me to the conclusion 
 that in 1872 the Democracy would modify their platform, and recognize 
 Reconstruction as accomplished facts ; and that patriotic Republicans at the 
 North would then begin to join the Democrats to arrest the Radical revo 
 lution to absolutism in some way. 
 
 This conclusion caused me to write the letter of December, 1870, advising 
 you to submit to the Constitution as amended, and . go to work to avert 
 further wrongs. I believed this position would aid me in the struggle to get 
 rid of Radical rule in Georgia, by keeping off Federal interference, and I 
 was not mistaken. Many of you abused me very much then. You ought 
 to be ashamed of it. I warned you that you would be ashamed of it, and so 
 you are. You did not then see the question as I saw it, only because you 
 had not studied it as I had. I saw then it was the only way out of our 
 troubles. Well, time has done its work, and you are all up with me now. 
 Everybody says submit. Nobody cries "nullity" now. I fear I must now 
 admonish you not to go too far. It must not become abject. We must 
 submit to the laws, right or wrong. We must cheerfully give all rights to 
 all races and colors. We must not resist the authority of the United States, 
 even though they cheat the ballot-box, and force usurpers and robbers in 
 office over the votes and the will of our people. Let us do all these things 
 and wait patiently for the awaking patriotism of the Northern people to re- 
 dress our wrongs. But beyond this I will not advise submission. I will not 
 advise that we give notice in advance that we will submit to be treated as 
 criminals. Never ! No honorable Northern man will ask it, nor respect us 
 if we grant it. If Congress, by act, shall declare us, or Grant by procla 
 mation adjudge us, to be bandits, and leave the rest to Sheridan, and he 
 begins to handcuff, court-martial, and shoot citizens of the South, I will not 
 advise freemen to submit to it ! I want the North to have freedom. I am 
 willing to vote with them, and if necessary fight with them for our common 
 freedom, but I am not willing that the North shall have freedom on condi 
 tion that we first become slaves. In a word, I am willing to advise our 
 people to submit to everything that patriots and freemen can submit to and 
 preserve honor, but I am not willing to see the Constitution subverted that we 
 may be treated as bandits and outlaws, and advise our people to submit to 
 that ; nor do I believe the Northern people will require or permit such humili 
 ation. If they do require or will permit it, then all honor as well as liberty 
 is lost, and there is nothing to hope for by any submission. We catch up 
 the old slogan of our enemies and read it, and turn to its authors and say, 
 : This country this whole country must be all free or all slave ! " 
 
 We will in all things deport ourselves as patriots, and respect and pro- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 431 
 
 tect the rights of all men ; we will submit to the accomplished facts of the 
 past, whether we approve them or not ; we will join our Northern brethren 
 to restore the Constitution as it is over all the country ; we will unite with 
 them at the ballot-box to redeem the country from its present thraldom and 
 its threatening future ; we will help them unchain all the States and pre 
 serve the liberties of all men. If force shall be employed by the enemies of 
 the Constitution by the rebels against Constitutional government to de 
 feat the will of the people through the ballot-box, we are willing to march 
 with them as common brethren, under a common flag, to preserve our com 
 mon country, Union, and Constitution. But we of the South will inaugu 
 rate no war. We shall resist every attempt to provoke or force us first into 
 the collision. We insist that the roll call for volunteers to defend the Con 
 stitution shall begin at Bunker Hill. Then let it go to Lexington, Con 
 cord, Saratoga, Brandywine, and Trenton. As it crosses the Potomac, let it 
 be repeated at Manassas, and Chancellorsville, and Richmond, and Chicka- 
 mauga, and Shiloh, and me thinks the very dead will leap up and answer ! 
 
 My Southern friends, how I take comfort from that beautiful law of a 
 wise and merciful Providence, that patient virtue, sooner or later, shall have 
 its reward. We have endured, we have struggled, we have made mistakes, 
 but all our mistakes were on the side of liberty and for what we believed 
 was the cause of Constitutional government. We have paid the penalty 
 of our mistakes most cruelly. Thank God, there is a logic in events which 
 human intentions cannot control. 
 
 There is a Providence in the world which the human will cannot restrain ; 
 one of them is that patient virtue, enduring right, suffering courage, shall 
 one day have their reward. I believethat day is dawning for us. I believe 
 the time is coming, if we be true to ourselves, if we bury the strifes of the 
 past, and have but one honest, longing, earnest desire to restore the Consti 
 tution of our fathers, and preserve liberty for all, that we shall find 
 a great cloud of witnesses at the North rising up for our rescue and 
 ready to accord us justice as patriots. When the victory shall begin ; when 
 the sins of the Radical party shall once begin to be exposed, oh, what 
 infamy awaits them! What pen can describe it? We have only to recite 
 a record of their deeds, of their violated oaths, of their brutality, of their 
 hypocrisy, to sink them deeper into infamy than was ever visited upon any 
 party in history. As they shall sink, you shall rise. The reawakened and 
 reunited patriotism of all sections will enkindle a flame in this country that 
 will burn up forever all spirit of rebellion to the Constitution ; and this 
 American Haman Radicalism so bigoted, so brutal, so insolent, will be 
 brought to the scaffold which himself has erected for our common Constitu 
 tion, and Northern patriots will cry out, " Let them be hanged, let them bo 
 hanged ! " 
 
 i 
 
SPEECH DELIVERED IN ATLANTA, GA., MAY 12, 1875. 
 
 Mr. Hill had been recently elected to Congress from the Ninth District, and the re 
 joicing of the people throughout the State was unprecedented. In Atlanta the citizens 
 were wild with joy, and gave evidence of their enthusiasm in firing cannon, parading 
 the streets, etc. In compliance with their enthusiastic demand, Mr. Hill delivered this 
 speech. It is an admirable address, full of sound sense and wise utterances. It abounds 
 with lofty sentiment, such as " There must be no handcuffed sovereignties at Liberty s 
 Centennial," and patriotic axioms such as, " If the men of the North will covenant that 
 the Union shall be Constitutional, the men of the South will covenant that it shall be 
 eternal." The people of the South looked to Mr. Hill s election to the national council 
 with great expectations. They regarded him as the long-delayed champion of Southern 
 history and civilization. They looked to him to defend the purposes of the South and to 
 uphold the honor of his people. They regarded him as the first representative of his 
 section, who not only had the ability, but was fully equipped to make her defense. He 
 seemed to feel the immense responsibility of his position, and throughout the speech 
 there breathes a tone of calmness, conservatism, and wisdom. There appears no personal 
 elation, but an earnest consecration of purpose to meet the high expectation of his people, 
 and to restore a Union of love. 
 
 Ladies, Friends, and Fellow-citizens: It would be utterly vain for me to 
 attempt to find language to express my appreciation of this greeting, and I 
 shall not make the effort. I am very far, however, from appropriating it 
 as only a compliment to myself. I accept this demonstration as evidence 
 of the interest which the people are very naturally feeling in the great issues 
 which are soon to break, in all their force, upon the country. 
 
 The recent election in the Ninth Congressional District of this State, over 
 the results of which you are pleased to rejoice, was remarkable for many rea 
 sons. To many of the reasons which make this election remarkable, I will not 
 here allude. I will now state only a few of the lessons taught, which I think it 
 important for the public to understand. In the first place, let it be dis 
 tinctly understood that the people of the Ninth District, by this election, 
 have expressed their most emphatic approval of sound, orthodox Demo 
 cratic principles. And this indorsement has not come too soon. It was 
 needed. If Democracy in this day means anything, it means that the pow 
 ers of the Federal Government are derivative and not inherent are dele 
 gated and not self-produced. It necessarily follows that a power not found 
 in the lists of those delegated, and not necessary to one so formed, does not 
 exist. The Constitution, too, was made for war as well as for peace. All 
 the powers intended to be given for war as well as for peace are written in 
 the covenant. Nor can war enlarge the powers, nor release from the obli 
 gation to support the covenant. Therefore, neither in time of war, nor as 
 a consequence of war, can the general government, nor any department or 
 officer of it, go outside of the Constitution to find power or authority. To 
 get outside of the Constitution is to get outside of existence itself, as far 
 as the general government is concerned. 
 
 The theory that " the conqueror has a right to prescribe terms to the con 
 quered" has no application whatever to the Federal Government and the 
 States composing it. It is a provision only of the laws of nations, and even 
 there has only a limited application. If the United States conquered Mexico, 
 the conqueror could prescribe certain terms to the conquered. But the 
 
 432 
 
HIS LIFE SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 433 
 
 United States have no right, authority, or power under the Constitution, to 
 conquer one of their own States. That would be to conquer part of them 
 selves. If they can conquer one State, they can conquer all the States ; 
 that is, conquer themselves, and thus destroy their own existence as well 
 as authority. If the general government can use force on a State at all, 
 it can only do so to enforce its Constitutional authority and no more. The 
 late war was not waged to conquer States. It was waged to preserve the 
 Constitutional authority of the Union, and the result cannot legitimately 
 exceed both the authority and the purpose. It is to this great heresy the 
 conqueror can prescribe terms for the conquered we owe all the troubles 
 of the past ten years. It has cursed the country more than did secession 
 and war. It has been the fountain of unlimited powers in the Federal Gov 
 ernment and of immeasurable wrongs upon the people. The assertion and 
 denial of this heresy constitutes the great fundamental issue between the 
 Radical and Democratic parties, and the final determination of that issue 
 must settle the question whether we shall have a central government of 
 unlimited or limited powers. During the late canvass I was shocked to hear 
 men who boasted that they were born Democrats, had always been Demo 
 crats, and want to be Democrats, actually indorsing this heresy. I was neither 
 slow nor timid in denouncing the heresy, and the people have responded 
 with a voice that can neither be mistaken nor disregarded. 
 
 In the second place, I wish it to be understood that this election is not an 
 expression by the people against Democratic organization. No man can be 
 more in favor of organization than myself, nor would I have permitted the 
 use of my name against a regular nominee. But it must be admitted that 
 very many of the best Democrats in the State are losing all patience with 
 conventions. Why ? Because they believe these conventions have been, 
 are being used by political intriguers and traders, to defeat the will of 
 the people, and to secure triumph to rings and combinations. There is too 
 much reason for these complaints. The worst enemies of conventions and of 
 the Democratic party are the men who use conventions to control the p^arty 
 for such selfish and unpatriotic purposes. The best friends of the conven 
 tions and of the party are those who will see to it that conventions shall be 
 used to express the will of the people and secure concert of action in the 
 party. We must remedy these evil uses of conventions, and not destroy the 
 system itself. We must drive out the traders and not destroy the temple. 
 This is exactly the meaning of the verdict rendered by the people of the 
 Ninth District. This result shows that those who, by combinations made 
 themselves a nominal majority in the Gainesville convention, represented 
 less than a third of the voters. I will not say this evil in the Gainesville 
 convention was the result of intentional intrigue, but I only say the evil 
 existed, and it has been rebuked and repudiated by a misrepresented people, 
 and that it is the evil and not a proper convention system which they have 
 rebuked and repudiated. 
 
 In this connection I hope I will be pardoned if I add some suggestions, 
 which I hope will be heeded. For twenty years a revolution has been pro 
 gressing. The struggle of 1876 will finally settle the fate of this country. 
 The issue is liberty or empire. The Democratic party is the only party now 
 existing under whose banner the friends of Constitutional liberty can rally. 
 Is that party a^ain to be divided? Is that party to march out for the last 
 great battle with the enemy with squads of friends firing into its ranks, and 
 \vith selfish leaders thinking of nothing but the spoils they may gather: 
 
434 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 so, the battle is lost and liberty will die the death that knows no resurrec 
 tion. Now let me beg that self may be abnegated, and the good of the 
 country only remembered, at least, until the country is safe. Let political 
 traders and intriguers forbear to ply their avocations, and let each one of us 
 suspect that possibly other men may have some patriotism and wisdom, at 
 least until after the battle is over. For two years, at least, let us all agree 
 that the best men shall be chosen for the most important places, and that 
 the policy adopted by the party shall be assumed to be the wisest policy. 
 
 No man can be less partisan than myself. No man can have more 
 decided convictions as to what is the best policy for the party to adopt ; but 
 no man will support more cheerfully and earnestly than myself whatever 
 may be the final authentic decisions of the party, whether those decisions 
 accord with my previously expressed opinions or not. For one, I am going 
 into the great struggle of 1876 with no concession for enemies and no ulti 
 matum for friends. I am willing to say to the liberalized Democracy of the 
 Union, what Ruth said to Naomi, "Where thou goest I will go, and thy 
 people shall be my people." To this end let our conventions be honest, let 
 our leaders be unselfish, let our discipline be perfect, let our desires all be 
 patriotic, and while it is proper that discussions of differing views of policy 
 may go on, let them go on without acrimony, and let all differences be 
 abandoned when the party shall finally pronounce its authoritative judgment. 
 
 It would be sheer affectation to pretend I did not feel gratified, in a 
 mere personal view, with the result of this election. Twenty 3*ears ago, 
 precisely, I departed from the purpose of my life and engaged in politics. 
 I had no motive in doing so, but to aid in the arrest of what I then be 
 lieved was a beginning revolution. During that period the Southern people 
 have passed through ordeals of severity and suffering unsurpassed in human 
 history. I have witnessed and shared all these trials. On several occasions 
 I have felt it my duty to act fearlessly and speak boldly, when I was denied 
 all assistance and encouragement from other public men. I will not say I 
 have committed no mistakes, but surely, under all the circumstances, patriotic 
 minds would know how to make allowances for mistakes and judge me with 
 charity. One thing I can affirm, in all sincerity, before you to-night, my 
 countrymen, and that is that during all that period of twenty years I have 
 never felt a selfish desire in connection with public affairs. I have never 
 asked for a vote, nor sought an office. I have never accepted an office, nor 
 used one, to gratify personal vanity nor to advance personal interest. 
 Whatever errors of judgment I may have committed, there has never been 
 a moment when the heart was not perfectly free from the slightest taint of 
 infidelity ; and now, when I have seen the people, for the first time, pass in 
 review my troubled life, which has done so little but desired to do so much, 
 and even under the most adverse circumstances and without the adven- 
 titious aid of a nomination, have seen them pass such a cheerful judgment of 
 approval, and in such an overwhelming voice of earnest confidence, to say 
 such a vindication did not affect me, would be to say I was more or less than 
 human. I do feel gratified and I feel chiefly gratified because this vindi 
 cation confirms me in the faith that in politics as well as everything else 
 honesty is the best policy. Whatever temporary injustice may be done, a 
 final approval of unselfish devotion to their interests will surely be pro 
 nounced by the people. There have been weary hours indeed, years of 
 trial and struggle in this humble life of mine, and rivalries engendered by 
 these struggles. But they are gone, and to-day I can look back upon the 
 
7/7.9 LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 435 
 
 past with but one personal regret, and that is that I have not been able to 
 accomplish more than the little I have accomplished. In entering upon, to 
 me, a new life, I can propose no reward for friends except to endeavor so to 
 discharge the duties of the high position to which they have called me, as 
 to make them glad of their confidence ; and I propose no revenge for my 
 enemies except by such faithful discharge of duties to make them regret 
 their opposition. 
 
 But, my friends, while I confess to you the great gratification I feel, I 
 will not disguise from you that I feel also a very heavy burden pressing 
 upon me. There is another view of this picture. The interest manifested 
 in the district, the even greater interest, if possible, manifested in the State, 
 the interest which comes from sister States, the touching letters which I 
 have received from almost every portion of the country, admonish me that 
 more is expected than I have the ability to accomplish. I fully comprehend 
 also that we are entering upon a very great crisis. I feel, whatever may be 
 the opinion of others, that the great struggle for the preservation and con 
 tinuance of Constitutional government on this continent is at hand. It is 
 to be determined in the next two years, for weal or for woe. Liberty is to 
 have new life, or is to die the death that knows no waking, in the next two 
 years. These are my convictions ; and in view of the terrible character of 
 these issues and the consequences that must follow, when my friends invite 
 me forward to take part in that great struggle, and with such expectations 
 of what I am to do, with the consciousness of my own inability to accom 
 plish half that is expected, I feel humble, I feel anxious, and I feel heavily op 
 pressed. But one thing God knows is true, I shall fail to defend no right, 
 and fear to meet no enemy, to the best of my ability. I have but one pur 
 pose and that is to serve the country, and the whole country, and to restore 
 to it, as far as I am able, healthy, Constitutional government. Every man 
 who helps is my friend, and every man who resists is my enemy. 
 
 Passing, then, from the mere party and personal views that the canvass 
 has suggested, I beg to submit to you calmly and dispassionately, in a con 
 versational style, a few thoughts as to the future. The one great work of 
 statesmanship in this generation, in this country, is to make peace be 
 tween the Northern and Southern people. Without that, nothing else 
 valuable can be accomplished. With that, everything that is good 
 will follow. How is that peace to be made ? Mark my language, to make 
 peace between the peoples of the respective sections. He is a stupid vision 
 ary who supposes he can ever make peace between the politicians of 
 two sections. These politicians have been the disturbers of the peace for 
 twenty years. They have acquired power by reason of. their succes 
 keeping "the peace disturbed, and their only hope of continuing in power is 
 to continue to be disturbers of that peace. The people must be reached 
 the people of the North and of the South, and they must be reached 
 manner as to show them that they have a common interest and 
 have a common feeling. . 
 
 Well, it is a very puzzling question at first view, but, my friends, i 
 like most every other great problem, it is at last solved by a very 
 pie process, very simple. What must be the basis of peace: 
 be but one basis of permanent peace between the ^orth and 
 What is that ? It is simple. Simply, only a return by the North and 
 the South, by the East and bv the West, by States and by individual* 
 the common Constitution. The great trouble in the past has been that 
 
436 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 of our Southern friends have attempted to save the Constitution by destroy 
 ing the Union. The great trouble with the Northern people is that they 
 have attempted to save the Union by destroying the Constitution. The 
 remedy for both grievances is simply for the North and the South to return 
 to the Constitution and the Union as the only guarantee of liberty, and the 
 only hope of peace, while they are one and inseparable. I do not hesitate, 
 therefore, to say to you, that when, upon taking my seat in Congress, I shall 
 take the oath to support the Constitution of the country, I shall take that 
 oath without mental reservation, and I shall keep it without partiality or 
 prejudice. I shall concede to Massachusetts everything that I claim for 
 Georgia, and I shall claim for Georgia everything I concede to Massachusetts. 
 The man who spins cotton in New England, will be as much my fellow-citi 
 zen as the man who grows cotton in Georgia. The man who cuts ice in 
 Massachusetts will be as much entitled to my protection as the man who 
 gathers oranges in Florida. I shall realize the great fact that Massachusetts 
 and Georgia are parties to the same Union, under the same Constitution, 
 with exactly the same rights and bound exactly by the same obligations. 
 And I shall feel, and I shall delight to feel, that this whole country, from 
 sea to sea and from the Lakes to the Gulf, is my country, and there is not a 
 foot of its soil I would desecrate nor a being in it whose rights I would 
 impair. 
 
 But it will be said, why, what are you going to do with all the great 
 differences that have existed between these people ; that have led to war and 
 strife and invasion ; accomplished crime and hate of every kind and charac 
 ter ? Well, there are three main propositions upon which the North and 
 South have divided, and I come briefly to give you a general view of them, 
 without stopping to discuss their merits. First, they differed on the question 
 of secession. Now, how are they to be reconciled on this ? Let me say that 
 no peace can be permanent which contains in its stipulations any terms dis 
 honorable to either party to it ; and he is unworthy to be called a statesman 
 who would undertake to make peace between the people of the North and 
 South by proposing or accepting anything dishonorable to either section. 
 How, then, will you dispose of the question of secession without requiring 
 one or the other to confess sins ? It is very easily disposed of just as 
 neighbors dispose of questions it is impossible for them to agree about. It is 
 impossible for us to require the North to justify secession. Equally it is 
 impossible for the North to require us to say that we are rebels and traitors. 
 There is no necessity for us to require the North to justify secession, for we 
 ourselves have abandoned secession, and what the Southern people profess 
 they mean. Then an issue on our part which is abandoned, need not be in 
 the way of reconciliation. It will be vain, utterly vain arid dishonorable 
 on their part to require that we should stipulate that we were rebels and 
 traitors. It could accomplish no good to the North, or to the Union ; and 
 while the blood is warm, the heart is true, and life is worthy, Southern 
 people will never admit that those who died to them as heroes shall be 
 remembered by them as traitors. 
 
 Very well ; take the next question of difference and I will show you how 
 they will all be settled together. The next question of difference is coercion, 
 that is, coercion by the Federal Government over a State. That was simply 
 adopted by the North, as they claimed, as a consequence of secession. If 
 the cause and principle is abandoned, the consequence should follow. Then 
 let coercion go. We may never admit that coercion is a Constitutional 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 437 
 
 measure, but however that may be in point of fact, coercion was resorted to 
 as a remedy against secession, and in point of fact it accomplished its pur 
 pose. It is a past fact, not a living issue. Then, again, here is Reconstruc 
 tion. What have you to say about that ? How will you ever get the North 
 
 V V ^/ 
 
 and South together upon the subject of Reconstruction ? Where is the basis 
 of agreement of reconciliation upon this subject? Reconstruction, I admit, 
 has engendered more bitterness, accomplished more wrongs than secession 
 and war. Ah, it was Reconstruction that struck deeper into the heart of 
 the Southern man than all the other evils combined. What are you going 
 to do? Are you going to require the North to come up and undo Recon 
 struction ; to confess that they were wrong, and recant it ? No, I shall not. 
 I propose to leave that question exclusively to time. Whatever may be the 
 wrongs of Reconstruction ; whatever may have been the temper and passions 
 in which it was accomplished, that, too, has been accomplished. I rest with 
 implicit frith in the conviction that when passion shall subside and patriotism 
 shall be reanimated, and reason shall reassert its sway, the Northern people 
 themselves will confess shame at the work. I am entirely willing to leave 
 
 t/ 
 
 it to that process, and there let it rest till that judgment shall be rendered. 
 
 And here, my friends, I shall be a little explicit. Here is a very difficult 
 question for some of our Southern people to grasp. Are you going to 
 justify Reconstruction, and say to the North you are ready to defend it ? 
 Never never. I will not require the North to justify secession, and the 
 North need not require us to justify Reconstruction. We will submit ; we 
 will recognize it ; we will obey ; we will take the law as we find it, until 
 those who made it shall choose to initiate a change. We will initiate none, 
 but we will obey, we will submit to, and we will recognize the facts as they 
 exist. We will never, under any circumstances or possible contingencies, 
 stultify or degrade ourselves by saying that the thing was right. There is 
 no reason why we should none on earth. All the North can ask us to say 
 is, that, right or wrong, Reconstruction has been accomplished. We will take 
 it as we find it, and submit to the laws as they exist while they are laws, and 
 so long as they are sustained by the courts of the country. We are willing, 
 in plain language, to let the dead past bury its dead ; but we insist that the 
 slaughter shall cease. That is all. 
 
 Now, then, my friends, what an easy thing it is to make peace, if patriot 
 ism would meet the question face to face ; if the statesmanship of the 
 country would strip itself of everything like mere personal desire to hold 
 office, and meet the question with the fixed determination to settle it upon a 
 basis honorable to all parties. 
 
 Secession, coercion, Reconstruction, are all over ; the records are made 
 up ! Who was right and who was wrong, \ve will remit to posterity, as 
 the only impartiarjudiye, to determine. Of course, in my judgment, when 
 that great trial shall come, the South will have nothing to fear. I eve 
 that when the future historian, reviewing the terrible scenes of 
 fifteen years, shall come to write his impartial judgment, he will 
 while there is much in the misfortunes of the South to regret, there 
 nothing in her history of which to be ashamed. 
 
 Why is it that we cannot make peace ? Why is it that the Intel 
 of the people North and South is not equal to the task of saying we let 
 gones be by-gones ? Why can we not let the past go, and unite our hand 
 and our hearts for the purpose of repairing the wrongs done, and make hm 
 the greatest hero who shall do most to repair them ? I repeat, these wrc 
 
438 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 must stop, or peace is impossible. Of that there can be no doubt. Thieves 
 must cease to be tax-gatherers. Usurpers must cease to be rulers. Louisiana 
 must be unchained. Sunlight must be let in on the shadowed face of South 
 Carolina. Arkansas must be free as Massachusetts. Georgia must be the 
 political equal of New York. There must be no handcuffed sovereignty at 
 the celebration of Liberty s Centennial ! The heart can never be glad, save 
 in hypocrisy ; the lips can never cheer, save in mockery, while the limbs are 
 fettered ! 
 
 Fellow-citizens, what is in the way? Why is it that ten years after actual 
 war has ceased the spirit of war still continues ? There must be a cause 
 there must be a reason. Have we not sufficient intelligence to find that 
 reason? Have we not sufficient patriotism to cure it when we find it? 
 Fellow-citizens, the reason is plain. It is no use to struggle hard to find it. 
 It is a reason founded in an unfortunate law of human nature, confirmed by 
 every chapter of human experience. You may be astonished at its simplicity 
 when I announce it. Why is it, I repeat, that the people of the North and 
 the South, ten years after the war has ceased in fact, have kept up this war 
 in spirit? The reason is simply this: The greed of power has absorbed and 
 destroyed the love of country with those who administer the government. 
 The men who, for the most part, have held high positions in the adminis 
 tration of the government acquired that power by virtue of the war the pas 
 sions of the war. Is it not natural, does not all history confirm it, that those 
 who acquire what they desire by certain means are willing to continue those 
 means that they may continue the result? And is it not true that almost 
 everybody in power in the United States now, acquired that power by virtue 
 of the passions of the war. Will anybody doubt that ? Can anybody doubt it ? 
 
 Can you expect men who owe all their greatness to strife, to passion, to 
 mad war, to make peace ? Can they cease to feed on that which alone gives 
 them power? Does any intelligent man in America believe that the dis- 
 franchisement of white men, disabilities upon educated men, the robberies, 
 oppressions, usurpations, and insults by the rule of carpet-bagism over a 
 prostrate people were ever authorized and permitted by those in power at 
 Washington, as measures of peace ? Were they not all born of that passion 
 which gave their authors power ; and were they not adopted to keep up 
 passion and to keep their authors in power? Who will say that measures 
 which shame the civilization of the age were adopted as measures of peace ? 
 
 Now, what is the remedy ? It is plain. The people of the North must 
 be made to see that all these harsh measures which have been adopted 
 toward the South, under pretense that they were necessary to keep down 
 rebels, were really adopted to keep up office-holders. And they must be 
 made also to see that if these measures of passion and hate shall continue, 
 they will, sooner or later, overthrow our common free institutions, as has 
 always been the case in every free country where men have acquired power 
 by virtue of the passions of civil wars. 
 
 Now, what I say is this, that we must, somehow or other, by some means 
 get away from these politicians who are in power, acquired by the passions 
 of the war, and seek to retain that power by continuing those passions. We 
 must get at the minds of the Northern people, that they may apply the 
 remedy. I believe they will do it. I have a faith that I have never yet 
 abandoned, that, notwithstanding all the wrongs we have witnessed for the 
 past fifteen years, the masses of the Northern people love liberty as well as 
 we do. I believe, if we can ever get to the minds of the Northern people, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 439 
 
 you will find that they will exhaust every effort to preserve the Constitu 
 tional character of this government. I believe they have acquiesced in, 
 rather than ^approved Reconstruction. I believe that they submitted to, 
 rather than justified, all those harsh measures against the South, because we 
 have been powerless to reach their minds. Their leaders have had success 
 in making the great masses of the Northern people believe that these meas 
 ures were necessary to keep down another rebellion ; and I believe it is true 
 that while the Northern people love liberty, and love the Constitution of the 
 country, and desire to preserve both, they would destroy the Constitution 
 and everything else to keep down another rebellion ! Now, then, the 
 Northern mind must be reached, and that Northern mind must be convinced 
 that we of the South sincerely and truly desire to live in the Union accord 
 ing to the Constitution, and we can fearlessly say, the South never was 
 unwilling to live in the Union according to the Constitution. 
 
 Without reopening the causes of our secession, I will say that history 
 will abundantly justify the proposition that the South left the Union with 
 regret, and only because she was made to believe the North would not adhere 
 to the Constitution. I believe that every intelligent man will be compelled 
 to sustain the proposition which I fearlessly proclaim, that the South 
 never was an enemy to the Constitution ! She was goaded and provoked 
 into secession by what she believed were infidelities to the Constitution. But 
 there is not a line, there is not a record in existence to justify the charge 
 that any Southern State was ever faithless to the Union of our fathers under 
 the Constitution. No\v, the trouble North has been this : that they have 
 lost sight of the Union as a principle. The real difference between the 
 North and South I will express to you in a few words. The North, having 
 full confidence in her physical power, has sought to preserve the Union as a 
 fact, as I expressed it on a former occasion. She has deified the Union as a 
 fact. It never has occurred to the masses of the Northern people yet, that 
 while they are deifying the Union as a fact, they may utterly destroy it as a 
 principle. The Union as a principle maybe a very different thing from the 
 Union as a fact. The Union as a fact may be an empire ; it ma} r be a des 
 potism ; it may be a monarchy. While the Union as a principle is a Union 
 under the Constitution and can only be republican in form. You see the 
 difference. The North, confident in her physical power, and impassioned 
 by the appeals of her politicians who sought to acquire power, have lost 
 sight of the Union as a principle and have lost sight of the great danger 
 that, in preserving the Union in form, they may convert what is a free re 
 public into a consolidated empire. On the other hand, the Southern people 
 not being physically strong, have studied the Union as a Union of principle, 
 and looking to the principle of union as their safety, they came to regard the 
 Union as desirable only because of the principles upon which it is organized. 
 Thus it has happened that, while the South has endeavored to preserve the 
 principle at the expense of the fact, the North has been expecting to preserve 
 the fact at the expense of the principle. The remedy is for patriots every 
 where to unite the fact and the principle and keep them forever together. 
 In that event we shall not only have union but also free government. We 
 shall have a Constitutional government and a Constitutional Jmon. And 
 this much I will say : If the North will covenant that the Union shall 
 Constitutional, the South will covenant that the Union shall be eternal. 
 
 Now does it not occur to you that such plain propositions as these, f 
 well fortified by the unfortunate history of the country, leave a door open 
 
440 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 for reconciliation, for peace, permanent peace ? It does so occur to me ; I 
 feel it. At the same time such have been the passions of the respective sec 
 tions that there is but one way to get at the intelligence of the North upon 
 this subject and remove the prejudices that have been created and the errors 
 that have been fixed upon their minds. You cannot do it by such speeches 
 as I am making here to-night, because they would not hear them. Their 
 ears are closed to all ex parte speeches. Your orators cannot do it by mak 
 ing speeches at the North, for the same reason. 
 
 It is chiefly through debates in Congress that the minds of the people 
 must be reached. There all sides are heard, and the people will listen, and 
 truths will sparkle from the conflict like fire from the collision of flint and 
 steel. Errors will be corrected, prejudices allayed, suspicions quieted and 
 measures of healing will be provided. The consuming flames of sectional 
 passion will be quenched, and those who keep these passions alive by abus 
 ing the high trusts of power in order to keep themselves in place, will be 
 rebuked by the patriotic people of all sections of the country. 
 
 It is because of the fearful responsibilities attaching to a seat in Con 
 gress that I have not been willing to seek the position. It is because I am 
 unwilling to shrink from duty that I have been unwilling to refuse to accept 
 the position if tendered by the people. In my opinion it is criminal to rush 
 upon such responsibilities, and it is unpatriotic to avoid them. 
 
 What a work is to be performed by the statesmen of this generation ! 
 In glory if successful, in shame if unsuccessful, there is no era in the history 
 of free governments which can approach it in magnitude. A revolution, 
 whose animating principle has been hate, must be arrested. States which 
 have been belligerent, must be made accordant ; sections which have been 
 alienated must be reunited ; people who have shed fraternal blood must be 
 made friends, and a Union which has been maintained by force must be 
 made again a Union of consent. If this great work can succeed ; if a sin 
 cere peace, honorable to all parties, can be made, if the spirit of patriotism 
 can be revived and made to animate all of our living as it animated all of 
 our ancestors to mutual glory and common weal, then the history of the 
 human race can furnish no parallel to the wealth, and power, and grandeur 
 which awaits the American people of the dawning century. But if this 
 work shall fail ; if this strife of section and spirit of hate shall continue ; if 
 those in power shall fan the flames of passion to keep themselves in place ; 
 if national statesmen shall still find pleasure in devising sectional wrongs, 
 and the Federal Government shall still furnish troops to foment and sustain 
 usurpations over States, then no pen can describe the horrors that await us. 
 Free government will perish ; disunion will come ; disintegration will mul 
 tiply ; Punic and Peloponesian wars will rage ; factions will rend ; empires 
 will divide up all sections and reduce to final slavery all the races of our 
 country. 
 
 The Southern extremists dreamed they could destroy the Union with 
 out war. Alas, what a dream ! And yet far more visionary are those 
 Northern extremists who dream that the Constitution can be destroyed 
 without war. The Constitution and the Union ! Would that patriots 
 North and South would wake up to the fact that these two are one. The 
 life of the first is the only hope of the last. Together both will live ; 
 divided both must die. In their life are peace and freedom and glories, ever 
 increasing and without end. In their death are strife and war and des 
 potism, ever enslaving and without hope. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 441 
 
 Fellow-citizens, I am charged with being ambitious. So I have been 
 ambitious ; but for what ? To save the South from the abyss of secession ; 
 the Union from the horrors of war ; liberty from the perils of sectional 
 hate, and my own race from the infamy of self-degradation. I am 
 ambitious ; but for what ? Simply to hold office ? How I pity the poor- 
 creature who could think so. I live high above the man who could find a 
 gratification of mere personal vanity in the fact of holding an office. I am 
 ambitious once more to see peace ! Peace between the sections ; peace 
 between the States ; peace between the races, and peace fraternal peace 
 between those who love the Constitution and those who love the Union. 
 And if, before I die, I can be permitted to see States accordant, sections 
 reconciled, the rights of all our people preserved, with the honor of none 
 tarnished or destroyed, and the rich legacy of free Constitutional govern 
 ment, bequeathed to us by our fathers, transmitted unimpaired to our 
 children, I shall go to my grave with a comfort which the diadems of kings 
 could not confer, and which the wealth and power of emperors could neither 
 buy nor take away. 
 
SPEECH DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 
 JANUARY ll, 1876, ON THE GENERAL AMNESTY BILL, IN 
 REPLY TO MR. ELAINE. 
 
 No speech ever delivered in Congress created a profounder impression than this one. 
 In the body of the biographical sketch a full account is given of the scene accompanying 
 its delivery and the manner of its reception by the country. The writer simply desires to 
 call attention in this place to the magnificent diction of the speech and its sustained and 
 convincing argument. It is logic on fire with truth and patriotism, literally consuming 
 falsehood and sectional hatred. If Mr. Hill had never again opened his mouth in Con 
 gress, this speech would have made him famous and forever embalmed him in the grate 
 ful hearts of his countrymen. The conclusion of this speech furnishes as fine declamation 
 as can be found in the English language, and is a favorite selection of college declaimers. 
 
 The House having under consideration the bill (H. R. No. 214) to remove 
 the disabilities imposed by the third section of the Fourteenth Article of the 
 Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, the pending question 
 being on the motion of Mr. Elaine to reconsider the motion by which the 
 bill was rejected. Mr. Hill said : 
 
 Mr. Speaker: The House will bear witness that we have not sought this 
 discussion. Nothing can be farther from our desire and purpose than to raise 
 such discussion. 
 
 Mr. Atkins. I rise to a point of order. The whole house desires to hear 
 the gentleman from Georgia, but it is impossible for them to do so unless 
 gentlemen retain their seats. 
 
 The Speaker. The point of order is well taken, and gentlemen will retain 
 their seats ; and order must be preserved not only within the bar but outside 
 the bar, and the Chair directs the doorkeeper to give especial attention to 
 the maintenance of order outside the bar. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I say, Mr. Speaker, that nothing could have been farther from 
 the desires and purposes of those who with me represent immediately the 
 section of country which on yesterday was put upon trial, than to reopen 
 this discussion of the events of our unhappy past. We had well hoped that 
 the country had suffered long enough from feuds, from strife, and from 
 inflamed passions, and we came here, sir, with a patriotic purpose to remem 
 ber nothing but the country and the whole country, and, turning our backs 
 upon all the horrors of the past, to look with all earnestness to find glories 
 for the future. 
 
 The gentleman who is the acknowledged leader of the Republican party 
 on this floor, who is the aspiring leader of the Republican party of this 
 country, representing most manifestly the wishes of many of his associates 
 not all has willed otherwise. They seem determined that the wounds 
 which were healing shall be reopened; that the passions which were hushing 
 shall be reinflamed. Sir, I wish this House to understand that we do not 
 reciprocate either the purpose or the manifest desire of the gentlemen on 
 the other side, and while we feel it our imperative duty to vindicate the truth 
 of history as regards the section which we represent, feeling that it is a portion 
 of this common country, we do not intend to say anything calculated to aid 
 
 442 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 443 
 
 the gentlemen in their work of crimination and recrimination, and of keepino- 
 up the war by politicians after brave men have said the war shall end. Th7> 
 gentleman from Maine on yesterday presented to the country two questions 
 which he manifestly intends to be the fundamental principles of the Repub 
 lican party, or at least of those who follow him in that party. The first is 
 what he is pleased to term the magnanimity and grace of the Republican 
 party ; the second is the brutality of those whom he is pleased to term "the 
 rebels." Upon the first question I do not propose to weary the House to-day. 
 If, with the history of the past fifteen years fresh in the memory of this 
 people, the country is prepared to talk about the grace and magnanimity of the 
 Republican party, argument would be wasted. With master enslaved, in 
 telligence disfranchised, society disorganized, industry paralyzed, States sub 
 verted, Legislatures dispersed by the bayonet, the people can accord to that 
 party the verdict of grace and magnanimity may God save the future of 
 our country from grace and magnanimity. 
 
 I advance directly to that portion of the gentleman s argument which 
 relates to the question before the House. The gentleman from Pennsylvania 
 (Mr. Randall) has presented to this House, and he asks it to adopt, a bill on 
 the subject of amnesty, which is precisely the same as the bill passed in this 
 House by the gentleman s own party, as I understand it, at the last session 
 of Congress. The gentleman from Maine has moved a reconsideration of 
 the vote by which it was rejected, avowing his purpose to be to offer an 
 amendment. The main purpose of that amendment is to except from the 
 operation of the bill one of the citizens of this country, Mr. Jefferson Davis. 
 
 He alleges two distinct reasons why he asks the House to make that 
 exception. I will state those reasons in the gentleman s own language. First, 
 he says that "Mr. Davis was the author knowingly, deliberately, guiltily, 
 and willfully of the gigantic murder and crime at Andersonville." That is 
 a grave indictment. He then characterizes, in his second position, what he 
 calls the horrors of Andersonville. And he says of them : 
 
 And I here, before God, measuring my words, knowing their full extent and import, 
 declare that neither the deeds of the Duke of Alva in the Low Countries, nor the massa 
 cre of St. Bartholomew, nor the thumb-screws and engines of torture of the Spanish 
 Inquisition, begin to compare in atrocity with the hideous crimes of Andersonville. 
 
 Sir, he stands before the country with his very fame in peril if he, having 
 made such charges, shall not sustain them. Now I take up the propositions 
 of the gentleman in their order. I hope no gentleman imagines that I am 
 here to pass in eulogy upon Mr. Davis. The record upon which his fame 
 must rest has been made up, and he and his friends have transmitted that 
 record to the only judge who will give him an impartial judgment an 1 
 honest, un impassioned posterity. In the mean time, no eulogy from me can 
 help him, no censure from the gentleman can damage him, and no act or 
 resolution of this House can affect him. But the charge is that he is a mur 
 derer, and a deliberate, willful, guilty, scheming murderer of thousands of 
 our fellow-citizens." Why, sir, knowing the character of the honorable gen 
 tleman from Maine, his high reputation, when I heard the charge fall from 
 his lips I thought surely the gentleman had made a recent discovery, and 
 listened for the evidence to justify that charge. He produced it ; and what 
 is it? To my utter amazement, as the gentleman from Pennsylvania I 
 Kelley) has well stated, it is nothing on earth but a report of a committee 
 of this Congress, made when passions were at their height, and it was known 
 to the gentleman and to the whole country eight years ago. 
 
444 SENATOR B. H. 1IILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Now, I say first, in relation to that testimony, that it is exclusively ex 
 parte. It was taken when the gentleman who is now put upon trial by it 
 before the country was imprisoned and in chains, without a hearing and with 
 out an opportunity to be heard. It was taken by enemies. It was taken in the 
 midst of fury and rage. If there is anything in Anglo-Saxon law which ought 
 to be considered sacred, it is the high privilege of an Englishman not to be con 
 demned until he shall be confronted with the witnesses against him. But that 
 is not all. The testimony produced by the gentleman is not only ex parte, not 
 only exclusively the production of enemies, or at least taken by them and in the 
 midst of passion, but the testimony is mutilated; ingeniously mutilated, 
 palpably mutilated, most adroitly mutilated. Why, sir, one of the main 
 witnesses is Dr. Joseph Jones, a very excellent gentleman, who was called upon 
 to give his testimony in what is called the Wirz trial, and which is produced 
 before this House and attention called to it by the gentleman. The object 
 of the gentleman was to prove that Mr. Davis knew of these atrocities at 
 Aridersonville, and he calls the attention of the House to the report of this 
 committee, and thanks God that it has been taken in time to be put where it 
 can neither be contradicted nor gainsaid, as a perpetual guide to posterity 
 to find out the authors of these crimes. 
 
 One of the most striking and remarkable pieces of evidence in this whole 
 report is found in the report made by Dr. Jones, a surgeon of fine character, 
 and sent to Andersonville by the Confederate authorities to investigate the 
 condition of that prison. That gentleman made his report, and it is brought 
 into this House. What is it? The first point is as to the knowledge of 
 this report going to any of the authorities at Richmond. Here is what Dr. 
 Jones savs : 
 
 */ 
 
 I have just completed the report, which I placed in the hands of the judge advocate, 
 under orders from the government, when the Confederacy went to pieces. That report 
 never was delivered to the surgeon-general, and I was unaware that any one knew of its 
 existence until I received orders from the United States Government to bring it and 
 deliver it to this court in testimony. 
 
 Now, he was ordered by the United States Government, the first time 
 this report ever saw the light, to bring it and deliver it on the trial of Wirz. 
 In accordance with that order he did bring it and deliver it to the judge advo 
 cate general. And when the report itself, or that which purported to be the 
 report, was presented to him while he was a witness, he discovered that it was 
 mutilated, and he asked permission to state that fact. Hear what he says 
 on that subject : 
 
 I beg leave to make a statement to the court. That portion of my report which has 
 been read is only a small part of the report. The real report contains the excuses which 
 were given by the officers present at Andersonville, which I thought it right to embody 
 with my report. It also contains documents forwarded to Richmond by Dr. White and 
 Dr. Stevenson, and others in charge of the hospitals. Those documents contained im 
 portant facts as to the labors of the medical department and their efforts to better the 
 condition of things. 
 
 All that part of the report is suppressed, and with that suppression this 
 magnificent receptacle of truth is filed away in the document room for the 
 information of posterity. 
 
 The committee ask him : 
 
 Question. Are your conclusions correctly stated in this extract ? 
 Answer. Part of my conclusions are stated not the whole. A portion of my con 
 clusions, and also my recommendations, are not stated. 
 
LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 445 
 
 Q, Well, touching the subject of exchange ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir ; the general difficulties environing the prisoners and their officers. 
 
 Q. What became of your original report ? 
 
 A. This is my original report. 
 
 That is, he had there the extract as far as it went. 
 Q. Did you make this extract yourself ? 
 
 The committee seem to suspect that he was the man that simply made 
 the extract and brought it before the committee. Now, here is his answer : 
 
 I did not. My original report is in the hands of the judge advocate. I delivered it 
 into his hands immediately upon my arrival in AVashington. 
 
 And this committee of Congress, to which the gentleman refers, abso 
 lutely tells us that this matilated report was the one introduced in evidence 
 against this man Wirz, and it is the one incorporated in this book. 
 
 Now I want to call attention to another extract from that original 
 report a part not included in this book. There are a great many such 
 omissions ; I have not been able to get all of them. 
 
 Dr. Jones in his report is giving an account of the causes of the sickness 
 and mortality at Andersonvilie ; and he says, among other things : 
 
 Surrounded by these depressing agents, the postponement of the general exchange of 
 prisoners and the constantly receding hopes of deliverance through the action of their 
 own government, depressed their already desponding spirits and destroyed those mental 
 and moral energies so necessary for a successful struggle against disease and its agents. 
 Homesickness and disappointment, mental depression and distress, attending the daily 
 longing for an apparently hopeless release, are felt to be as potent agencies in the de 
 struction of these prisoners as the physical causes of actual disease. 
 
 Ah ! why that homesickness, that longing and the distress consequent 
 upon it, and its effect in carrying those poor, brave, unfortunate heroes to 
 death ? I will tell this house before I am done. 
 
 Now, sir, there is another fact. Wirz was put on trial, but really Mr. 
 Davis was the man intended to be tried through him. Over one hundred and 
 sixty witnesses were introduced before the military commission. The trial 
 lasted three months. The whole country was under military despotism ; 
 citizens labored under duress ; and quite a large number of Confederates 
 were seeking to make favor with the powers of the government. Yet, sir, 
 during those three months, with all the witnesses they could bring to Wash 
 ington, not one single man ever mentioned the name of Mr. Davis in con 
 nection with a single atrocity at Andersouville or elsewhere. The gentle 
 man from Maine, with all his research into all the histories of the Duke of 
 Alva and the massacre of St. Bartholomew and the Spanish inquisition, has 
 not been able to frighten up such a witness yet. 
 
 Now, sir, there is a witness on this subject. Wirz was condemned, 
 found guilty, sentenced to be executed ; and I have now before me the 
 written statement of his counsel, a Northern man and a Union man. He 
 gave this statement to the country, and it has never been contradicted. 
 
 Hear what this gentleman says : 
 
 On the night before the execution of the prisoner Wirz, a telegram was sent to the 
 Northern press from this city stating that Wirz had made important disclosures 
 General L. C. Baker, the well-known detective, implicating Jefferson Davis, and that the 
 confession would probably be given to the public. On the same evening some parties 
 came to the confessor of Wirz, Rev. Father Boyle, and also to me as his counsel, one ot 
 them informing me that a high cabinet officer wished to assure Wirz that 
 implicate Jefferson Davis with atrocities committed at Andersonvilie his sentence woulc 
 
448 SENATORS. IT. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 the Confederate soldiers in the field received. Federal prisoners had per 
 mission to buy whatever else they pleased, and the Confederates gave their 
 friends at home permission to furnish them the means to do so. And yet, 
 Mr. Speaker, it is true that, in spite of all these advantages enjoyed by these 
 prisoners, there were horrors, and great horrors, at Andersonville. What 
 were the causes of those horrors ? The first was want of medicine. That 
 is given as a cause by Dr. Jones in his testimony ; that is given by this very 
 Father Hamilton, from whom the gentleman from Maine read. In the very 
 same testimony which the gentleman read, Father Hamilton says : 
 
 I conversed with Dr. White with regard to the condition of the men, and he told me 
 it was not in his power to do anything for them ; that he had no medicine, and could 
 not get any, and that he was doing everything in his power to help them. 
 
 Now, how was it that medicines and other essential supplies could not 
 be obtained ? Unfortunately they were not in the Confederacy. The 
 Federal Government made medicine contraband of war ; and I am no^ 
 aware that any other nation on the earth ever did such a thing before not 
 even the Duke of Alva, sir. The Confederate Government, unable to intro 
 duce medicine according to its right under the laws of nations, undertook to 
 run the blockade, and whenever possible the Federal Navy captured its 
 ships and took the medicines. Then, when no other resource was left, when 
 it was suspected that the women of the North the earth s angels, God bless 
 them would carry quinine and other medicines of that sort, so much needed 
 by the Federal prisoners in the South, Federal officers were charged to 
 capture the women and examine their petticoats, to keep them from carry 
 ing medicines to Confederate soldiers and to Federal prisoners, and they 
 were imprisoned. Surely, sir, the Confederate Government and the South 
 ern people are not to be blamed for a poverty in medicines, food, and 
 raiment, enforced by the stringent war measures of the Federal Government 
 a poverty which had its intended effect of immeasurable distress to the 
 Confederate armies, although it incidentally inflicted unavoidable distress 
 upon the Federal prisoners in the South. 
 
 The Federal Government made clothing contraband of war. It sent 
 down its armies, and they burned up the factories of the South wherever 
 they could find them, for the express purpose of preventing the Confederates 
 from furnishing clothing to their soldiers, and the Federal prisoners, of 
 course, shared this deprivation of comfortable clothing. It was the war 
 policy of the Federal Government to make supplies scarce. Dr. Jones in 
 his testimony, and Father Hamilton in his testimony, which I will not 
 stop to read to the House, explained why clothing was so scarce to Federal 
 prisoners. 
 
 Now, then, sir, whatever horrors existed at Andersonville, not one of 
 them could be attributed to a single act of legislation of the Confederate 
 Government or to a single order of the Confederate Government, but every 
 horror of Andersonville grew out of the necessities of the occasion, which 
 necessities were cast upon the Confederacy by the war policy of the other 
 side. The gentleman from Maine said that no Confederate prisoner was 
 ever maltreated in the North. And when my friend answered from his 
 seat, " A thousand witnesses to the contrary iii Georgia alone," the gentle 
 man from Maine joined issue, but as usual produced no testimony in support 
 of his issue. I think the gentleman from Maine is to be excused. For ten 
 years, unfortunately, he and his have been reviling the people who were not 
 allowed to come here to meet the reviling. Now, sir, we are face to face, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 449 
 
 and when you make a charge you must bring your proof. The time has 
 passed when the country can accept the impudence of assertion for the force 
 of argument, or recklessness of statement for the truth of history. 
 
 Now, sir, I do not wish to unfold the chapter on the other side. I am 
 an American. I honor my country, and my whole country, and it could be 
 no pleasure to me to bring forward proof that any portion of my country 
 men have been guilty of willful murder or of cruel treatment to poor man 
 acled prisoners. Nor will I make any such charge. These horrors are 
 inseparable, many of them and most of them, from a state of war. I hold 
 in my hand a letter, written by one who was a surgeon at the prison at 
 Elmira, and he says : 
 
 The winter of 1864-1865 was an unusually severe and rigid one, and the prisoners 
 arriving from the Southern States during this season were mostly old men and lads, 
 clothed in attire suitable only to the genial climate of the South. I need not state to you 
 that this alone was ample cause for an unusual mortality among them. The surround 
 ings were of the following nature, namely, narrow, confined limits, but a few acres in 
 extent 
 
 And Andersonville, sir, embraced twenty-seven acres. 
 
 and through which slowly flowed a turbid stream of water, carrying along with it all the 
 excremental filth and debris of the camp ; this stream of water, horrible to relate, was 
 the only source of supply, for an extended period, that the prisoners could possibly 
 use for the purposes of ablution and to slack their thirst from day to day ; the tents and 
 other shelter allotted to the camp at Elmira were insufficient and crowded to the utmost 
 extent ; hence small-pox and other skin diseases raged through the camp. 
 
 Here I may note that, owing to a general order from the government to vaccinate the 
 prisoners, my opportunities were ample to observe the effects of spurious and diseased 
 matter, and there is no doubt in my mind but that syphilis was ingrafted in many 
 instances ; ugly and horrible ulcers and eruptions of a characteristic nature were, alas ! 
 too frequent and obvious to be mistaken ; small-pox cases were crowded in such a man 
 ner that it was a matter of impossibility for the surgeon to treat his patients individually ; 
 they actually laid so adjacent that the simple movement of one would cause his neighbor 
 to cry out in an agony of pain. The confluent and malignant type prevailed to such an 
 extent and of such a nature that the body would frequently be found one continuous 
 scab. 
 
 The diet and other allowances by the government for the use of the prisoners were 
 ample, yet the poor unfortunates were allowed to starve. 
 
 Now, sir, the Confederate regulations authorized ample provisions for 
 Federal prisoners, the same that was made for Confederate soldiers, and you 
 charge that Mr. Davis is responsible for not having those allowances 
 honestly supplied. The United States made provisions for Confederate 
 prisoners, so far as rations were concerned, for feeding those in Federal 
 hands ; and yet what says the surgeon ? "They were allowed to starve." 
 
 But " why ? " is a query which I will allow your readers to infer and to draw con 
 clusions therefrom. Out of the number of prisoners, as before mentioned, over three 
 thousand of them now lay buried in the cemetery located near the camp for that purpose 
 a mortality equal if not greater than that of any prison in the South. At Anderson 
 ville, as I am well informed by brother officers who endured confinement there, as well 
 as by the records at Washington, the mortality was twelve thousand out of, say, forty 
 thousand prisoners. Hence it is readily to be seen that the range of mortality was no 
 less at Elmira than at Andersonville. 
 
 Mr. Platt. Will the gentleman allow me to interrupt him a moment to 
 ask him where he gets that statement ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. It is the statement of a Federal surgeon, published in the New 
 York World. 
 
 Mr. Platt. I desire to say that I live within thirty-six miles of Elmira, 
 and that those statements are unqualifiedly false. 
 
450 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Mr. Hill Yes, and I suppose if one rose from the dead, the gentleman 
 would not believe him. 
 
 Mr. Platt. Does the gentleman say that those statements are true ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Certainly I do not say that they are true, but I do say that I 
 believe the statement of the surgeon in charge before that of a politician 
 thirty-six miles away. Now, will the gentleman believe testimony from the 
 dead ? The Bible says, " The tree is known by its fruits." And, after all, 
 what is the test of suffering of these prisoners North and South ? The test 
 is the result. Now, I call the attention of gentlemen to this fact, that the 
 report of Mr. Stanton, the secretary of war you will believe him, will you 
 no t ? on the 19th of July, 1866 send to the Library and get it exhibits 
 the fact that of the Federal prisoners in Confederate hands during the war, 
 only 22,576 died, while of the Confederate prisoners in Federal hands 26,436 
 died. And Surgeon- General Barnes reports in an official report I suppose 
 you will believe him that in round numbers the Confederate prisoners in 
 Federal hands amounted to 220,000, while the Federal prisoners in Con 
 federate hands amounted to 270,000. Out of the 270,000 in Confederate 
 hands 22,000 died, while of the 220,000 Confederates in Federal hands over 
 26,000 died. The ratio is this : More than twelve per cent, of the Confeder 
 ates in Federal hands died, and less than nine per cent, of the Federals in 
 Confederate hands died. What is the logic of these facts according to the 
 gentleman from Maine? I scorn to charge murder upon the officials of 
 Northern prisons, as the gentleman has done upon Confederate prison 
 officials. I labor to demonstrate that such miseries are inevitable in prison 
 life, no matter how humane the regulations. I would scorn, too, to use a 
 newspaper article, unless it were signed by one who gave his own name and 
 whose statement, if not true, can be disproved, and I would believe such a 
 one in preference to any politician over there who was thirty-six miles away 
 from Elmira. That gentleman, so prompt to contradict a surgeon, might 
 perhaps have smelled the small-pox, but he could not see it, and I venture 
 to say that if he knew the small-pox was there he would have taken very 
 good care to keep thirty-six miles away. He is a wonderful witness. He 
 is not even equal to the mutilated evidence brought in yesterday. But, sir, 
 it appears from the official record that the Confederates came from Elmira, 
 from Fort Delaware, and from Rock Island, and other places, with their 
 fingers frozen off, with their toes frozen off, and with teeth dropped out. 
 
 But the great question is behind. Every American, North and South, 
 must lament that our country has ever impeached its civilization by such an 
 exhibition of horrors on any side, and I speak of these things with no de 
 gree of pleasure. God knows, if I could hide them from the view of the 
 world I would gladly do it. But the great question is, at last, who was 
 responsible for this state of things ? And that is really the only material 
 question with which statesmen now should deal. Sir, it is well known that, 
 when the war opened, at first the authorities of the United States deter 
 mined that they would not exchange prisoners. The first prisoners captured 
 by the Federal forces were the crew of the Savannah, and they were put in 
 chains and sentenced to be executed. Jefferson Davis hearing of this, com 
 municated through the lines, and the Confederates having meanwhile also 
 captured prisoners, he threatened retaliation in case those men suffered, and 
 the sentences against the crew of the Savannah were not executed. Subse 
 quently our friends from this way I believe my friend before me from 
 New York (Mr, Cox) was one insisted that there should be a cartel for the 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 451 
 
 exchange of prisoners. In 1862 that cartel was agreed upon. In substance 
 and briefly it was that there should be an exchange of man for man and 
 officer for officer, and whichever held an excess at the time of exchange 
 should parole the excess. This worked very well until 1863. I am going 
 over the facts very briefly. 
 
 Mr. Starkweather. I do not wish, and none on this side wishes to inter 
 rupt the gentleman. I believe he has spoken over his hour. We desire 
 that he shall speak as long as he chooses, but we wish to have a free dis 
 cussion and want a little time on this side. 
 
 The, Speaker. The gentleman from Georgia has not exhausted his hour 
 yet. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I was reciting briefly the facts. In 1863 this cartel was in 
 terrupted ; the Federal authorities refused to continue the exchange. Now 
 commenced a history which the world ought to know, and which I hope the 
 House will grant me the privilege of stating, and I shall do it from official 
 records. This, I say frankly to the gentlemen on the other side, was in 
 truth one of the severest blows stricken at the Confederacy, this refusal to ex 
 change prisoners in 1 863 and continued through 1 864. The Confederates made 
 every effort to renew the cartel. Among other things, on the 2d of July, 
 1863, the Yice-President of the Confederacy, the gentleman to whom the 
 gentleman from Maine (Mr. Blaine) alluded the other day in so com 
 plimentary terms, Mr. Alexander H. Stephens, was absolutely commissioned 
 by President Davis to cross the lines and come to Washington to consult 
 with the Federal authorities, with a broad commission to agree upon any 
 cartel satisfactory to the other side for the exchange of prisoners. Mr. 
 Davis said to him, " Your mission is simply one of humanity, and has no 
 political aspect." Mr. Stephens undertook that work. What was the result ? 
 I wish to be careful, and I will state this exactly, correctly. Here is his 
 letter : 
 
 CONFEDERATE STATES STEAMER TORPEDO, 
 
 IN JAMES RIVER, July 4, 1863. 
 
 Sir : As military commissioner, I am the bearer of a communication in writing from 
 Jefferson Davis, commander-in-chief of the land and naval forces of the Confederate 
 States, to Abraham Lincoln, commander-in-chief of the land and naval forces of the 
 United States. -Hon. Robert Ould, Confederate States agent of exchange, accompanies 
 me as secretary, for the purpose of delivering the communication in person and confer 
 ring upon the subject to which it relates. I desire to proceed to Washington in the steamer 
 Torpedo, commanded by Lieutenant Hunter Davidson, of the Confederate States navy, 
 no person being on board but Hon. Mr. Ould, myself, and the boat s officers and crew. 
 
 Yours, most respectfully, 
 
 ALEX. H. STEPHENS. 
 
 To 8. H. Lee, Admiral. 
 This was directed to S. H. Lee, admiral. Here is the answer : 
 
 Acting Rear- Admiral S. H. Lee, Hampton Roads : 
 
 The request of Alexander H. Stephens is inadmissible 
 
 GIDEON WELLS, 
 
 Secretary of the Navy. 
 
 You will acknowledge that Mr. Stephens s humane mission failed. The 
 Confederate authorities gave to that mission as much dignity and character 
 as possible. They supposed that of all men in the South Mr. Stephens most 
 nearly had your confidence. They selected him to be the bearer of mes 
 sages for the sake of humanity in behalf of the brave Federal soldiers who 
 were unfortunate prisoners of war. The Federal Government would not 
 even receive him j the Federal authorities would not hear him. 
 
450 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Yes, and I suppose if one rose from the dead, the gentleman 
 would not believe him. 
 
 Mr. Platt. Does the gentleman say that those statements are true ? 
 
 Mr. Sill. Certainly I do not say that they are true, but I do say that I 
 believe the statement of the surgeon in charge before that of a politician 
 thirty-six miles away. Now, will the gentleman believe testimony from the 
 dead ? The Bible says, " The tree is known by its fruits." And, after all, 
 what is the test of suffering of these prisoners North and South ? The test 
 is the result. Now, I call the attention of gentlemen to this fact, that the 
 report of Mr. Stanton, the secretary of war you will believe him, will you 
 not ? on the 19th of July, 1866 send to the Library and get it exhibits 
 the fact that of the Federal prisoners in Confederate hands during the war, 
 only 22,576 died, while of the Confederate prisoners in Federal hands 26,436 
 died. And Surgeon- General Barnes reports in an official report I suppose 
 you will believe him that in round numbers the Confederate prisoners in 
 Federal hands amounted to 220,000, while the Federal prisoners in Con 
 federate hands amounted to 270,000. Out of the 270,000 in Confederate 
 hands 22,000 died, while of the 220,000 Confederates in Federal hands over 
 26,000 died. The ratio is this : More than twelve per cent, of the Confeder 
 ates in Federal hands died, and less than nine per cent, of the Federals in 
 Confederate hands died. What is the logic of these facts according to the 
 gentleman from Maine? I scorn to charge murder upon the officials of 
 Northern prisons, as the gentleman has done upon Confederate prison 
 officials. I labor to demonstrate that such miseries are inevitable in prison 
 life, no matter how humane the regulations. I would scorn, too, to use a 
 newspaper article, unless it were signed by one who gave his own name and 
 whose statement, if not true, can be disproved, and I would believe such a 
 one in preference to any politician over there who was thirty-six miles away 
 from Elmira. That gentleman, so prompt to contradict a surgeon, might 
 perhaps have smelled the small-pox, but he could not see it, and I venture 
 to say that if he knew the small-pox was there he would have taken very 
 good care to keep thirty-six miles away. He is a wonderful witness. He 
 is not even equal to the mutilated evidence brought in yesterday. But, sir, 
 it appears from the official record that the Confederates came from Elmira, 
 from Fort Delaware, and from Rock Island, and other places, with their 
 fingers frozen off, with their toes frozen off, and with teeth dropped out. 
 
 But the great question is behind. Every American, North and South, 
 must lament that our country has ever impeached its civilization by such an 
 exhibition of horrors on any side, and I speak of these things with no de 
 gree of pleasure. God knows, if I could hide them from the view of the 
 world I would gladly do it. But the great question is, at last, who was 
 responsible for this state of things ? And that is really the only material 
 question with which statesmen now should deal. Sir, it is well known that, 
 when the war opened, at first the authorities of the United States deter 
 mined that they would not exchange prisoners. The first prisoners captured 
 by the Federal forces were the crew of the Savannah, and they were put in 
 chains and sentenced to be executed. Jefferson Davis hearing of this, com 
 municated through the lines, and the Confederates having meanwhile also 
 captured prisoners, he threatened retaliation in case those men suffered, and 
 the sentences against the crew of the Savannah were not executed. Subse 
 quently our friends from this way I believe my friend before me from 
 New York (Mr, Cox) w^as one insisted that there should be a cartel for the 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 451 
 
 exchange of prisoners. In 1862 that cartel was agreed upon. In substance 
 and briefly it was that there should be an exchange of man for man and 
 officer for officer, and whichever held an excess at the time of exchange 
 should parole the excess. This worked very well until 1863. I am going 
 over the facts very briefly. 
 
 Mr. Starkweather. I do not wish, and none on this side wishes to inter 
 rupt the gentleman. I believe he has spoken over his hour. We desire 
 that he shall speak as long as he chooses, but we wish to have a free dis 
 cussion and want a little time on this side. 
 
 The Speaker. The gentleman from Georgia has not exhausted his hour 
 yet. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I was reciting briefly the facts. In 1863 this cartel was in 
 terrupted ; the Federal authorities refused to continue the exchange. Now 
 commenced a history which the world ought to know, and which I hope the 
 House will grant me the privilege of stating, and I shall do it from official 
 records. This, I say frankly to the gentlemen on the other side, was in 
 truth one of the severest blows stricken at the Confederacy, this refusal to ex 
 change prisoners in 1 863 and continued through 1 864. The Confederates made 
 every effort to renew the cartel. Among other things, on the 2d of July, 
 1863, the Vice-President of the Confederacy, the gentleman to whom the 
 gentleman from Maine (Mr. Blaine) alluded the other day in so com 
 plimentary terms, Mr. Alexander H. Stephens, was absolutely commissioned 
 by President Davis to cross the lines and come to Washington to consult 
 with the Federal authorities, with a broad commission to agree upon any 
 cartel satisfactory to the other side for the exchange of prisoners. Mr. 
 Davis said to him, " Your mission is simply one of humanity, and has no 
 political aspect." Mr. Stephens undertook that work. What was the result ? 
 I wish to be careful, and I will state this exactly, correctly. Here is his 
 letter : 
 
 CONFEDERATE STATES STEAMER TORPEDO, 
 
 IN JAMES RIVER, July 4, 1863. 
 
 Sir : As military commissioner, I am the bearer of a communication in writing from 
 Jefferson Davis, commander-in-chief of the land and naval forces of the Confederate 
 States, to Abraham Lincoln, commander-in-chief of the land and naval forces of the 
 United States. -Hon. Robert Ould, Confederate States agent of exchange, accompanies 
 me as secretary, for the purpose of delivering the communication in person and coufer- 
 rin g upon the subject to which it relates. I desire to proceed to Washington in the steamer 
 Torpedo, commanded by Lieutenant Hunter Davidson, of the Confederate States navy, 
 no person being on board but Hon. Mr. Ould, myself, and the boat s officers and crew. 
 
 Yours, most respectfully, 
 
 ALEX. H. STEPHENS. 
 
 To S. H. Lee, Admiral. 
 This was directed to S. H. Lee, admiral. Here is the answer : 
 
 Acting Hear- Admiral S. H. Lee, Hampton Hoads : 
 
 The request of Alexander H. Stephens is inadmissible 
 
 GIDEON WELLS, 
 
 Secretary of the Navy. 
 
 You will acknowledge that Mr. Stephens s humane mission failed. The 
 Confederate authorities gave to that mission as much dignity and character 
 as possible. They supposed that of all men in the South Mr. Stephens most 
 nearly had your confidence. They selected him to be the bearer of mes 
 sages for the sake of humanity in behalf of the brave Federal soldiers who 
 were unfortunate prisoners of war. The Federal Government would not 
 even receive him j the Federal authorities would not hear him. 
 
452 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 What was the next effort ? After Mr. Stephens s mission failed, the 
 commissioner for the exchange of prisoners, Colonel Ould, having exhausted 
 all his efforts to get the cartel renewed, on the 24th January, 1864, wrote 
 the following letter to Major-General E. A. Hitchcock, agent of exchange 
 on the Federal side : 
 
 CONFEDERATE STATES OP AMERICA, WAR DEPARTMENT, 
 
 RICHMOND, VIRGINIA, January 24, 1864. 
 
 Sir : In view of the difficulties attending the exchange and release of prisoners, I pro 
 pose that all such on either side shall be attended by a proper number of their own sur 
 geons, who, under rules to be established, shall be permitted to take charge of their 
 health and comfort. I also propose that these surgeons shall act as commissaries, with 
 power to receive and distribute such contributions of money, food, clothing, and medi 
 cines as may be forwarded for the relief of the prisoners. I further propose that these 
 surgeons shall be selected by their own government, and that they shall have full liberty, 
 at any and all times, through the agents of exchange, to make reports not only of their 
 own acts, but of any matters relating to the welfare of the prisoners. 
 
 Respectfully, your obedient servant, 
 
 ROBERT OULD, 
 
 Agent of Exchange. 
 Major- General E. A. Hitchcock, Agent of Exchange. 
 
 The Speaker. The hour of the gentleman has expired. 
 
 Mr. Randall. I move the gentleman from Georgia be allowed to pro 
 ceed. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. I do not object ; but before the gentleman from Georgia 
 passes from the subject upon which he is now speaking, I would be glad to 
 know 
 
 The Speaker. If there be no objection, the gentleman from Georgia will 
 have leave to proceed. 
 
 There was no objection. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. I believe the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Hill) was a 
 member of the Confederate Senate. I find in a historical book of some 
 authenticity of character that in the Confederate Congress, Senator Hill, 
 of Georgia, introduced the following resolution, relating to prisoners. 
 
 Mr. Hill.- -You are putting me on trial now, are you? Go ahead. 
 
 Mr. JBlaine. This is the resolution : 
 
 That every person pretending to be a soldier or officer of the United States, who shall 
 be captured on the soil of the Confederate States after the 1st day of January, 1863, shall 
 be presumed to have entered the territory of the Confederate States with the intent to in 
 cite insurrection and abet murder ; and, unless satisfactory proof be adduced to the con 
 trary before the military court before which the trial shall be had, shall suffer death. 
 This section shall continue in force until the proclamation issued by Abraham Lincoln, 
 dated at Washington on the 22d day of September, 1862, shall be rescinded, and the policy 
 therein announced shall be abandoned, and no longer. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I will say to the gentleman from Maine, very frankly, that I 
 have not the slightest recollection of ever hearing that resolution before. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. The gentleman does not deny, however, that he was the 
 author of it ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I do not know. My own impression is that I was not the 
 author ; but I do not pretend to recollect the circumstances. If the gentle 
 man can give me the circumstances under which the resolution was intro 
 duced, they might recall the matter to my mind. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. Allow me to read further : 
 
 October 1, 1862. The judiciary committee of the Confederate Congress made a report 
 and offered a set of resolutions upon the subject of President Lincoln s proclamation, from 
 vvhich the following are extracts : 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 453 
 
 2. Every white person who shall act as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer 
 commanding negroes or mulattoes against the Confederate States, or who shall arm, or 
 ganize, train, or prepare negroes or mulattoes for military service, or aid them in any 
 military enterprise against the Confederate States, shall, if captured, suffer death. 
 
 3. Every commissioned or non-commissioned officer of the enemy who shall incite 
 slaves to rebellion, or pretend to give them freedom under the aforementioned act of 
 Congress and proclamation, by abducting or causing them to be abducted or inducing 
 them to abscond, shall, if captured, smfer death. 
 
 Thereupon Senator Hill, of Georgia, is recorded as having offered the 
 resolution I have read. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I was chairman of the judiciary committee of the Senate. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. And this resolution came directly from that committee. 
 
 Mr. Hill. It is very probable that, like the Chairman of the Committee 
 on the Rules at the last session, I may have consented to that report. 
 
 Mr. Elaine. The gentleman then admits that he did make that report ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I really do not remember it. I think it very likely. 
 
 A Member (to Mr. Elaine). What is the book? 
 
 Mr. I3laine.--The book from which I have read is entitled " Republican 
 ism in America," by R. Guy McClellan. It appears to be a book of good 
 credit and authenticity. I merely want it settled whether the gentleman 
 from Georgia was or was not the author of that resolution. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I say to the gentleman frankly that I really do not re 
 member. 
 
 Mr. .Blaine. The gentleman does not say he was not the author. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I do not. I will say this: I think I was not the author. 
 Possibly I reported the resolution. It refers in terms to " pretended," not 
 real soldiers. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. I thought that inasmuch as the gentleman s line of argu 
 ment was to show the character of the Confederate policy, this might aid him 
 a little in calling up the facts pertinent thereto. 
 
 Mr. Hill. With all due deference to the gentleman, I reply he did not 
 think any such thing. He thought he would divert me from the purpose of 
 my argument and break its force by 
 
 Mr. Blaine. Oh, no. 
 
 Mr. Hill. He thought he would get up a discussion about certain meas 
 ures presented in the Confederate Congress having no relation to the subject 
 now under discussion, but which grew out of the peculiar relation of 
 Southern States to a population than in servitude a population which 
 Confederate Government feared might be incited to insurrection and meas 
 ures were doubtless proposed which the Confederate Government may have 
 thought it proper to take to protect helpless women and children in 
 South from insurrection. But I shall not allow myself to be diverted by 
 gentleman to o either into the history of slavery or of domestic insurrec 
 tion, or, as a friend near me suggests, "John Brown s raid." 
 that if I or any gentleman on the committee was the author of that resoluti 
 which I think more than probable, our purpose was not to do injustice to any 
 man, woman, or child North or South, but to adopt what we deemed 
 gent measures within the laws of war to protect our wives and children fi 
 servile insurrection and slaughter while our brave sons were in 
 That is all, sir. r 
 
 But, sir, I have read a letter from the Confederate commissioner of 
 change, written in 1864, proposing that each side send surgeons wi 
 prisoners ; that they nurse and treat the prisoners ; that the 
 
454 SENATOR B. H, HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 ties should send as many as they pleased ; that those surgeons be commis 
 sioned also as commissaries to furnish supplies of clothing and food and 
 everything else needed for the comfort of prisoners. 
 
 Now, sir, how did the Federal Government treat that offer? It broke the 
 cartel for the exchange of prisoners ; it refused to entertain a proposition, 
 even when Mr. Stephens headed the commission, to renew it ; and then, sir, 
 when the Confederates proposed that their own surgeons should accompany 
 the prisoners of the respective armies, the Federal authorities did not answer 
 the letter. No reply was ever received. 
 
 Then, again, in August, 1864, the Confederates made two more proposi 
 tions. I will state that the cartel of exchange was broken by the Federal 
 authorities for certain alleged reasons. Well, in August, 1864, prisoners ac 
 cumulating on both sides to such an extent, and the Federal Government 
 having refused every proposition from the Confederate authorities to provide 
 for the comfort and treatment of these prisoners, the Confederates next pro 
 posed, in a letter from Colonel Ould, dated the 10th of August, 1864, waiv 
 ing every objection the Federal Government had made, to agree to any and 
 all terms to renew the exchange of prisoners, man for man, and officer for 
 officer, as the Federal Government should prescribe. Yet, sir, the latter re 
 jected that proposition. It took a second letter to bring an answer to that 
 proposition. 
 
 Then, again, in that same month of August, 1864, the Confederate 
 authorities did this : Finding that the Federal Government would not ex 
 change prisoners at all ; that it would not let surgeons go into the Con 
 federacy ; finding that it would not let medicines be sent into the Confed 
 eracy ; meanwhile the ravages of war continuing and depleting the scant 
 supplies of the South, which was already unable to feed adequately its own 
 defenders, and much less able to properly feed and clothe the thousands of 
 prisoners in Confederate prisons, what did the Confederates propose ? They 
 proposed to send the Federal sick and wounded prisoners without equivalent. 
 Now, sir, I want the House and the country to understand this : that in 
 August, 1864, the Confederate Government officially proposed to Federal 
 authorities that if they would send steamships of transportation in any form 
 to Savannah, they should have their sick and wounded prisoners without 
 equivalent. That proposition, communicated to the Federal authorities in 
 August, 1864, was not answered until December, 1864. In December, 1864, 
 the Federal Government sent ships to Savannah. Now, the records will 
 show that the chief suffering at Andersonville was between August and 
 December. The Confederate authorities sought to avert it by asking the 
 Federal Government to come and take its prisoners without equivalent, 
 without return, and it refused to do that until four or five months had 
 elapsed. 
 
 That is not the only appeal which was made to the Federal Government. 
 I now call the attention of the House to another appeal. It was from the 
 Federal prisoners themselves. They knew as well as the Southern people did 
 the mission of Mr. Stephens. They knew the offer of January 24, for sur 
 geons, for medicine and clothing, for comforts and food, and for pro 
 visions of every sort. They knew that the Confederate authorities had 
 offered to let these be sent to them by their own government. They knew 
 that had been rejected. They knew of the offer of August 10, 1864. They 
 knew of the other offer, to return sick and wounded without equiva 
 lent. They knew all these offers had been rejected. Therefore they held a 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 455 
 
 meeting and passed the following resolutions ; and I call the attention of the 
 gentleman on the other side to these resolutions. I ask, if they will not be 
 lieve the surgeons of their hospitals ; if they will not believe Mr. Stan ton s 
 report ; if they will not believe Surgeon-General Barnes s report. I beg from 
 them to know if they will not believe the earnest, heart-rending appeal of 
 those starving, suffering heroes ? Here are the resolutions passed by the 
 Federal prisoners, the 28th of September, 1864. 
 
 Resolved, That while allowing the Confederate authorities all due praise for the atten 
 tion paid to our prisoners, numbers of our men are daily consigned to early graves, in the 
 prime of manhood, far from home and kindred, and this is not caused intentionally by the 
 Confederate Government, but by the force of circumstances. 
 
 Brave men are always honest, and true soldiers never slander. They say 
 the horrors they suffered were not intentional ; that the Confederate Govern 
 ment had done all it could to avert them. Sir, I believe this testimony of 
 gallant men as being of the highest character, coming from the sufferers 
 themselves. 
 
 They further resolved : 
 
 The prisoner is obliged to go without shelter, and in a great portion of cases without 
 medicine. 
 
 Resolved, That whereas in the fortune of war it was our lot to become prisoners, we 
 have suffered patiently, and are still willing to suffer, if by so doing we can benefit the 
 country ; but we would most respectfully beg to say that we are not willing to suffer to 
 further the ends of any party or clique to the detriment of our own honor, our families, 
 and our country. . And we would beg this affair be explained to us, that we may con 
 tinue to hold the government in the respect which t is necessary to make a good citizen 
 and soldier. 
 
 Was this touching appeal heeded ? Let any gentleman, who belonged 
 to the "clique or party that the resolutions condemn, answer for his 
 party. 
 
 Now, sir, it was in reference to that state of things, exactly, that Dr. 
 Jones reported, as I have already read to the House, in his report which was 
 mutilated before that committee of Congress and in the trial of Wirz it 
 was in consequence of that very state of things that Dr. Jones said that de 
 pression of mind and despondency and home-sickness of these poor prisoners 
 carried more to their graves than did physical causes of disease. That was 
 not wonderful at all. 
 
 But, Mr. Speaker, why were all these appeals resisted ? Why did the 
 Federal authorities refuse to allow their own surgeons to go with their own 
 soldiers, and carry them medicine and clothing and comfort and treatment 
 Why ? Why did they refuse to exchange man for man, and officer for 
 officer? Why did they refuse to stand up to their own solemn engage 
 ments, made in 1862, for the exchange of prisoners? Who is at fault 
 There must be a reason for this. That is the next point to which I wish to 
 call the attention of the House. Sir, listen to the reading. The New York 
 Tribune, referring to this matter in 1864, said I suppose you will believe 
 Tribune in 1864, if you do not believe it now : 
 
 In August the rebels offered to renew the exchange man for man. General Grant 
 then telegraphed the following important order : It is hard on our men held 
 prisons not to exchange them, but it is humanity to those left in the ranks to tight 
 battles. Every man released on parole or otherwise becomes an active sol 
 us at once, either directly or indirectly. If we commence a system of exchange wh 
 liberates all prisoners taken, we will have to fight on till the whole Booth is extermii 
 If we hold those caught, they amount to no more than dead men. At this particulu 
 
45 C SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 to release all rebel prisoners North would insure Sherman s defeat and would compro 
 mise our safety here. 
 
 Mr. Garfield. What date is that? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Eighteen hundred and sixty-four. 
 
 Mr. Garjield. What date in that year ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I do not note the day or month. I have read the telegram 
 which is taken from the New York Tribune, after August, 1864. 
 
 Here is General Grant s testimony before the Committee on the exchange 
 of prisoners, February 11, 1865. You believe him, do you not? 
 
 Question. It has been said that we refused to exchange prisoners because we found 
 ours starved, diseased, and unserviceable when we received them, and did not like to ex 
 change sound men for such men. 
 
 That was the question propounded to him. His answer was : 
 
 Answer. There never has been any such reason as that. That has been a reason for 
 making exchanges. I will confess that if our men who are prisoners in the South were 
 really well taken care of, suffering nothing except a little privation of liberty, then, in a 
 military point of view, it would not be good policy for us to exchange, because every 
 man they got back is forced right into the army at once, while that is not the case with 
 our prisoners when we receive them ; in fact, the half of our returned prisoners will 
 never go into the army again, and none of them will until after they have had a furlough 
 of thirty or sixty days. Still, the fact of their suffering as they do is a reason for 
 making this exchange as rapidly as possible. 
 
 Q. And never has been a reason for not making the exchange ? 
 
 A. It never has. Exchanges having been suspended by reason of disagreement on 
 the part of agents of exchange on both sides before I came in command of the armies of 
 the United States, and it then being near the opening of the spring campaign, I did not 
 deem it advisable or just to the men who had to fight our battles to re-enforce the enemy 
 with thirty or forty thousand disciplined troops at that time. An immediate resumption 
 of exchange would have had that effect without giving us corresponding benefits. The 
 suffering said to exist among our prisoners South was a powerful argument against the 
 course pursued, and so I felt it. 
 
 There is no disputing the fact that, with the knowledge that his prisoners 
 were suffering in the South, he insisted that the exchange should not be re 
 newed, because it would increase the military power of the enemy. Now, 
 that may have been a good military reason. I do not quote it for the pur 
 pose of reflecting upon General Grant in the slightest. I am giving the 
 facts of history. I insist that the Confederacy shall not be held responsible 
 for the results of the war policy of the Federal Government, especially when 
 the record proves that the Confederate authorities made every possible 
 effort to avert these results. Nor do I allege inhumanity on the part of 
 General Grant or the Federal Government. I give you the facts, and I have 
 given you General Grant s interpretation of those facts. Let the world 
 judge. 
 
 Now, sir, we have other authority upon that subject. Here is a letter 
 by Junius Henri Browne. I do not know the gentleman. He signs his 
 name to the letter. He writes like a scholar. He is a Northern gentleman, 
 and I am not aware that his statement has ever been contradicted. Now, 
 what does he say ? 
 
 NEW YORK, August 8, 1865. 
 
 Moreover, General Butler in his speech at Lowell, Mass, stated positively that 
 he had been ordered by Mr. Stanton to put forward the negro question to complicate 
 
 and prevent the exchange Every one is aware that when the exchange did take 
 
 place, not the slightest alteration had occurred in the question, and that our prisoners 
 might as well have been released twelve or eighteen mouths before as at the resumption 
 of the cartel, which would have saved to the Republic at least twelve or fifteen thousand 
 heroic lives. 
 
HIS LIFE SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 457 
 
 That they were not saved is due alone to Edwin M. Stanton s peculiar policy and dog 
 ged obstinacy; and, as I have remarked before, heis unquestionably the digger of tin- 
 unnamed graves that crowd the vicinity of every Southern prison with historic and never 
 to be forgotten horrors. 
 
 That is the testimony of a Northern man against Mr. Stanton. And he 
 goes on : 
 
 I regret the revival of this painful subject, but the gratuitous effort of Mr. Dana to re 
 lieve the secretary of war from a responsibility he seems willing to bear, and which 
 merely as a question of policy, independent of all considerations of humanity, must be re 
 garded as of great weight, has compelled me to vindicate myself from the charge of mak 
 ing grave statements without due consideration. 
 
 Once for all let me declare that I have never found fault with any one because I was 
 detained in prison, for I am well aware that was a matter in which no one but myself and 
 possibly a few personal friends would feel any interest ; that my sole motive for impeach 
 ing the secretary of war was that the people of the loyal North might know to whom they 
 were indebted for the cold-blooded and needless sacrifice of their fathers and brothers, 
 their husbands and their sons. 
 
 I understand that Mr. Browne is a contributor to Harper s MontJdy, and 
 was then. The man, so he tells you, who was responsible for these atrocities 
 at Andersonville was the late secretary of war, Mr. Stanton. 
 
 Now, Mr. Speaker, what have I proven? I have proven that the Fed 
 eral authorities broke the cartel for the exchange of prisoners deliberately ; 
 I have proven that they refused to reopen that cartel when it was proposed 
 by Mr. Stephens, as a commissioner, solely on the ground of humanity ; I 
 have proven that they made medicine contraband of war, and thereby left 
 the South to the dreadful necessity of treating their own prisoners with such 
 medicine as could be improvised in the Confederacy ; I have proven that 
 they refused to allow surgeons of their own appointment, of their own army, 
 to accompany their prisoners in the South, with full license and liberty to 
 carry food, medicine, and raiment, and every comfort that the prisoners 
 might need ; I have proven that when the Federal Government made the 
 pretext for interrupting the cartel for the exchange of prisoners, the Con 
 federates yielded every point and proposed to exchange prisoners on the 
 terms of the Federal Government, and that the latter refused it ; I have 
 proven that the Confederates then proposed to return the Federal sick and 
 wounded without equivalent in August, 1864, and never got a reply until 
 December, 1864 ; I have proven that high Federal officers gave as a reason 
 why they would not exchange prisoners that it would be humanity to the 
 prisoners but cruelty to the soldiers in the field, and therefore it was a part of 
 the Federal military policy to let Federal prisoners suffer rather than that the 
 Confederacy should have an increase of its military force ; and the Federal 
 Government refused it, when by such exchange it would have received more 
 prisoners than it returned to the Confederates. 
 
 Now, what is the answer to all this? Against whom does the charge lie, 
 if there are to be accusations of any, for the horrors of Andersonville 
 
 Mr. Bright. What was the percentage of death in the prison ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I have already given it. I have proved also that, With 
 the horrors at Andersonville the gentleman from Maine has so ostentatiously 
 paraded, and for an obvious partisan purpose of exciting upon this floor a 
 bitter sectional discussion, from which his party, and perhaps himself, may 
 be the beneficiary, greater sufferings occurred in the prisons where 
 federate soldiers were confined, and that the percentage of death was 
 per cent, greater among Confederate troops in Federal hands than anio 
 
458 SENATOR R II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Federal soldiers held by the Confederates. And I need not state the con 
 trast between the needy Confederacy and the abundance of Federal supplies 
 and resources. 
 
 Now, sir, when the gentleman rises again to give breath to that effusion 
 of unmitigated genius without fact to sustain it, in which he says, 
 
 And I here, before God, measuring my words, knowing their full extent and import 
 declare that neither the deeds of the Duke of Alva in the Low Countries, nor the mas 
 sacre of Saint Bartholomew, nor the thumb-screws and engines of torture of the Spanish 
 Inquisition, begin to compare in atrocity with the hideous crime of Audersonville, 
 
 let him add that the mortality at Andersonville and other Confederate 
 prisons falls short by more than three per cent, the mortality in Federal 
 prisons. 
 
 Sir, if any man will reflect a moment he will see that there was reason 
 why the Confederate Government should desire exchange of prisoners. It 
 was scarce of food, pinched for clothing, closed up with a blockade of its 
 ports ; it needed troops ; its ranks were thinning. 
 
 Now, Mr. Speaker, it is proper that I should read one or two sentences 
 from the man who has been arraigned as the vilest murderer in history. 
 After the battles around Richmond, in which McClellan was defeated, some 
 ten thousand prisoners fell into the hands of the Confederacy. Victory had 
 perched upon its standard, and the rejoicing naturally following victory was 
 heard in the ranks of the Confederate army. Mr. Davis went out to make a 
 gratulatory speech. Now, gentlemen of the House, gentlemen of the other 
 side, if you are willing to do justice, let me simply call your attention to the 
 words of this man that then fell from his lips in the hour of victory. Speak 
 ing to the soldiers, he said : 
 
 You are fighting for all that is dearest to man ; and, though opposed to a foe who dis 
 regards many of the usages of civilized war, your humanity to the wounded and prisoners 
 was a fit aiu> crowning glory to your valor. 
 
 Above the victory, above every other consideration, even that victory 
 which they believed insured protection to their homes and families, he tells 
 them that at last their crowning glory was their humanity to the wounded 
 and prisoners who had fallen into their hands. 
 
 The gentleman from Maine yesterday introduced the Richmond Exam 
 iner as a witness in his behalf. Now it is a rule of law that a man cannot 
 impeach his own witness. It is true the Examiner hated Mr. Davis with a 
 cordial hatred. The gentleman could not have introduced the testimony of 
 perhaps a bitterer foe to Mr. Davis. Why did it hate him ? Here are its 
 reasons : " The chivalry and humanity of Jefferson Davis will inevitably 
 ruin the Confederacy." That is your witness, and the witness is worthy of 
 your cause. You introduced the witness to prove Mr. Davis guilty of inhu 
 manity, and he tells you that the humanity of Mr. Davis will ruin the Con 
 federacy. That is not all. In the same paper it says : " The enemy have 
 gone from one unmanly cruelty to another." Recollect, this is your witness. 
 " The enemy have gone from one unmanly cruelty to another, encouraged by 
 their impunity, till they are now and have for sometime been inflicting on 
 the people of this country the worst horrors of barbarous and uncivilized 
 war." Yet in spite of all this the Examiner alleged, " Mr. Davis, in his deal 
 ing with the enemy, was as gentle as a sucking dove." 
 
 Mr. Garfield. What volume is that ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. The same volume, page 531, and is taken from the Richmond 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 459 
 
 Examiner the paper the gentleman quoted from yesterday. And thnt is 
 the truth. Those of us who were there at the time know it to bt the fact. 
 One of the persistent charges brought by that paper and some others against 
 Mr. Davis was his humanity. Over and over again Mr. Davis has been 
 heard to say, and I use his very language, when applied to retaliate for 
 the horrors inflicted upon our prisoners, " The inhumanity of the enemy to 
 our prisoners can be no justification for a disregard by us of the rules of civil 
 ized war and of Christianity." Therefore he persisted in it, and this paper 
 cried out against him that it would ruin the Confederacy. 
 
 I am sure I owe this House an apology for having detained it so long ; I 
 shall detain it but a few moments longer. After all, what should men do 
 who really desire the restoration of peace and to prevent the recurrence of 
 the horrors of war ? How ought they to look at this question ? Sir, war is 
 always horrible ; war always brings hardships ; it brings death, it brings 
 sorrow, it brings ruin, it brings devastation. And he is unworthy to be 
 called a statesman, looking to the pacification of this country, who will parade 
 the horrors inseparable from war for the purpose of keeping up the strife 
 that produced the war. 
 
 I do not doubt that I am the bearer of an unwelcome message to the 
 gentleman from Maine and his party. He says that there* are Confederates 
 in this body, and that they are going to combine with a few from the North 
 for the purpose of controlling this government. If one were to listen to the 
 gentlemen on the other side he would be in doubt whether they rejoiced 
 more when the South left the Union, or regretted most when the South came 
 back to the Union that their fathers helped to form, and to which they will 
 forever hereafter contribute as much of patriotic ardor, of" noble devotion, 
 and of willing sacrifice as the constituents of the gentleman from Maine. 
 Oh, Mr. Speaker, why cannot gentlemen on the other side rise to the height 
 of this great argument of patriotism? Is the bosom of the country always 
 to be torn with this miserable sectional debate whenever a Presidential elec 
 tion is pending ? To that great debate of half a century before secession 
 there were left no adjourned questions. The victory of the North was abso 
 lute, and God knows the submission of the South was complete. But, sir, 
 we have recovered from the humiliation of defeat, and we come here among 
 you and we ask you to give us the greetings accorded to brothers by brothers. 
 We propose to join you in every patriotic endeavor and to unite with you in 
 every patriotic aspiration that looks to the benefit, the advancement, and the 
 honor of every part of our common country. Let us, gentleman of all par 
 ties, in this centennial year indeed have a jubilee of freedom. We divide 
 with you the glories of the Revolution and of the succeeding years of our 
 national life before that unhappy division that four years night of gloom 
 and despair and so we shall divide with you the glories of all the future. 
 
 Sir, my message is this : There are no Confederates in this house ; there 
 are now no Confederates anywhere ; there are no Confederate schemes, 
 ambitions, hopes, desires, or purposes here. But the South is here, and here 
 she intends to remain. Go on and pass your qualifying acts, trample upon 
 the Constitution you have sworn to support ; abnegate the pledges of your 
 fathers ; incite raids upon our people, and multiply your infidelities until 
 shall be like the stars of heaven or the sands of the seashore, without num 
 ber ; but know this, for all your iniquities the South will never again seek a 
 remedy in the madness of another secession. We are here ; we are in the 
 house of our fathers, our brothers are our companions, and we are at home 
 to stay, thank God ! 
 
460 SENATOR B. If. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 We come to gratify no revenges, to retaliate no wrongs, to resent no past 
 insults, to reopen no strife. We come with a patriotic purpose to do what 
 ever in our political power shall lie to restore an honest, economical, and 
 Constitutional administration of the government. We come charging upon 
 the Union no wrongs to us. The Union never wronged us. The Union has 
 been an unmixed blessing to every section, to every State, to every man of 
 every color in America. We charge all our wrongs upon that " higher law 
 fanaticism, that never kept a pledge nor obeyed a law. The South did seek 
 to leave the association of those who, she believed, would not keep fidelity 
 to their covenants ; the South sought to go to herself ; but so far from having 
 lost our fidelity for the Constitution which our fathers made, when we sought 
 to go, we hugged that Constitution to our bosoms and carried it with us. 
 
 Brave Union men of the North, followers of Webster and Fillmore, of 
 Clay and Cass and Douglass you who fought for the Union for the sake 
 of the Union ; you who ceased to fight when the battle ended and the sword 
 was sheathed we have no quarrel with you, whether Republicans or Demo 
 crats. We felt your heavy arm in the carnage of battle ; but above the 
 roar of the cannon we heard your voice of kindness, calling "Brothers, come 
 back ! And we bear witness to you this day that that voice of kindness 
 did more to thin the Confederate ranks and weaken the Confederate arm 
 than did all the artillery exploded in the struggle. We are here to co-oper 
 ate with you ; to do whatever we can, in spite of all our sorrows, to rebuild 
 the Union ; to restore peace ; to be a blessing to the country, and to make 
 the American Union what our fathers intended it to be the glory of America 
 and a blessing to humanity. 
 
 But to you, gentlemen, who seek still to continue strife, and who, riot 
 satisfied with the sufferings already endured, the blood already shed, the 
 waste already committed, insist that we shall be treated as criminals and 
 oppressed as victims, only because we defended our convictions to you we 
 make no concessions. To you who followed up the war after the brave sol 
 diers that fought it had made peace and gone to their homes to you we 
 have no concessions to offer. Martyrs owe no apologies to tyrants And 
 while we are* ready to make every sacrifice for the Union, even secession, 
 however defeated and humbled, will confess no sins to fanaticism, however 
 bigoted and exacting. 
 
 Yet, while we make to you no concession, we come even to you in no spirit 
 of revenge. We would multiply blessings in common for you andfor us. We 
 have but one ambition, and that is to add our political power to the patriotic 
 Union men of the North in order to compel fanaticism to obey the law and 
 live in the Union according to the Constitution. We do not propose to com 
 pel you by oaths, for you who breed strife only to get office and power will 
 not keep oaths. 
 
 Sir, we did the Union one great wrong. The Union never wronged the 
 South ; but we of the South did to the Union one great wrong ; and we 
 come, as far as we can, to repair it. We wronged the Union grievously 
 when we left it to be seized and rent and torn by the men who had de 
 nounced it as "a covenant with hell and a league with the devil." We ask 
 you, gentlemen of the Republican party, to rise above all your animosities. 
 Forget your own sins. Let us unite to repair the evils that distract and 
 oppress the country. Let us turn our backs upon the past, and let it be said 
 in the future that he shall be the greatest patriot, the truest patriot, the 
 noblest patriot, who shall do most to repair the wrong of the past and pro 
 mote the glories of the future. 
 
THE STARS AND STRIPES. 
 
 Speech of Mr. Hill in Atlanta, Ga., on the reception of a flag, presented to the city 
 by visitors from the State of Ohio. The correspondence preceding the speech fully explains 
 the occasion for its delivery. The address itself is one of the most finished productions 
 of the orator, and is one of the few that he ever wrote out in full before delivery. It 
 contains the most luminous discussion of the theory of our Constitution, a patriotic vin 
 dication of the purposes of the South, and a passionate appeal for the death of sectional 
 ism and the complete restoration of the Union. It contains much splendid declamation, 
 and is commended to the student and elocutionist. 
 
 MAYOR S OFFICE, CLEVELAND, O., 
 
 August 28, 1876. 
 Hon. C. C. Hammock, Mayor City of Atlanta: 
 
 The Ohio excursionists, from Cleveland and Cincinnati, express to you 
 this day a national flag, a gift to the city of Atlanta, as a slight memento 
 for the generous hospitality and good will shown us on our recent excursion 
 to your State. 
 
 Without forgetting any, we desire to speak especially for the untiring 
 efforts of some whose names we forbear to mention, to whom we are in 
 so large a degree indebted for our enjoyable trip to the sunny South. 
 Such a fraternal expression of favor and interest on the part of Southern 
 friends cannot fail to greatly advance national prosperity and union. 
 
 As long as there are Southern breezes to expand the folds of the emblem 
 of peace and unity, may the eyes of the world look upon us as a free and 
 united people. H. A. MASSEY, Chairman. 
 
 Cleveland, 0. 
 
 Geo. If. Burrows, Secretary, 
 
 Cincinnati, O. 
 
 MAYOR HAMMOCK S REPLY. 
 
 \ 
 
 ATLANTA, GA., September 2, 1876. 
 Hon. H. A. Massey and others of the Ohio Delegates of the Great Southern 
 
 Excursion Party to Atlanta and the South : 
 
 GENTS : Our hearts are full of good feelings, and on behalf of one and 
 all of our people, I acknowledge the chaste feeling and modestly written 
 letter of Mr. Massey, conveying to us the intelligence you had sent us, as a 
 remembrance of our efforts to make your short stay with us pleasant, an ele 
 gant national flag. The very timely, yes, truly thoughtful gift, makes 
 feel that you thought us worthy members of that glorious . nion of 
 and people, of which it is the emblem ; that we honored and respected it and 
 the laws of our common land ; and that we not only desire but are deter 
 mined, to see that the rights of all classes of our citizens, white and 
 protected. Yes, I earnestly and again thank you for this splendid 
 feel certain that it will never be unfolded to the breeze without calling forth 
 
 461 
 
462 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 wild feelings of pride ; and, mark you, one and all of our people will stand 
 as firmly by the national government, and guard this, the emblem of our 
 national honor, as they once fought to separate themselves from it, and the 
 conceived wrongs which it represented. We feel we are one again, and 
 that your national flag is ours, and that ours is yours. 
 
 In a few days it w r ill be publicly received, and due acknowledgments 
 made by one of our most gifted orators the Hon. B. H. Hill. Arrange 
 ments are being made. 
 
 I take the liberty of adding, no member of this community rejoices more 
 heartily over this generous act of yours than the big-hearted, patriotic 
 originator and executor of that excursion Dr. W. H. White. Our people 
 here, over and over, have thanked him, so do I, for his eiforts to bring us 
 together. 
 
 Gentlemen, one and all of you, your friends, yes, all Northern people, 
 will be welcomed to our city. Mr. Hill will say as much for the whole State. 
 
 Yours, with most profound respect, 
 
 C. C. HAMMOCK, 
 
 Mayor City of Atlanta. 
 
 ATLANTA, September 5, 1876. 
 Hon. B. H. Hill : 
 
 DEAR SIR : As you will see by the accompanying letter from Hon. H. 
 A. Massey, of Cleveland O., the citizens of that city and that great State who 
 visited this city and the South last February on an invitation extended to 
 them by the Mayor and General Council, Board of Trade of Atlanta, and 
 Governor of the State, and which was known as the great Western excur 
 sion, have in a most feeling and patriotic way presented us a splendid national 
 flag. 
 
 In this we recognize their appreciation of our love of the Union, of the 
 firm intention of our people to maintain its honor, to see that the laws of the 
 land are enforced, and to stand by the emblem of our nationality. 
 
 Sir, we feel that this gratif}dng and thoughtful mark of their esteem, of 
 their good will, should be publicly received, and we desire you, because of 
 your known Union sentiments and heartfelt desire for permanent reconcilia 
 tion, for fraternal love between all sections of our common country, to 
 receive it, not only on behalf of the citizens of Atlanta, but of the whole peo 
 ple of the State of Georgia. 
 
 A general invitation has been extended to all citizens of the State to be 
 present. 
 
 The gathering will be in front of the Kimball House, Thursday afternoon, 
 at four and a half o clock 
 
 C. C. HAMMOCK, Mayor, 
 R. F. MADDOX, 
 
 E. P. CHAMBERLAIN, 
 
 D. II. BEATIE. 
 
 ATLANTA, GA., September 5, 1876. 
 
 Gentlemen : Your very complimentary letter of this date, asking me, 
 because of my known Union sentiments, and heartfelt desire for permanent 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 463 
 
 reconciliation, for fraternal love between all sections of our common country," 
 to receive the splendid national flag, presented by patriotic citizens of Ohio to 
 the City of Atlanta, is before me. I will cheerfully comply with your request. 
 
 With high regard, I am, yours very truly, 
 
 BENJ. H. HILL. 
 
 Hon. C. C. Hammock, Mayor, R. F. Maddox, E. P. Chamberlain, 
 D. H. Beatie. 
 
 MAYOR HAMMOCK S REMARKS. 
 
 We have assembled for the purpose of giving a formal reception to a 
 national flag presented to the City of Atlanta by the members of the late 
 Northwestern excursion from the cities of Cleveland and Cincinnati, Ohio. 
 You have been selected, sir, as the orator on this occasion for the reason that 
 your name and fame are known not only to the City of Atlanta, but wherever 
 that flag floats. It is, therefore, my pleasure, and I am allowed the high 
 honor to present you this flag, and through you to the City of Atlanta. 
 
 MR. HILL S SPEECH. 
 
 Mr. Mayor, Gentlemen of the City Council, and Fellow-citizens : Im 
 mediately after the close of the late war, a gentleman of Northern birth, 
 raising, and education, one who had been a brave and faithful soldier with 
 the Northern army throughout the war, came to make his home in the South.* 
 He did not come to boast over the humiliation of our defeat. He did not 
 come to rob us in our helpless condition. He did not come to breed strife 
 between the races for the purpose of office and power. He came as a citi 
 zen, as a gentleman, as a patriot, to identify himself with us and with ours. 
 To him we opened our doors. He was welcomed to our firesides. What 
 were his previous political opinions we did not stop to inquire. What they 
 were we do not even now know. We should have been glad to welcome 
 millions of the same kind on the same mission. This gentleman, after a resi 
 dence of years, discovered that the great trouble between the North and 
 South arose chiefly from the fact that the people did not understand each 
 other. He discovered that the impression so industriously made by design 
 ing politicians in the North as to the temper, character, and purposes of our 
 people were not true. And he engaged in the patriotic work of doing what 
 he could to correct the wrong impression existing among his Northern 
 countrymen concerning us. Among other things, during the last spring, he 
 instigated a movement in which the Mayor, the Council, and Board of Trade 
 of the City of Atlanta, and the Governor of the State, co-operated, for the pur 
 pose of bringing a large number of Northwestern gentlemen to the Southern 
 portion of the country, that they might see and judge for themselves. 
 These gentlemen came. They returned, and so agreeable were the impres 
 sions made upon them, that a portion of them, representing the cities of 
 Cincinnati and Cleveland, in the great State of Ohio, have sent this flag to 
 be presented to the City of Atlanta as a testimonial of their high apprecia 
 tion of the hospitality and patriotism of our people. Thus you have the 
 history which brings to your view the present occasion. I have been selected 
 
 * This gentleman is Dr. W. H. White, and no man in our State is more respected for 
 
 his integrity, patriotism, and public spirit. 
 
464 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 to receive this flag in the name of the people of Atlanta and of the State of 
 Georgia, and in my heart I find it pleasing to do so. 
 
 In olden times the flag of a nation was intended as an emblem of the 
 nation s power, and was used only in war. In more modern times, it has been 
 made to represent the principles and character of the government as well as 
 its power, and is a symbol in peace as well as in war. This flag, with its 
 beautiful design, upon which you look this afternoon, was originally designed 
 and adopted by the Congress of 1777, one year after the declaration of inde 
 pendence. It was then ordered that the flag of the nation should consist of 
 thirteen stripes, alternate white and red, and thirteen stars in a blue field. 
 In 1794 two additional States had been admitted into the Union, and an 
 act was passed changing the flag to fifteen stripes and fifteen stars. By the 
 year 1818, five more States had been added, making twenty in all. Then an 
 act was passed, which fixed the flag as you now see it ; that is, that there 
 should be thirteen stripes, alternate white and red, and one star for each 
 State then in the Union, with one star to be added as each State should after 
 ward be admitted into the Union. The thirteen stripes represent, first, the 
 original thirteen States. They constitute what is properly the flag. It is a 
 symbol to the outside world. The white stripes are symbolical of good will 
 and friendship for our friends. The red stripe is a symbol of defiance to our 
 enemies. The union in the corner is formed of a blue ground and one star 
 for each State, and, in the original resolution adopted by Congress in 1777, it 
 is called "a new constellation." Who first suggested stars as appropriate 
 representatives of States is not definitely known. Perhaps the best author 
 ity is that the idea of combining the stars and stripes in our national emblem 
 was borrowed from the coat of arms of the Washington family. Be this as 
 it may, the thought that the stars upon that flag should represent the States 
 is a beautiful one. The word " star" is derived from the Greek and means 
 a heavenly body, and wherever that flag floats, whether on sea or on land, 
 whether in peace or in war, it speaks a voice which every statesman should 
 heed and every patriot should love, that as there can be no constellation in 
 the heavens without the stars, so there can be no Union in America without 
 the States. 
 
 Fellow-citizens, we are all sadly conscious of the fact that the States and 
 people for whom our fathers adopted that flag have had serious and fatal 
 differences. There cannot live in the North or the South a single patriot 
 who does not desire cordial reunion, and earnest fraternal association of all 
 portions of the country. How shall that great desirable object be com 
 pletely accomplished ? It cannot be brought about by unmanly concessions 
 on the one side nor by unmanly exactions on the other. 
 
 The spirit of truckling on the part of the Southern people, and the spirit 
 of exactions on the part of the Northern people are alike inimical to cordial 
 and permanent reunion. The people, North and South, must realize the 
 great fact that we are all a manly people, and will not consent to be hu 
 miliated as criminals. It is our duty, then, to meet every issue that arises in 
 a spirit of frankness, in a spirit of manliness and self-respect, and with a 
 single purpose to arrive at the truth. While I am addressing this large 
 audience to-day, we are conscious of the fact that there are a hundred rep 
 resentative leaders of a great party in the North, who are teaching the peo 
 ple of that section that we of the South are enemies of that flag enemies 
 of the government of which it is the emblem, and, therefore, not fit to be 
 trusted in the administration of that government. How ought that propo- 
 
 i 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 405 
 
 sition to be met ? In a spirit of recrimination ? By no means. In a spirit 
 of truckling sycophancy ? Never ! Meet it truthfully. First of all, let us 
 examine ourselves. Are we the enemies of that flag ? Are we the enemies 
 of the government which it represents ? Are we the enemies of the Ameri 
 can Union ? If we are, I concede the conclusion that we are not fit to be 
 representatives in that government. No enemy of a government ought to 
 be trusted with its administration. On the other hand, if we are not enemies 
 but friends, then they, who denounce us as enemies, are slanderers of one-third 
 of the Union, and are themselves the enemies of the Union, and not tit to be 
 trusted with the administration of the government. In a patriotic spirit, 
 seeking to arrive at the true solution of this question, let us consider it fear 
 lessly and frankly, concealing nothing and shrinking from nothing. Now, 
 fellow-citizens, here in the metropolis of my native State, here where every 
 building in our sight is one that has arisen upon the ashes of the war, here 
 in the presence of the Governor of my State, here in the presence of these 
 thousands of my fellow-citizens, I will announce three propositions which 
 every Southern man ought to accept and will accept as axioms in American 
 politics never to be questioned. They will test our fidelity or infidelity to 
 that flag. The first proposition is this : The American Union constituted, 
 when formed, and yet constitutes, the wisest, noblest, and grandest contri 
 bution ever made by the human intellect to the science of government. 
 The second proposition is that the preservation of the American Union is 
 the highest possible duty of patriotism. The third proposition is that the 
 destruction of the American Union would be the greatest crime possible 
 against human progress and happiness. If the first proposition be true, the 
 two others follow as corollaries and are necessarily true. 
 
 Now, the first proposition is that the American Union as formed, and as it 
 now exists, constituted and constitutes the wisest, noblest, and greatest con 
 tribution ever made by the human intellect to the science of government. 
 What is the American Union? What are the means by which that Union 
 must be preserved, and what are the dangers that threaten its destruction : 
 First, what is the American Union ? There is no greater popular error, for 
 which I insist the statesmanship of this country is largely responsible, than 
 the popular idea which contemplates the Union only as a fact. Most peo 
 ple think that by American Union you mean the fact that the people of this 
 country, inhabiting a given territory, originally embracing thirteen States 
 along the Atlantic coast, and now composing thirty-eight States, extending 
 from ocean to ocean and from the lakes to the gulf, live under one and the 
 same government and have the same flag. That is as far as their idea of 
 Union goes. Fellow-citizens, what do you mean when you say that our 
 fathers exhibited great wisdom in forming the American Union ? 
 
 Our fathers did not form the territory. God formed the territory and 
 the monarchies of the old world peopled it ! The fame of our fathers for 
 wisdom cannot be based on these facts. The great truth which I would im 
 press upon the American people, is, that the American Union is a principle, 
 and is a fact only as that fact is the result and the product of a principle. 
 Why, suppose this government, under which this people live, was a Russian 
 despotism, a German empire, a Mexican anarchy, it would be over the same 
 territory and might be inhabited by the same people, and they might have 
 even the same flag. Rut would any man say that was the American 1 
 Would any man say that was the Union founded by our fathers and which 
 made them immortal for wisdom? And yet the fact of union would exist, 
 
466 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 precisely as now, in either case supposed. We must come to the great point, 
 the American Union is a si/stern of government, and the wisdom of its 
 framers must be determined by the adaptability of this system of govern 
 ment to promote the happiness and the progress of the people who inhabit 
 this given territory. 
 
 Next, then, what is the system of government ? 
 
 There are two great essential features of this great system, without 
 either of which the whole system would fail, and I shall briefly call your at 
 tention to these two essential features. Every man in America ought to 
 understand them and be able to give a reason why the American Union is a 
 great system of government and why this system, represented by that flag 
 floating above us, ought to be dear to every American citizen. The first 
 essential feature of this American system is this : That there shall be a gen 
 eral government for general affairs and a local government for local affairs. 
 That is the first underlying fundamental and indispensable principle of the 
 American system of government. It was a happy thought. There are cer 
 tain affairs which are general to all the people of this country equally. If 
 you did not have one general government clothed with jurisdiction to man 
 age those general affairs, each State would have to manage them for herself. 
 That would multiply the expense and dangers of our foreign affairs thirty- 
 eight times ; that would multiply our standing armies thirty-eight times ; 
 that would multiply all the machinery of general government thirty-eight 
 times ; that would line the borders of thirty-eight States with custom house 
 and foreign regulations and military fortifications ! To avoid such burdens, 
 our fathers provided one general government to take charge of all the 
 affairs that were general and common to all the States alike, leaving each 
 State to manage its own local affairs in its own way. Why ? Because each 
 State would be the best judge of what local laws suited its own people, bet 
 ter than any foreign States and better than any government representing a 
 great number of States. So that, I repeat, the first great leading idea and 
 fundamental feature in this American system of government is a general 
 government for general affairs and local or State governments for local or 
 State affairs. 
 
 The second great feature of this system of government is, that it is ab 
 solutely necessary to the working of the system that each of these govern 
 ments should be free, independent, and unrestrained in the exercise of its 
 own appropriate functions. Every reason which makes the division in the 
 functions of government wise, makes independence in the exercise of these 
 functions necessary. Neither government can be efficient if trammeled, 
 restrained, or supervised by the others. I cannot delay you now with 
 elaboration. I give you the general idea, I give you the two great features 
 of this system. One of the greatest and best of the framers of the Consti 
 tution put this idea in perhaps as good language as has ever been employed. 
 It was the great and noble Ellsworth, of Connecticut, one of the wisest 
 members of the convention of 1787, and I desire to read what he said in 
 that convention : 
 
 Under a national government he should participate in the national security ; but that 
 was all. What he wanted was domestic happiness. The national government could not 
 descend to the local objects on which this depended. It could only embrace objects of a 
 
 feneral nature. He turned his eyes, therefore, for the preservation of his rights to the 
 tate governments. From these alone he could derive the greatest happiness he expected 
 ID this life. His happiness depends on their existence as much as a new-born infant on 
 its mother for nourishment. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 467 
 
 So, for remedies for all your civil rights ; for penal laws to restrain 
 crime and provide punishment for the criminal ; for the regulation of your 
 titles and protection of your property ; for the preservation of individual life, 
 individual liberty, and individual prosperity, these all devolve upon your 
 State government. When you want relations with people outside of your 
 State, with foreign governments, or with the citizens of other States, then 
 you enter relations appropriate to the general government and there you 
 must go for protection in them. 
 
 Fellow-citizens, you cannot too well contemplate these two grand 
 features of this system. When you understand them thoroughly, you com 
 prehend the great general character of our American system of government, 
 and never otherwise. Now, both governments derive their authority from 
 the same source the people. The government of each State deriving its 
 authority from the people of that State, and the general government deriv 
 ing its authority from the people of all the States, each State acting through 
 its own people. Now there is no conflict between these two jurisdictions. 
 Each has its own sphere. Each has its own functions. They are co-equals ; 
 they are co-ordinate ; they are also co-independent, and yet co-workers in 
 the one grand end of preserving the rights and liberties of the same people. 
 There never was a reason on earth why there should have been any conflict 
 between their jurisdictions if patriotism had controlled all public men. You 
 see, each of these governments also is a perfect government. The general 
 government is a perfect government, having its own legislature, its own 
 judiciary, and its own executive power. So you see also each State govern 
 ment is a perfect government, having its own legislature, its own judiciary, 
 and its own executive power. Each perfect in its own domain, in the 
 exercise of its own functions. But, then, neither alone is a complete govern 
 ment, because a complete government is that which protects its citizens in 
 both their internal and external relations. But as the State government 
 protects the citizen in his internal relations and the general government in 
 his external relations, you see, while both governments are perfect in their 
 sphere, it takes both together to make a complete government for the 
 citizen. Now, then, who is the enemy of that government? The State 
 government is a part of the American Union, just as much as the general 
 government is a part of the American Union. It takes both to complete the 
 great system known as the American Union. Who then, I repeat, is a dis- 
 unionist ? The man who strikes at the Federal government is a disunionist, 
 because he strikes at an essential feature of the system which makes the 
 American Union. But the man who strikes at the State government, is also 
 a disunionist, because he strikes at an equally essential feature of the same 
 system. He alone is a perfect Union man who is faithful to the whole 
 system to both the general government and the State government, each in 
 its sphere. Blot out the stars from that flag and you have no American 
 flag ; blot out the States from this Union and you have no American 1 Inion ! 
 Cripple the States and you cripple the Union. Invade the States and you 
 invade the Union. Make war on the States and you are a traitor making 
 war on the Union. 
 
 Fellow-citizens, this system of government, this American Union, ] 
 always said has no parallel in history. I say here to-day that it is the best, 
 the wisest, the grandest system of government the world ever saw. 
 great mistake our statesmen have made has consisted in trying to judge tl 
 government by previous systems. There is nothing in history like it. 
 
468 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Solon s of Greece had as little comprehension of this American system of 
 government as the soldier, with his javelin at Marathon, had of our modern 
 columbiads ; or the sailor, with his galley at Salamis, had of our modern 
 iron-clads. The Catos and Ciceros of Rome had as little comprehension of 
 the grandeur and wisdom and beauty of our American system, as the 
 dweller upon the banks of the sluggish Tiber had of the length, depth, and 
 power of the Mississippi River. No, my American friends, you are the heirs, 
 under Providence, of the greatest system of government the world ever saw. 
 If you destroy it, there is no hope beyond. This system is as new to the 
 science of government as was the discovery of America new to the map of 
 the world. And I have sometimes thought that Providence, tired of the 
 wranglings, and strifes, and oppressions, and wrongs of the governments in 
 Europe and Asia for thousands of years, bad reserved this grand continent, 
 that the wearied and oppressed of all nations might come and form by their 
 mingling a new people, on a new continent, and inspired our fathers to pro 
 vide for them a new system of government, most wisely adapted to their 
 wants and happiness, and thus develop the highest type of the human race. 
 
 The greatest enemy this Union has hitherto had has been sectionalism. 
 No one State has ever endangered the general government, and the general 
 government could not undertake to endanger any one State without excit 
 ing the ire of all. But sectionalism, by which I mean the desire of one 
 section of the country composed of several States, to either use, abuse, or 
 destroy the general government for the purpose of promoting ideas or 
 interests peculiar to that section, has proved, in our history, to be the most 
 dangerous enemy to the system of government which makes the American 
 Union. This sectionalism has assumed its most dangerous form whenever 
 it has been organized into geographical parties and distinctions. Washing 
 ton saw this spirit of sectionalism even in the midst of the Revolution. He 
 saw it during his administration. 
 
 It came near destroying the system on several occasions during his 
 administration. And in his farewell address he warned his countrymen, in 
 the strongest terms, against the formation of parties on geographical lines, 
 ideas, and distinctions. I am dealing to-day with history and not mere 
 parties. But, necessarily, history involves parties, and I shall state nothing 
 but what history proves to be true ; and, following up this history with my 
 argument, I state that the first large sectional party ever organized in 
 America upon geographical lines and ideas, and directly contrary to Wash 
 ington s warning,* was the Republican party of the North. That party, 
 twenty-one years ago, organized upon a geographical basis, upon sectional 
 ideas and for sectional purposes. Its organization was confined to the 
 Northern States. It had no organization in any Southern State ; it expected 
 none and desired none, because its animating spirit of sectionalism was 
 animosity to Southern institutions. Therefore, it could be no other than a 
 sectional party, organized on a geographical line, to promote ideas peculiar 
 to one section against property peculiar to the other section. That sectional 
 party provoked into existence naturally a Southern sectional party, one an 
 tagonizing the other. The last sectional party took its name as the Southern 
 Rights or Secession party. Now, a party is not less sectional because it 
 
 : There were a number of sectional movements and minor organizations before, 
 such as the Nullification, Abolition, and Free Soil parties. But these did not combine 
 States sufficient to be dangerous. The Republican party organized upon and absorbed 
 the Abolition and Free Soil parties. 
 
HTS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 4G9 
 
 remains in the Union ; because the very worst and most unmanly form of 
 disunion is that which seeks to hold on to the government of the union for 
 the purpose of accomplishing sectional objects, and thereby destroying the 
 system on which the Union was founded. Whatever else may be said of 
 secession and I concede it was a madness it was at least manly and 
 direct. It scorned to use the Union to promote sectional ideas. It would 
 not violate the Constitution in the name of loyalty. It would not hold the 
 government to sell its offices. It was unwise and suicidal, but still brave 
 and manly. 
 
 Now, when these two sectional parties organized, one in the North and 
 the other in the South, you will observe the results. The antagonisms of 
 these two sectional parties continued to increase irritation until secession 
 followed and war was waged. Then, my fellow-countrymen, here is the 
 grand point to which I want to call your attention now. It is this, that the 
 late war was between two sectional parties. The Union represented by that 
 flag was no party to that war save as a weeping, bleeding victim ! 
 
 True, after the leaders of each sectional party got control of their 
 respective sections to such an extent that war resulted, the Union people of 
 each section went into the armies of their respective sections, and neither 
 ought to be blamed for that. Thousands here who had no sympathy with 
 secession went into the service of the sectional party of the South, against 
 a sectional party North, but they did not go into it to strike at a single 
 principle represented by that flag. Thousands, hundreds of thousands of 
 patriotic Northern men, who had no sympathy with the original sectional 
 organization that led them, when the crisis came went bravely into the fight, 
 as they honestly believed, for the Union ; and they acted patriotically and 
 nobly, and we cheerfully concede to them pensions, and all the benefits of 
 their apparent Union position. Each side did what it thought right in 
 standing up to its own side in the sectional war. Thousands in both armies, 
 while slaying each other in a sectional fight, would have given their lives 
 for the true common American Union. Our Northern friends had the great 
 advantage of being in possession of the government, an advantage which 
 they reaped more from our own folly than their own wisdom, and they used 
 that government to help accomplish their sectional purposes, and that was 
 the great advantage they had of us. 
 
 But, my fellow-citizens, it is with no ordinary pride that I, who have op 
 posed all these sectional parties, can stand here m the city of Atlanta, in the 
 very center of all our sorrows, and raise my voice, fearing no successful 
 contradiction when I affirm that the Union never made war upon the South. 
 It was not the Union, my countrymen, that slew your children ; it was not 
 the Union that burned your cities ; it was not the Union that laid waste 
 your country, invaded your homes, and mocked at your calamity ; it was 
 not the Union that reconstructed your States ! it was not the Union that 
 disfranchised intelligent citizens and denied them participation in their own 
 governments. No, no ! Charge not these wrongs upon the Union of your 
 fathers. Every one of these wrongs wasi nflicted by a diabolical sectionalism 
 in the very teeth of every principle of the American Union. So equally, I 
 say, the South never made war upon the Union. There has never been an 
 hour when nine out of ten of us would not have given our lives for this 
 Union. We did not leave that Union because we were dissatisfied with it ; 
 we did not leave the Union to make war on itwe left the Union because a 
 sectional party had seized it, and we hoped thereby to avoid a conflict. But 
 
470 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 
 
 if war must come, we intended to fight a sectional party and not the Union. 
 Therefore, the late war, with all its disastrous consequences, is the direct re 
 sult of sectionalism in the North and of sectionalism in the South, and none, 
 I repeat, of these disasters are chargeable on the Union. 
 
 When unimpassioned reason shall review our past, there is no subject in 
 all our history on which our American statesmanship, North and South, will 
 be adjudged to have been so unwise, so imbecile, and so utterly deficient as 
 upon that one subject, which stimulated these sectional parties into existence. 
 
 There was nothing in slavery which could justify the North in forming 
 a sectional party to cripple or destroy it, and there was nothing in slavery 
 which could justify the South in leaving the Union to maintain it. There 
 was no right in freedom contrary to the Constitution, and there was no 
 safety for slavery out of the Union. The whole African race, whether 
 slaves or free, were not worth the American Union. One hour of the Ameri 
 can Union has done more for human progress than all the governments 
 formed by the negro race in six thousand years ! And the dear noble boys 
 of the white race, North and South, who fell in the late war, slaying each 
 other for the negro, were worth more to civilization and human happiness 
 than the whole African race of the world. 
 
 We will do justice to the colored man. We are under the very highest 
 obligations of a brave manhood to do justice to the negro. He is not our 
 equal. He is in our power, and cowardice takes no meaner shape than when 
 power oppresses weakness. But in the name of civilization, in the name of 
 our fathers, in the name of forty millions of living whites and of hundreds 
 of millions of their coming children ; in the name of every principle repre 
 sented by tfyat banner above us, I do protest to-day, that there is noth 
 ing in statesmanship, nothing in philanthropy, and nothing in patriotism, 
 which can justify the peril or destruction of the rights and liberties of the 
 white race in crazy wranglings over the rights and liberties of the black 
 race. We have shed more white blood and wasted more white treasure in 
 four years over the liberties of the negro in these States, than the entire 
 negro race have shed and wasted for their own liberties in all the ages of the 
 world ! And all at the bidding of sectional demagogues who still cry for 
 more ! 
 
 We have buried, widowed, and orphaned one white person for every 
 colored person, old and young, male and female, in America ; and yet there 
 are hundreds of demagogues now haranguing the honest, deluded masses of 
 the North, seeking to keep themselves in power, by keeping alive the pas 
 sions of sectional hate, at the hazard of every right and of every liberty in 
 tended to be preserved and protected by our American Union ! God of our 
 fathers ! how long, oh, how long shall this madness continue and success 
 fully usurp the places, to disgrace the functions of elevated statesmanship ? 
 
 Above all the din of these sectional quarrelings I would raise my voice, 
 and proclaim to all our people, that there is no right or liberty for any race 
 of any color in America, save in the preservation of that great American 
 Uuion according to the principles symboled by that flag. Destroy the gen 
 eral government and the States will rush into anarchy. Destroy the States, 
 and we will all rush into despotism and slavery. Preserve the general gov 
 ernment ; preserve the States ; and preserve both by keeping each untram- 
 meled in its appropriate sphere, and we shall preserve the rights and liberties 
 of all sections and of all races for all time. 
 
 But extreme men in both sections insisted upon settling the issues of sla- 
 
HI& LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WETTINGS. 471 
 
 very by force ; and in this fell spirit both the sectional parties were organ 
 ized. And upon this line of force, so contrary to every principle of our 
 constitutional system, the issues have been settled, but at what a fearful cost. 
 We have wasted in money and the destruction of property fifteen billions of 
 dollars. We have slain one million of our own sons, brothers and fellow- 
 citizens. We have made one million of sorrowing widows, and two mil 
 lions of weeping orphans, and still the rage of sectional hate and passion 
 goes on ! 
 
 On the other hand, suppose this question of slavery had been treated as 
 every other question settled by our Constitution had been treated in a 
 spirit of amity and of mutual deference and concession. Every slave had 
 his market value. The South could not have been wronged by receiving 
 that market value, because that was her due. The North could not have 
 been wronged in paying that market value, for it was an obligation justly 
 due under the recognition of property in slaves by the Constitution. 
 
 And by this plan of wisdom and justice and peace every slave could have 
 been set free at a cost not exceeding one tenth of the values destroyed by the 
 conflict of force, and without one drop of blood and without one hour of 
 war. And what was in the way of this plan ? Nothing, nothing but an un 
 reasoning sectionalism and an insatiate thirst for power under the influence of 
 that sectionalism. 
 
 Suppose we concede for the argument, that slavery was a wrong if you 
 please, a crime. Who was guilty of that crime ? The black man is the only 
 portion of our population that came here involuntarily. The Northern 
 fathers captured him a barbarian, in Africa, reduced him to slavery, brought 
 him to America, and our Southern fathers bought him. If that was a crime, 
 were not all our fathers parties to it ? Was not here a field for charity and 
 mutual concession ? So again, if slavery was a crime, that crime was repeated 
 when it was recognized as property in the Constitution. Who made that 
 recognition ? Not only the Northern fathers, not only the Southern fathers, 
 but all our fathers ! Was not here again a field for mutual deference and 
 concession ? 
 
 The resolve to manumit the slave by force was the greatest of all possible 
 crimes in our dealings with the negro. It was that fell spirit that organized 
 the sectional parties and precipitated the war which has cost us so much, and 
 which threatens to cost us our all in the final destruction of our American 
 Union. Who shall be able to describe the fearful judgment which an un- 
 impassioned and impartial posterity shall pronounce upon the weak, way 
 ward, wicked statesmanship, that could not and would not emancipate the 
 black race without destroying and imperiling everything of right, property, 
 or liberty belonging to the white race ! 
 
 Fellow-citizens, I have stated, but I cannot too often repeat, that all the 
 curses that we have suffered originated, not in adherence to the principles of 
 our Union, but in a departure from those principles. No symbol in the flag 
 above us either taught the war, or can justify the war. ^ e owe a ^ our 
 wrongs to unpatriotic sectional parties organized first in the North, and then 
 in the South. Sectionalism at the South has been utterly crushed out by the 
 war. Secession is dead, and can have no resurrection in the South. It now 
 remains for every patriot, North and South, to unite and crush put the only 
 remaining sectional party that grim-visaged parent of all sectional parties 
 -the sectional Republican party of the North, with the ballots of freemen. 
 Then we shall have peace ; then we shall have Union cordial, equal Union; 
 
472 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 then we shall have our American system of government in all the plenitude 
 of its glory and power, and ever ample for the protection of the life, lib 
 erty, and property of every man of every section North and South, and of 
 every race, black and white. 
 
 The very perfection of patriotism is animosity to sectionalism. I do not 
 mean only sectionalism at the South. I mean sectionalism anywhere and 
 everywhere. I do not mean only sectionalism in the form of secession ; I 
 mean sectionalism in any form and in every form. Sectionalism under any 
 pretext, sectionalism for any purpose is disunionism ! And sectional dis- 
 unionism can take no more odious form, it can wear no more traitorous 
 hue, than when it seeks to seize or hold the powers of our common Union by 
 teaching the people of the different sections to hate each other. Even now, 
 while I speak, this spirit of sectional disunionism Insolent with power, and 
 reeking with corruption in the capital of the nation is forging chains for 
 the States for no purpose but to continue its foul domination.* There is no 
 safety for property, for right, or liberty, or union, save in a patriotic return 
 by all sections of our country to the principles of that great syscem of gov 
 ernment whose symbols we read in the flag above us. 
 
 My countrymen, have you studied this wonderful American system of 
 free government ? Have you compared it with former systems and noted 
 how our forefathers sought to avoid their defects ? Let me commend this 
 study to every American citizen to-day. To him who loves liberty, it is 
 more enchanting than romance, more bewitching than love, and more 
 elevating than any other science. Our fathers adopted this plan, with 
 improvements in the details, which cannot be found in any other system. 
 With what a noble impulse of patriotism they came together from different 
 States and joined their counsels to perfect this system, thenceforward to be 
 known as the "American System of Free Constitutional Government ! r 
 The snows that fall on Mount Washington are not purer than the motives 
 which begot it. The fresh dew-laden zephyrs from the orange groves of 
 the South are not sweeter than the hopes its advent inspired. The flight 
 of our own symbolic eagle, though he blow his breath on the sun, cannot 
 be higher than its expected destiny. Have the motives which so inspired 
 our fathers become all corrupt in their children ? Are the hopes that 
 sustained them all poisoned to us ? Is that high expected destiny all 
 eclipsed, and before its noon ? 
 
 No, no, forever no ! patriots North, patriots South, patriots everywhere ! 
 let us hallow this year of Jubilee by burying all our sectional animosities. 
 Let us close our ears to the men and the parties that teach us to hate each other ! 
 
 Raise high that fla<* of our fathers ! Let Southern breezes kiss it ! Let 
 Southern skies reflect it ! Southern patriots will love it ! Southern sons 
 will defend it, and Southern heroes will die for it ! And as its folds unfurl 
 beneath the heavens, let our voices unite and swell the loud invocation : 
 Flag of our Union ! Wave on ! wave ever ! But wave over freemen, not 
 over subjects ! Wave over States, not over provinces ! And now let the 
 voices of patriots from the North, and from the East, and from the West, 
 join our voices from the South, and send to heaven one universal according 
 chorus : Wave on, flag of our fathers ! Wave forever ! But wave over 
 a union of equals, not over a despotism of lords and vassals ; over a land of 
 law, of liberty, and peace, and not of anarchy, oppression, and strife ! 
 
 The late order of Attorney General Taft, approved by the President, is more fully, 
 more dangerously, because more insidiously disunion in its character than any ever issued 
 in the wildest days and moods of secession. 
 
SPEECH DELIVERED BEFORE THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF 
 GEORGIA, IN ATLANTA, JANUARY 20, 1877, PENDING THE 
 ELECTION FOR UNITED STATES SENATOR. 
 
 Mr. Hill was a member of Congress and was at his post in Washington City, 
 earnestly engaged with the leaders of his party in endeavoring to secure the peaceful 
 inauguration of Mr. Tilden. He recognized the fact that the country was on the 
 verge of a great crisis, and he was unwilling to leave Washington even for a short 
 time, and as he was regarded as the ablest and wisest representative from the South, 
 his Democratic colleagues were opposed to his leaving. His competitor for the Senate, 
 Senator T. M. Norwood, had left his seat and had been in Georgia for weeks making a 
 personal canvass for re-election. He and his friends had put in circulation the most 
 groundless reports touching Mr. Hill and his attitude toward the great question of the 
 hour. So persistent and outrageous were their charges, that Mr. Hill s friends and 
 supporters insisted that he should come to Atlanta and meet them. In deference to 
 their appeals he came home, delivered his speech the night of his arrival, and returned 
 the next morning. The speech is a comprehensive exposition of the situation before 
 Congress, and a terrific and crushing arraignment of his slanderers. It contains a 
 review of his entire political course since the war and furnishes a most complete 
 vindication of its wisdom, consistency, and patriotism. The speech was badly reported, 
 and Mr. Hill never corrected it. 
 
 Hon. JOHN D. STEWART, of Spalding, conducted Mr. Hill into the 
 Speaker s seat, and by way of introduction said : 
 
 " I take pleasure in introducing to you upon this occasion, the Hon. B. 
 II. Hill, Georgia s statesman and Georgia s orator." 
 
 When Mr. Hill rose, he was greeted with a storm of applause from his 
 admirers. 
 
 MR. HILL S ADDRESS. 
 
 I desire to say to the gentlemen of the press and newspapers that I 
 will take the liberty of relieving them of the labor of reporting my remarks 
 to-night. I will take occasion to do that myself at the proper time and 
 furnish a copy to each member of the General Assembly and of the press. 
 
 I have no intention, upon this occasion, of uttering one word that ought 
 to be offensive to any gentleman. If, however, I should say anything in the 
 discharge of my duty here by which any gentleman thinks himself involved, 
 and that may need a reply from him, I wish very much that he would give 
 me notice of the fact at as early a time to-night or to-morrowas pos 
 sible. If I get no such notice I shall, in all probability, go, as soon as 
 can, back to Washington ; but if I do get such a notice, I shall take great 
 pleasure in meeting whoever may desire it. 
 
 Gentlemen of the General Assembly, my business to-night is with you, 
 and, first of all, I feel that I owe you an apology for being here, 
 critical condition of the country, when, in my judgment, everything va luabli 
 to freemen must be determined in the next forty days, and all the prelimn 
 ary work necessary to make this determination wisely, has been, and 
 progressing, nothing but the most extraordinary circumstances would jus; 
 me m leaving my post of duty and coming here upon this business. B 
 circumstances have occurred which induced ray friends here and in Washing 
 ton to assure me that I ought to come, and I have selected a period wne 
 
 473 
 
474 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 could be absent without detriment to any of your interests, having nothing 
 to demand my presence there from the time that I left, and because, under 
 the rules of the House, no business can be transacted until Tuesday. Under 
 ordinary circumstances it would be a pleasure for me to meet the General 
 Assembly whenever they desired me to do so, and if the most extraordinary 
 conspiracy had not existed with the purpose to destroy me and my influence 
 in this country, I would have been content to leave my destiny and my record 
 with the intelligent members of this General Assembly. 
 
 The people of America have, for years, committed one great mistake, 
 and that mistake consists in the fact that they have not realized fully the 
 dangers through which they have been passing. Those of you who have 
 done me the honor, for the last ten years, to hear and read my opinions, need 
 not be reminded that I have always said during that time that the crisis 
 the critical period in American history would be when the Republican 
 party was called upon to give up power. I arrived at that opinion in no 
 partisan spirit, without feeling or bitterness, for it was a conviction founded 
 upon a careful study of the purposes and character of the Republican leaders 
 in the light of history. The most dangerous event to a Republican is the 
 accession of a party to power in the midst of civil war. When the time 
 should come for the American people or, when the American people would 
 demand this surrender of power by the Republican party, that had gained 
 it under those circumstances, no man could foresee; but whenever it should 
 come, it is singular that every reflecting mind did not see that the country 
 would be involved in a most perilous crisis. 
 
 For the first time after the war I felt a desire to participate in 
 public affairs when a vacancy occurred in the Ninth District, for the 
 reason that at the election just before a Democratic majority had been 
 elected to the lower house of Congress, and I believed that the time 
 had come when, if that majority improved the opportunity, they 
 would bring about the time when the people would demand that the 
 Republican party should surrender power. I said in almost every speech 
 that I made in that canvass, what I said here in this very stand two 
 years ago : that whenever that time should come, it was important 
 the demand should be made by an overwhelmingly large majority, and 
 that it would be especially unfortunate if the Southern States, or a few 
 of them, constituted the balance of power with those commanding this party 
 to yield. The Forty-fourth Congress did assemble, and, owing to the kind 
 ness of the people of the Ninth District, it was my pleasure to be there. I 
 was a witness and participant in its proceedings. Better work, in my judg 
 ment, was never done than by the Democrats in the first session of the Forty - 
 fourth Congress. The people responded to the work they did ; they re 
 sponded by a change of over a million of votes. And the result was that 
 the Republican party, which had 800,000 majority in 1872, were asked to 
 surrender their power in 1876 by over 250,000 votes ! But it so happened, 
 just as I had apprehended and feared, that the deciding power in that con 
 test was the Southern States, and thus the very trouble which seemed to me 
 deplorable, if that contingency happened, stares the country in the face ; and 
 when the second session of the Forty-fourth Congress met on the first Mon 
 day in December last, the condition of the country was exceedingly embar 
 rassed. Evidently the Republican party did not intend to surrender power 
 if, by any means, they could hold it, and they felt that the means were in 
 their hands. When I speak of the Republican party now, I speak of those 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 475 
 
 whom we call leaders the controlling men, the men who have shaped and 
 directed, and continue to shape and direct its destiny. 
 
 What was the condition of the country when Congress met ? You are 
 all familiar with it. Voluntary committees, or associations, of gentlemen 
 from both parties had hurried down to witness the counting of the votes in 
 the three most disputed States Southern States and all of them under 
 the control of Radical State governments. It required that all three of 
 those States should be counted for the Republicans, to give success to their 
 ticket. But there was a reserved power over whatever might be determined 
 by these returning boards, as they were called, in these several States. Their 
 action had to undergo review by some power at Washington, under the Con 
 stitution of the country. So it became important, not only that the Repub 
 lican party should secure what they called the prima facie count in those three 
 States, but that it should have the review of those "counts" in the hands of 
 persons in Washington who would be as super-serviceable as the boards them 
 selves, else in the last hour their scheme might fail. This state of things 
 presented a remarkable question. You hear it talked about, discussed on tilt- 
 streets and in the newspapers everywhere. It was a new question, born 
 of party exigencies and never before suggested by a statesman in the whole 
 history of the country, and that was : That the final counting of the votes 
 belonged exclusively to the President of the Senate, and that the two houses 
 of Congress, required by the Constitution to be present when the count is 
 made, are simply spectators, with no power to participate in any manner. 
 So that the Republican policy, upon the first Monday in December, consisted 
 of three propositions. The first was, to secure the returns in the three dis 
 puted States ; the second was, to have the President of the Senate, who is a 
 Republican, alone to count the votes thus secured, without any power of re 
 view by any other party ; and the third plank in the Republican platform 
 was, that the result thus secured and thus announced should be sustained at 
 every hazard by the army, under the orders of the present President. lie is 
 little to be respected as a statesman who does not see at once the danger of 
 that policy of the Republicans in what is known as " the Presidential count." 
 It was evidently the party purpose, the party movement ; and the great end 
 and object was to continue the Republican party in power ; and the question 
 for the Democracy to meet was, how to meet those three propositions. Now, I 
 am going to say to you this : that I have no thought of going into the details 
 of the policy of the Democratic party, adopted and now being carried out. 
 It would be improper for me to do so and you must not expect it, but it is 
 proper for me to give you a general idea of the principles and plan of opera 
 tions by which these propositions are to be met. 
 
 The policy of the Republicans had to be met by a Democratic policy. 
 What was it ? It may be stated in the statement of a few principles. The 
 first manifestly wise one adopted by it was this : that the party must look 
 upon this great question, raised for the first time in all our history, not as an 
 occasion for mere party triumph, but that the Democratic party must now 
 become the party of the people, intrusted with the great work of ascertain 
 ing and declaring the will of the people. That high position was taken by 
 this party because the question for us to determine was not whom the people 
 ought to elect that had been done during the canvass and the people had 
 voted but the question we had to determine was how the people had 
 voted whom they had elected ! And in determining that question we were 
 bound by all the obligations, sacred in their character, of judge and jury in 
 
476 SENATOR R H. IITLL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 determining all questions submitted to them under their oaths, and I submit 
 it to every intelligent person if, upon this proposition, the Democratic party 
 didn t distinguish itself as entitled to credit from the American people in con 
 tradistinction to the Republican party? The Republicans were bent upon 
 solving the problem " how to secure our man, whether the people elected 
 him or not ! " They had worked in the three disputed States to overthrow 
 the will of the people. They had no purpose to serve but a partisan purpose. 
 The President even lent himself to this ; a most remarkable spectacle for him 
 to present ! He requested gentlemen to go to those States. Who gave him 
 any authority to do so ? And they went because he requested them to; and 
 every one who went made of himself a partisan, a witness and attorney to 
 defend the frauds and illegal actions of these returning boards. They came 
 back and made their report ; they sent it to the President, and he trans 
 mitted it to Congress and made it part of the official proceedings. Now, 
 when the Democratic party stepped in at this time, wasn t it wisdom, wasn t 
 it patriotism, that it should say: " Our purpose is to represent the people, 
 the peace, and the laws of the country, and ascertain the will of the people, 
 and abide by it, not as a party matter but in a patriotic spirit"? 
 
 That was the first ground taken. To carry out this policy, conferences of 
 leading gentlemen of the party were held before the meeting of Congress, 
 and it was determined to appoint, when Congress met, committees to go to 
 these States and learn the facts. Now, you see the difference. We had even 
 then any quantity of testimony. That sent in by the President concerning 
 Louisiana made up a volume as large, if not larger than this that I hold in my 
 hand, so that you see we were plentifully supplied with testimony of a certain 
 kind. Some of this testimony had been taken by interested partisans of the 
 Democratic party, but it was manifest that it was all taken not in any official 
 character and under no authority, and had no binding effect ; and was like 
 taking testimony into court that had been taken under no authority of law, 
 not in the usual forms of law and without the sanction of an oath. Hence 
 it was determined to adopt the plan of taking the necessary testimony offi 
 cially by committees, under oath, and where both parties could be fairly 
 heard and represented. Strange to say, that proposition was resisted by the 
 Republicans. We had to suspend the rules on Monday, the first day, in 
 order to pass the resolutions, and it takes a two-third vote to suspend the 
 rules. We just do it and without a vote to spare, the Republicans voting 
 solidly, with three honorable exceptions, against it; and the Democrats vot 
 ing solidly for it. 
 
 The next proposition of the Democratic party was to settle upon what 
 rule the votes should be counted when they should come in. As I have told 
 you, the Republicans had adopted the idea that it should be done by the 
 President of the Senate. The Democratic party insisted that it should be 
 counted by the two Houses. Without stopping to discuss the powers of the 
 two Houses in the count, the great question here was, in whom the power to 
 count was vested ; the Republicans insisting that it was the President of 
 the Senate, and the Democrats that it was in the two Houses of Congress in 
 joint session, and each House acting separately. Now, my friends, which had 
 the advantage there ? The Republican party themselves, by what tliey 
 called the twenty -second joint rule, adopted in 1865 when they had a large 
 majority, had counted in Lincoln for his second, and Grant for both of his 
 terms, and that rule recognized the power to count to be in the two Houses. 
 So, here was a remarkable spectacle presented to the country. 
 
HIS LIFff, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 477 
 
 For the purpose of counting the votes of 1876 the Republican party 
 abandoned their own rule adopted in 1865, when they had a two-thirds 
 majority, and under which they had counted in Lincoln and Grant ; and 
 they even had the brass to call it "unconstitutional " ! If that is so, Lin 
 coln and Grant were both unconstitutional Presidents. But the Demo 
 cratic party took the position that it was no time to devise new methods 
 of count, and they expressed their willingness, to a man, to take the Repub 
 lican s own rule and count the vote ! So, I think we had the advantage of 
 them upon both points. 
 
 Now, then, in answer to the question of force. The position of the 
 Democratic party was that it was unnecessary to talk about force, and that 
 the American people, through their representatives, were entirely competent 
 to determine whom thev had elected President. We insisted that it was a 
 
 */ 
 
 plain matter of figures and simple calculation, and that it was no use to in 
 dulge in threats and appeals to force. One of the most beautiful and trying 
 questions in this whole matter was, what should be the position of the 
 Southern States. It was clearly the purpose of the Republican party, if 
 they could possibty, by force or otherwise, continue in power, to take posses 
 sion of the House of Representatives, very much in the same way that they 
 had taken possession of the Houses in several of the States, make it Repub 
 lican, review the laws and conduct of several of the Southern States, with 
 the purpose, if they could, to remand them back to a territorial condition. 
 That seems a strong declaration, but I have not stated it strong enough. 
 Did you know that at the last session of Congress a most elaborate report 
 of two large volumes in size, was made concerning the Mississippi election 
 matter, and at the end of it resolutions were appended that the State be re 
 manded to a territorial condition until a new generation should arise? The 
 proposition was that the old generation, raised under the administration of 
 slavery, had never and could never properly appreciate this government and 
 the blessings of liberty, and that it was better to remand the people of that 
 and these other Southern States until they had become fitted in a new gen 
 eration, and by another course of education, to participate in this great gov 
 ernment of America. That proposition is upon the table yet, seriously 
 entertained by the leaders of the party; and soon after the present session 
 opened, Mr. Edmunds, one of the ablest of the leaders of the party, in- 
 troduced resolutions to investigate the elections in Georgia, Alabama, and 
 other sister States. You thought because you had 80,000 majority you 
 were safe, and they thought you could not have 80,000 majority 
 without some fraud ! And upon that subject I had to write to a 
 very good friend in New York, the other day, to explain to him how 
 possible. You have no idea how much these things affect the people oi 
 North, and with what interest they look upon them. They believe 
 carry our elections by force and fraud, and my observations in Congress cc 
 vince me of the fact* that the Republican party has regretted 
 removed any disabilities and let us back into a participation in the gover 
 ment. And, if they ever get us down again, they will never consent 
 us up ! I orive you that warning, now. 
 
 Now, that was the Democratic policy. Evidently General Grant was 
 gathering military forces at Washington for the purpose I spoke of, and 
 expected to find in the temper of the Southern people and their representa 
 tives a pretext for the use of that force. The great hope ot the Repub 
 party, to enable them to carry out their scheme of force, was to remake 
 
478 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 issue between the South and the North ; to convince the people of the 
 North that the people of the South were dangerous, and that from the 
 moment they returned, through the Democratic party which they were said 
 to control, to a part in the administration of the government, they would 
 take possession of it in a sectional spirit and undo all that the Republican 
 party had done. If General Grant could find that pretext that s all he 
 wants under the pretext that he was putting down what he would call a 
 "new rebellion," he would use the army to inaugurate a Republican Presi 
 dent, right or wrong, or to continue himself in power, as the case may be. 
 And if it was said that this was " usurpation," the reply would be, " it is 
 better to have usurpation in order to keep the government in the hands of 
 the loyal people of the North, than to let it go into the hands of the disloyal 
 South ! J: You understand that ! He would provoke the people of the 
 South to do such things as would furnish this pretext, if he could. He has 
 worried the people of South Carolina, and day by day sought to provoke 
 the gallant Hampton to do something wrong. He failed, and the American 
 people can never fully appreciate the example afforded by that historic 
 character, the hero of South Carolina ! And he is trying his hand now 
 upon Louisiana. He expected when Congress met that our hot-blooded 
 Southern representatives "the hundred ex-Confederates" would come up 
 swaggering and swearing on every hand that " Tilden is elected and we are 
 going to inaugurate him ! That is what Grant wanted ; and what is most 
 remarkable, they looked with more hope to the member from the Ninth than 
 to any other man to be that great fool ! Well, the old gentleman was mis 
 taken. We wers there several days before the meeting of Congress. What 
 was going to be the policy of the Democratic party nobody exactly knew. 
 Everybody was thinking and talking upon other subjects, but this one had 
 not been discussed. The Democratic party held a caucus to nominate a 
 Speaker of the House, and did nothing else. That was on Saturday night. 
 On Sunday some fifteen or twenty of us had a caucus conferences, they 
 are called and it being Sunday, we thought everybody s sheep were in the 
 ditch and it was our duty to help them out, and we talked over the matter 
 together. Nobody had said what the Southern people would do in this 
 crisis, and everybody seemed to think that somebody else should say what 
 ought to.be done. We had another caucus and appointed a "committee of 
 prudence," composed of seven members, then adjourned. We met again 
 and the committee reported a resolution that had been agreed upon by the 
 seven persons who composed it, and when the resolution was read, somebody 
 had to say something. The time had come. It was the crisis ! The Demo 
 cratic party was to make out the policy which was to put it on an aggressive 
 line, or otherwise, and it was upon that occasion that I made the speech 
 about which you have all heard so much, and know nothing ! About which 
 so many versions have been published, and not a single word in any of them 
 true ! Now, I cannot give you that speech, for that would not be proper. 
 I was the first man who took the floor. That is so. I saw that the time 
 had come, and my mind was made up. I did not know how many were 
 there who had made up their minds, but I knew that I had ; and if you will 
 excuse me I will not bore you with the speech, but only give you the opening 
 sentences, to show you the line I was on just to give you the text. Now, 
 here they are : 
 
 Mr. Chairman : It is with the greatest diffidence I rise even to suggest a modification 
 of the resolution reported unanimously from a committee composed of such distinguished 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WAITINGS. 479 
 
 gentlemen as those who compose this committee. Yet, we are here together and I have 
 my views upon this matter and I think I should express them. Now, the text : The 
 supreme duty of the crisis is to secure the peaceful inauguration of Tilden and Hend ricks. 
 Whatever promotes this end is wise. Whatever obstructs this end is unwise. Accomplish 
 this and all other good things will come to our country. Fail to accomplish this, and all 
 other evils will come upon our common country alike. 
 
 I then went into a calm, dispassionate discussion of a few things which 
 I thought would promote that result, and of a few others which I thought 
 would obstruct that result. I never said an unkind word of anybody no 
 Democrat! I never said anything about "the conservative influence of a 
 fifteen-inch shell with the fuse in a state of combustion," because I didn t 
 know anything about it myself ! I never used those beautiful expressions 
 that you have seen traveling around the country about " invincibles in peace 
 and invisibles in war." I never rasped my friend Mr. Wood not a bit of 
 it ! On the contrary, it should gratify you all as much as it did me ; 
 even Mr. Wood, who reported the resolution, accepted the suggestion and 
 it was adopted unanimously by them. And I never made a speech in my life 
 for which I received warmer congratulations from men whose congratulations 
 were worth having. Every single Southern man who was there agreed with 
 me and I have heard it there every day since that that little innocent speech 
 was the turning point in the whole matter. It was a small thing to do, but 
 it only takes a little force to set a ball in motion and to keep it going until 
 the momentum increases and no power can stop it. And that ball had to be 
 started right there, on one track or the other. If it was started on the wrong 
 track it would have gone on and on until we were ruined, and if on the right 
 track, the country would be safe. It only required a little thing to start it 
 and the one tiling to do was to start it in the right direction. It was unani 
 mously agreed that the deportment of the South in this crisis should be 
 quiet perfectly quiet ! And that it would be exceedingly improper for the 
 South to take the position that if war occurred it would be exclusively a 
 Northern war, because that would not be sincere. It would be improper to 
 say in advance that you wanted it to occur and wanted to go into it. It was 
 imprudent to discourage the Northern Democrats by telling them that you 
 would not go in, if it did come ; and again it was a mistake to attempt 
 to patronize them into position. You are very much mistaken if you think 
 the Northern Democrats are not as brave as any ! I do not believe that 
 they are going to let their rights be destroyed, except it be upon the idea 
 that if they got into a war up there, we would set up for ourselves down here. 
 That idea, let me say to you, is industriously held out to them up there. 
 And it was unnecessary, wholly so, for your Southern representatives to in 
 dulge in bravado and tell which side they would take if war came, because 
 it was our duty to keep off war if possible ; but if war must come the whole 
 world knew which side the South would take ! And there is not a Demo 
 crat in Congress from the North who would not have done what I did- 
 lieve all little politicians and newspapers from saying what the South would 
 do. Whenever you see a man running ahead and swearing he will do so 
 and so, you can sVear almost that he won t do it ! That sort of courage is 
 
 * 
 
 not valued in Congress. 
 
 Well, now, my friends, just as soon as this general policy of the two 
 parties became known, the effect began to be seen. There was the Republi 
 can party on the one hand seeking a mere party triumph by fair or foul 
 means, saying, we will have the count in the three disputed States, there. 
 
480 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 shall be no means of review after they are put in the hands of the Presi 
 dent of the Senate, and will inaugurate our President and sustain him with 
 the forces of the United States. That was making it an unconstitutional 
 party, the party of usurpation and the party of war. There was the Demo 
 cratic party saying : This question must be put on a high and patriotic plane, 
 and both parties should insist that according to the evidence they were will 
 ing to decide, and that the evidence should be taken according to the ac 
 cepted forms and long-established interpretations of the Constitution ! By 
 this means the Democratic party made itself the patriotic party the party 
 of law and the party of peace. It is impossible to tell you the wonderful 
 effect these two policies had upon the situation. Nothing was more gratify 
 ing. Sensible, intelligent Republicans began to consider. You see our 
 great point was, by taking this broad, catholic position, to induce enough 
 Republican Senators to go with us on their own rule. Who could dread a 
 fair count of the votes, according to law, except the party that was not will 
 ing to have and abide by a fair count ? Yet some people wrote to me, " Don t 
 say a fair count, but say Tilden is elected ! But I was a good Democrat 
 enough and had confidence enough in the result to say that I had confidence 
 in a " fair count," and when you don t say that, you admit that you don t 
 have confidence in a fair count ! That was the very position into which we 
 were crowding the Republicans. They were going around saying : "Hayes 
 is elected. Hayes is elected." We said to them, " Oh, come on now and let 
 us have a fair count." " Oh, Hayes is elected ! " they said (much weaker), 
 and so it was that we were at an advantage with them upon that point. 
 
 Grant commenced weakening from the very day of that caucus in which 
 that question was determined. General Grant, Morton, and the other leaders 
 of the Republican party commenced weakening, and the only comfort that I 
 had when the whole press of the country was saying that I was a traitor 
 and selling out to Hayes, I could prove the contrary by Grant and Morton, 
 for both of them were cursing me for being a hypocrite. There wasn t 
 any hypocrisy about me. I thought the Democratic party was right on the 
 merits of its case, and I was willing to stand upon the merits. That is all. 
 If you are not willing to do that, you are not good Democrats, and go and 
 make a trade with Hayes yourselves ! 
 
 I have no apologies to make none in the world not a particle. Well, 
 after this thing occurred, it did not occur to me I will simply go into a 
 little history of my further connection with those matters, for that is my 
 business here. This last caucus was the last general caucus; but our private 
 caucuses, or conferences, were held often. I had the honor and the pleas 
 ure to be a regular attendant, and felt both the honor and the pleasure of 
 the position and tried to make a worthy member. I felt that the very fate 
 of the country depended upon the crisis and I was willing to do all in my 
 power and to humble myself, even on to my knees, to give it a successful 
 issue. After this caucus had adjourned several days we began to see in the 
 newspapers that Mr. Hill had made a terrible speech in the caucus and had 
 rasped Mr. Wood fearfully, and that we had all fallen out and broken up in 
 a row. ^ Well, we just laughed at it all and let it pass, and talked together, 
 and said the reporters had missed it this time. They are always trying to 
 guess what takes place in caucus, and they are mighty bad guesses at that ! 
 They took it into their heads that because Wood was the chairman of the 
 committee and reported the resolutions, and because I offered the suggestion 
 to modify them, that that broke up the meeting in a row. Why, it was no 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, ANb WRITINGS. 481 
 
 such thing it was a regular class-meeting. We just laughed at these re 
 porters, but it went on getting worse. After a while it became important 
 that some Southern man should make an emphatic expression upon some 
 points. I was asked to make it, and did do so, not having an opportunity in 
 the House, but in an interview which has become generally known as the 
 Herald interview, published in the New York Herald. That interview has 
 been very much misunderstood, and I desire to say something about it. 
 And, first, that I am not responsible for either the interpretation or the intro 
 duction given to it by the reporter, all of which are untrue; and second, that 
 every word in it was the result of conferences with the most trusted and 
 prominent of our leaders there in Washington. Talk of my policy. The 
 Democratic party has a policy ! Mr. Hill has no policy. The Democratic 
 party has a policy, and Mr. Hill is a part of it ! And it was in furtherance 
 of that policy that the interview was had, and the main idea of it was to 
 put a center shot into that claim that the President of the Senate alone could 
 count the vote and I did it ! And the other part of it was to say that we 
 were not going to get up another rebellion ! 
 
 On the 16th of December, 1876, a most important conference was held. 
 Mr. Hewitt came to me and said that a few gentlemen whom he had in 
 vited, were going to meet at his house that night to discuss some matters, 
 and there would be some gentlemen there from New York among others, 
 and that he and they were anxious that I should be there. I went, and the 
 meeting continued until near midnight, and I think it was one of the most 
 pleasant and satisfactory that I ever attended in all my life. It was an 
 earnest, honest discussion, the whole evening, of certain measures which we 
 thought should be adopted certain evils to be avoided, and certain good 
 things to be desired and accomplished. I am not going into the details of 
 that conference, but when the history of this winter s work is written it will 
 take an important place in the events of the time. And when it broke up, 
 the member from the Ninth District was gratified as much as he ever has 
 been in his life by the fact, communicated by Mr. Hewitt, that he had been 
 complimented with a special vote of thanks, for his suggestions, by this whole 
 company of distinguished persons. I felt very grateful for that, I can 
 assure you. It was exceedingly gratifying to me, and I left his house at 
 midnight it was one of the bitterest nights I ever felt cold, late, the street 
 cars all stopped, and it was a good mile walk to my house. The only man 
 of the party going my way was that great, wise, gallant man from Virginia, 
 John Randolph Tucker ! It was cold and the wind was icy, and we had to 
 walk that full mile. We set out and were talking about what had just 
 passed, and we were so gratified and cheerful at the prospect of the early 
 redemption of our people, that we well-nigh forgot about the cold. We 
 knew that the South had suffered and borne in patience, and we knew 
 that her deliverance was coming, and we were pleased that in some way we 
 were humble instruments in bringing it about. The feeling was so good and 
 so cheerful that when I first got home and went into my room I did not care 
 to think of much else. And when Mrs. Hill said, " There are some telegrams 
 for you," I did not care to bother with them. I was tired and had been up 
 until the hours of the Sabbath were upon us, but being telegrams, I went in 
 and looked at them. What were they ? One of them was from a gallant, 
 honorable young friend in this city, whom I esteem very much, and it said : 
 " Plant yourself square for Tilden, or you are beat ! " Plant yourself ! 
 I thought I had been planted ! "Plant yourself square ! Well, I thought 
 
482 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 I had been pretty " square." " Plant yourself square for Tilden ! r The 
 Lord knows I had never dreamed that I was for anybody else ! I opened 
 another, and it was from two gentlemen of the city, both of whom were my 
 warmest of friends. That was a long and earnest one. It said : 
 
 " You must send a telegram distinctly stating that you are not indifferent 
 as between Tilden and Hayes. You must send it to-night so that it may go 
 into the Constitution in the morning. The people of Atlanta are greatly 
 excited ! Now, what had I done ! How do you reckon I felt? I will 
 never forget that night. There I had been out all that night laboring for 
 the cause of my people and country, complimented for my services, and had 
 come home to find such telegrams awaiting me ! And as the past ran over 
 me and I remembered what I had done during the canvass, had left my own 
 districts and gone into others, and wherever there was doubt, and even to 
 gallant little Florida, to make it sure for Tilden, and I had the best assur 
 ances from one of the most distinguished men in Florida that after all it 
 was my humble visit down there that had made Drew governor, and that 
 Tilden ought of right to have the electoral vote ! And after all to come 
 home now and find such telegrams ! What did it mean ? I soon found out. 
 I did not answer the telegrams. It was too late, and I did not have the 
 heart to do it, anyway. Then, in a day or two, the letters began to come in. 
 My dear friends, I love to hear from you, but how you did flood me with 
 letters ! They said, the charge is that you are indifferent between Tilden 
 and Hayes ; that you are selling out Tilden and Hendricks ; and I suppose a 
 hundred Southern newspapers had editorials on Ben Hill s abandonment of 
 Tilden ! Gentlemen, that was very trying and outrageous, when I had not 
 said one word that had not been concurred in unanimously by the Democrats 
 in Congress. The truth is, if I wasn t in accord with the Democratic party, 
 then it was not in accord with itself. It was impossible for a man to be in 
 Washington City and be in more absolute accord with the Democratic 
 party than myself ! Now, where did these things get out ? Not a single 
 word published as from me was ever uttered by me not one ! Well, 
 fellow-citizens, I want to say to you very kindly that I don t charge you 
 with believing these things, nor will I complain of my friends because of 
 their sensitiveness, doubtless growing out of their attachments to me and 
 my fortunes, and because they knew that the world is apt to be misled, and 
 that when a thing goes into a newspaper somebody has a suspicion that 
 there is some truth in it. These things got to be so frequent that I felt that 
 I should write something about them and I did write one letter to a friend 
 for publication ; and some letters to others that did get into print of their 
 own accord. And now, I do say to you that there is not a man in Congress 
 from the South who has more of the affection and confidence of the Demo 
 cratic party of the North than I have. It simply fell to me to make a few 
 remarks upon a certain line of policy, and it was their policy not mine. And 
 that I was charged with being ready to sell out to Hayes. Why, I never 
 saw an agent of Hayes in my life ; never had any communication with him 
 or his friends, directly or indirectly. And why should these things be done ? 
 
 I am going to give you a partial revelation of the plot. It was the un 
 mixed result of an unmitigated conspiracy to defame me. Some few of the 
 persons engaged in it were Democrats, and some were Republicans. And 
 these things do not occur accidentally. There is a cause for every effect, 
 and the effect is equal to the cause, and e converso. Now, for a little about 
 them. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 483 
 
 In 1865 because a little history is necessary now to understand points 
 and I stand prepared to prove and vindicate what I say. When I came out 
 in 1865, of Fort Lafayette as a paroled prisoner, I stopped, on my way 
 home, in New York at the old New York Hotel. While there, several ?en- 
 tlemen called to see me and some to make my acquaintance. One of these 
 was Wash. McLean, editor of the Cincinnati Enquirer, and his object he 
 said, was to say that General Steadman, who was commanding the Depart 
 ment of Georgia then, with headquarters at Augusta, was a good friend of 
 his and a good Democrat, and he wanted me on my return home to specially 
 cultivate him and make friends with him. I didn t know that there was any 
 purpose in it at the time, but when I reached Georgia, a very singular state 
 of things existed here. There was at Augusta General Steadman at his 
 headquarters, with his little subordinates stationed around at every court 
 house and in every county. They were the only judges that we had, and 
 had taken charge of the laws and rights of the people, and were adminis 
 tering civil as well as military judgments. One of them over in my country 
 tried a divorce case, for instance, but their main business was to attend to 
 the neighbor s cotton. They were looking up Confederate cotton to seize, 
 but they managed to take anybody else s that they could. I thought it was 
 a very great outrage, and though I was only paroled prisoner, I thought 
 something should be done to stop it. It was no use to try and stop it in the 
 counties, but it was necessary to go to the fountain head. I determined to 
 do what I could, and I went to Augusta. I had heard of one celebrated 
 cotton case there which had been settled, but which one of the parties said 
 would have been kept open if I could have gotten there sooner. I volun 
 tarily left my home in La Grange and went to Augusta. When I went to 
 see my old friend Metcalf, and when I went in he was actually about to turn 
 over a lot of nine thousand bales of cotton which had been adjudged to some 
 claimant in Philadelphia. I asked the facts and they told me, and that they 
 were afraid not to comply with the order, lest they should be put in jail. I 
 said to them that it was not right and should be resisted. They said that 
 Metcalf had tried it and gotten^ into jail. I said I thought I could stop it, 
 and that I wouldn t think of a fee unless I gained the case. I begged them 
 to let me go on in their name. It is not often I do that. I never did ask a 
 case before in my life, but I did then, and I am not ashamed to admit it. 
 They sent for Judge Gould and asked his opinion, and he said there was no 
 chance for them. They said they would consult their lawyers, and all of 
 them said they must give up the cotton 9,978 bales in one lot. Judge 
 Gould s opinion he has borne testimony to frankly and I have it here. He 
 told them that if they resisted they would get into jail, and forbade them to 
 talk about it at all. I finally got permission from Bell to take his case; and 
 on the express condition that if anybody was to go to jail I would go myself, 
 as I was the only one who would have done anything wrong. And it is not 
 often that you find a man willing to go to jail to get a case. That was 
 late on Saturday evening. I went early on Monday morning to see General 
 Steadman, and he ordered me not to talk to him about it. He said that ho 
 had ordered that cotton to be turned over, and that if I interfered in th 
 matter he would send me to jail. I told him that I was just out of Fort 
 Lafayette and that it wasn t such a bad place after all. He might also 
 understand that I intended to interfere. He said then that he would put any 
 judge in jail who would grant an injunction in the matter. The next day 
 I went on the mean time preparing for the fight one of the parties inter- 
 
484 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 ested in the claim for the cotton came to me and said that if I would stand 
 aside and not interfere, I could get $100,000 ! That was a very bad position 
 to put a poor man in, you see ! It was very tempting ! But I felt that the 
 offer to bribe me was a concession that they feared me, and I scorned the 
 bribe and defied the jail, and in ten days I had the cotton safe and the orders 
 rescinded ; and not only rescinded in that case, but they had rescinded all 
 other orders of the kind in Georgia ! In plain language, I stopped the 
 seizure of cotton by military orders all over Georgia ! 
 
 Now, you see, the gentleman upon whose instance that cotton was seized 
 was George Schley, of Augusta, brother of William Schley, late of Savannah 
 and now of New York. Again it was tried to sell this cotton on one of 
 these orders, and it was resisted and carried to the United States Court and 
 tried in Savannah, and here now is all the testimony taken on that trial and 
 all the distinguished counsel are here. It was a bill in equity, which in that 
 court is somewhat different from the practice in our State courts. The 
 matters of fact there are made up and submitted to the jury in the shape 
 of questions and they find their verdict upon them. These are called 
 " special verdicts." [Mr. Hill here read from the record the questions upon 
 which special verdicts were given, to the effect that Schley had no authority, 
 verbal or written, from Metcalf to sell the cotton.] 
 
 That case was tried in the court below, those verdicts were rendered, and 
 the decrees entered. It went to the Supreme Court of the United States 
 and there it was fully reviewed and affirmed. And here you have it by the 
 testimony of those records that I did, by that interference in those cases, by 
 defying the threats of imprisonment and scorning to be bribed, save my 
 client from being robbed of nine thousand bales of cotton, attempted to be 
 sold without his authority, verbal or written. And now, from that day to 
 this, that man, Wash. McLean, and his Cincinnati JZnquirer have been my 
 enemies, and have been assailing me. He was the man who was the special 
 friend of Steadman, and wanted me to cultivate him and be his friend, and 
 not interfere with him, I suppose; for this bill in the case discloses that 
 there was a conspiracy, under cover of the military authority of the govern 
 ment, by these men, to steal the cotton of the people of Georgia, and grow 
 rich off the plunder. I do not know that he had any interest in the matter, 
 but I do know that since then he has been my special enemy. In Washing 
 ton City, a short while before Christmas, a conference was held by some 
 gentlemen, not members of Congress, in Wash. McLean s room, and your 
 humble servant was the special subject of discussion; and at it Schley, of 
 New York, gave a particularly delectable account of Mr. Hill. And George 
 Alfred Townsend, the man who writes up people for the newspapers, was 
 there, and I am ready to prove that the conversations took place just as re 
 ported. I charge no one with the conspiracy, but I have the proof that the 
 conversations took place, were reported, and that the object was to cram him 
 upon me and my record. He was outraged at the discovery of the use they 
 would have made of him and let the whole thing out. Then I heard from 
 New York just the other day that two gentlemen from there would be here 
 to defeat me for the Senate. One of the gentlemen was Schley. I do not 
 know whether he is here or not. I do not know why he should do these 
 things ; I never did the gentleman any harm, neither to him nor his family, 
 except it was to stop the seizure of that cotton by his brother in Augusta, 
 when the facts show that if it had succeeded he would have taken, as his 
 share, $100,000; and as it was, he did not take a cent ! I do not say that all 
 
WS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 485 
 
 that " Gath " says is true, but I give what he says about it and I have his 
 letter now to prove it. But these other facts I can give, for I have the facts 
 here as were proven in court. Whether this gentleman is laboring from a 
 lingering spirit inspired by these things, I do not know. Whether McLean 
 is, or not, I do not know. But I do know that about a year ago, when I 
 made that Amnesty speech, the Enquirer joined in the bitterest denunciations 
 of it, and the meanest things that were said about it were said by McLean 
 and Steadman the very men who were engaged in this same cotton steal. 
 I do know that this interview took place, that the conversations were had, 
 and that my record was discussed. I do not know that my excellent friend! 
 Senator Norwood, participated in any of the intentions of the party, but 
 they say that he was there and what they had him there for, I do not know ! 
 
 The Thursday after, an article appeared in the Cincinnati Enquirer, also 
 stating some of the facts which " Gath " has in his interview the same facts 
 of my record in which I am made out a very bad fellow ; and there is an 
 article in which the Georgia Legislature is advised not to send Ben Hill to 
 the Senate that I am not a good Democrat and that I was trading with 
 Hayes. I have taken some pains to find out who wrote those articles. They 
 were written by a man named McBride and who is he ? I have the au 
 thority of the Chairman of the State Democratic Committee of Ohio, and 
 Sergeant-at-Arms of the House at Washington, that he is a Radical! This 
 fellow writes articles to the Georgia Legislature saying that I am a Radical 
 and won t do to trust, and a Democratic paper in Cincinnati published them. 
 Mr. Thompson authorizes me to say that this man is a Radical. Now, has 
 it come to this that one of your representatives is to be defamed by a 
 Democratic newspaper through articles written by a Radical, known to be 
 such ? What are we coming to ? Here is a Democratic newspaper saying 
 that I am trading with Hayes ; that I am not a good Democrat ; that I am 
 selling out to Hayes; and all the time these beautiful articles are copied into 
 all no, not all but into certain Georgia newspapers and spread before the 
 people. I read most of them myself in a Georgia newspaper. 
 
 There is another man in Washington. I do not know whether he is a 
 Radical or a Democrat I think he is chiefly both and not much of either ! 
 Ele published the other day (I hear of these things before they come out ! 
 He is a man writing over the signature of "Buell "), he published an article 
 purporting to say and it was copied by my good friend, the Const itution- 
 that General Gordon said I was not a good Democrat. I have not seen Gen 
 eral Gordon, but two of his friends in Washington say that he did not say 
 it. If he says he did not, I do not believe General Gordon would tell what 
 is not true. But who is " Buell " ? He is the man who wrote the most out 
 rageous reports of my Amnesty speech. Why, when the Radicals were 
 doing all they could to pervert my speech and one of them told me that 
 they were compelled to do it ; that they had no idea that the South had such a 
 good defense of that prison question, and if the speech had gone before the 
 people of the North without something to break its force it would have ruined 
 the Republican party the one man who was engaged in this work was this 
 man Buell. I suppose he belongs to whichever side pays him the most. But 
 he, too, is now coming into the arena against me. He is another one of 
 the conspirators. Now, here is another branch of the conspiracy. It 
 is in the office of the National Republican, at Washington - - it is 
 Grant s organ, you know! Did you ever see the paper? Did you 
 ever read it ? if you want to feel like a decent man, don t you ever 
 
486 SENATOR . 3. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 read it ! It is certainly one of the most licentious papers I ever saw unless 
 it is the Cincinnati Enquirer. I tell you as a fact, that in this office they have 
 manufactured entire speeches for me out of the whole cloth. And it has been 
 praising me and welcoming me into the Radical party. And these speeches 
 that they manufacture are picked up and published in other newspapers. 
 Why, it made such a plausible report of a speech that it attributed to me, 
 and called editorial attention to it for two days in succession, and spoke of 
 Mr. Hill s able remarks, and all that, until some of my friends actually de 
 bated whether I should get up in the House and deny it, when in fact the 
 occasion never occurred at which the speech was said to have been delivered. 
 And all these things are the results of the conspiracies in Washington Cit}% 
 by different parties, acting from different motives and from different stand 
 points, but all for the same purposes. 
 
 Among other things, about a year ago, the Republican party managers 
 published a campaign document by taking my Amnesty speech, cutting it in 
 two, changing some of the sentences, and rearranging it and putting in 
 things I did not say, and then putting it in between the speeches of Blaine 
 and Garfield, and then sent it out by hundreds of thousands. A gentleman 
 wrote to me from Illinois a Mr. Davidson calling my attention to the 
 matter, and on it I wrote what is known as the Davidson letter, in which I 
 denounced it and said that no honorable man would circulate it. That broke 
 down the scheme, and a large number of the documents were left over. 
 And I was told in Washington, by authority that I believe to be true, that 
 under the frank of Senator Edmunds these documents are being sent to 
 Georgia to members of the Legislature. If you have any of them you 
 know whether this is true or not. If it is not so, I am glad that my con 
 spirators are not guilty of at least one act like this. 
 
 Then, again, last year when we were drawing for seats as you do here 
 and they have two sides there, one called the Democratic side and one the 
 Radical side. Now, if you divided it here, the Radicals over here would 
 have plenty of room on their side, but the Democrats would be crowded 
 over there. But in the last Congress there being seventy-two Democratic 
 majority, some of the Democrats have had to sit on the Republican side. 
 I was unfortunate, being one of the last names called, and I had to take a 
 seat on the extreme back row, on the outside of the Democratic side of the 
 House. My friend, Hon. Wm. E. Smith, got a seat upon the Republican side, 
 right in front of the Speaker a very desirable seat. He was a little exer 
 cised about the poor position I had, as I was myself, to tell the truth, and 
 he said to me that he considered his seat a sort of partnership seat between 
 us and I could use it whenever I wanted to be near and watch what was 
 going on. Well, at the last session he did not come on at first, and I sat in 
 his seat, and don t you think a mean, contemptible Georgia paper published 
 that I had gone over to the Radicals and was sitting upon their side of the 
 House. Why not say Smith is a Radical ? Why not say that any one of 
 the Democrats who are compelled to sit on that side are Radicals ? No, 
 they are not; and no nobler, more gallant, and chivalrous man ever lived than 
 Wm. E. Smith ! 
 
 Now, fellow-citizens, I have been gathering up these facts and laying 
 them before you. There are correlative duties in this life. A public repre 
 sentative owes fidelity, zeal, and watchfulness over the interests and honor 
 of his constituency. Do they owe nothing in return to their public servant? 
 If your public representative has been faithful and watchful and true to 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 
 
 your interests, are you under no obligation to protect his character when it 
 is assailed in this style ? The character of a public man is public property 
 and it is valued according to his ability and efficiency. And the whole pur 
 pose of these groundless charges, whatever the motive, whoever the conspira 
 tors, and whatever the inducement the whole purpose is to defame and de 
 stroy me, as a public man, through you. What have I done to deserve this ? 
 One paper in Georgia calls me a vile demagogue, and that is picked up and 
 circulated over the North. And there is another paper, characteristic in its 
 elegant literature, that calls me a " flat-headed mud-cat," and here in the 
 very streets of Atlanta, on which I have walked for years among you, and 
 where I defied the bayonets of your oppressors, I have been caricatured at 
 the very time I was doing the service of which 1 have already spoken, and 
 this caricature was circulated all over the North. 
 
 And I am accused of being ambitious and selfish ! Why, I wouldn t 
 have office under either Tilden or Hayes ! I challenge any man to show the 
 part of my record that has the smell of selfishness upon it ! Briefly, when 
 was I ever in politics for a selfish purpose ? I 1855 I was opposed to the 
 Democratic party because I believed its policy would lead to secession, and 
 that secession would be bad for the Southern people. Was that for a selfish 
 
 but, thank God, there are four years of my public life that have never been 
 assailed by the conspirators ! Previous to the war I canvassed all over the 
 State of Georgia, doing service for my party and for what I believed to be 
 correct principles, and I never asked for office, except to go to the Legis 
 lature from my dear little County of Troup. But when, at the beginning of 
 the war, I went to Milledgeville and the people transferred me to the Con 
 federate Senate, I served there during the war you all know in what man 
 ner. Was that selfish ? It may have been conferred upon me, as a Demo 
 crat once explained to me, to appease the forty thousand Whigs in Georgia, 
 whose support was needed, and who it was thought could be controlled by me. 
 I accepted the compliment, but did I falter? Did I use my office for selfish 
 purposes? And if it is not true that during all that time my affections grew 
 dearer and deeper as the days grew darker? It was at that time that I won 
 from your old chieftain the compliment I am too modest here to repeat. Then 
 in 1865, when a paroled prisoner, I went to Augusta, bearded the tyrant and 
 broke his arm. Was that selfish ? And while I succeeded in rescinding the order 
 in that one case, here is the further record. I did not stop with that one order 
 I made myself the attorney for every freeman in Georgia, and had all the 
 orders of the same kind rescinded. And in 1866, soon after this had been 
 accomplished, when Federal treasury agents were sent all over Georgia, 
 ostensibly to look for Confederate cotton subscribed by the citizens, and was 
 serving notices on every man who subscribed cotton to the Confederate 
 Government, and stating that he must furnish that amount to the Federal 
 Government. Over here, in Meriwether County, one of these agents got a 
 list of the names of the parties who had subscribed and served notice on all 
 of them to give up the cotton or be arrested ; the people interested sent Mr. 
 A. Adams over to see if I would take the cases. I examined into the facts 
 and did so, and I served notice upon this treasury agent that I was going 
 to defend them. I got on the train and went to Washington City at my 
 own expense to see Andrew Johnson, and told him that he had stopped the 
 
488 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 seizure of cotton down here by military order, and now his Federal treasury 
 agents were down here to look after Confederate cotton, and they were taking 
 everybody else s. He said, " What shall I do about it ? " I said, " Withdraw 
 the last one of them." He said, "I sent government agents down there, and 
 they went to stealing ; then I sent supervisors, and they went to stealing too ; 
 then we sent the Federal treasury agents, and you tell me that they are 
 stealing too. Well, they all steal." I replied, "Yes, every man of them." I 
 told him our people had very little left to start their plantations on, and if 
 that little was taken from them they would be left without means and to 
 suffer. I did not make a speech more than five minutes long before the old 
 man said, " Stop, Mr. Hill, I believe you are right, and I ll stop it at once "; 
 and he did. There is the record. And I did not charge my friend in 
 Meriwether a dollar for that service. And again I served the whole people 
 of Georgia and the South, for the orders were made general, and these 
 agents were withdrawn from the South. Well, did you ever know a flat- 
 headed catfish to act that way ? 
 
 These are the facts. Every one of them can be proven. They are re 
 corded facts. I have never mentioned them before in a public address, 
 because I did not do those things for effect. How many men would have 
 this record and not have it in every newspaper in Georgia ! And yet I am 
 arraigned in this most critical period of my life and of my services as unsafe. 
 After the war I never expected to go into politics again. I expected to go 
 to the State University and engage in literary pursuits, practice law, and 
 educate my children. I moved from La Grange to Athens. Pretty soon 
 after this these Reconstruction acts came along ; but I paid no attention to 
 them. I read none of the acts and none of the speeches until I came here 
 to court, when I was called upon by a number of citizens, asking me to take 
 the lead and advise the people to agree to Reconstruction. I said to them 
 that I knew nothing about it and I wish to the Lord that I never had 
 that it never had occurred, I mean. I went home and read the acts and 
 studied the debates and I said if the people accepted them I thought it would 
 be essential forever after. After all that we had suffered in the war, the 
 blood and treasure, loss of property, desolation of homes, broken firesides, 
 the people were called upon as a last sacrifice to consent to their own dis 
 honor. You were asked to consent to that. Then followed my "Notes 
 on the Situation." I did not write them to make known that I was 
 ready and willing to resist the Government of the United States. Here is 
 the opinion. I had the power and force that was being applied to us 
 then. [Mr. Hill here read a couple of paragraphs from the " Notes on the 
 
 cvj. .iV in 
 
 situation. 
 
 The point is, where was the selfishness in all this ? Was I seeking office ? 
 You were hardly able to speak at all. Your enemy was here upon you, and 
 had all power in his hands. If I had been seeking office, and wanted a selfish 
 purpose accomplished, I would have joined your enemies. But when you 
 were powerless and your enemies all-powerful, I stood up and defended your 
 honor to the last. I do not ask you to say that I was wise. The only point 
 is, was it wise or unwise when I said it? That thing lasted from 1866 to 
 1870, and during all of which time I did my best to resist it. In the mean 
 time I want to mention one thing right here to show you how people 
 misunderstand things I have been charged with advising the people not to 
 take part in the election of 1870. I found then that was a most trying 
 question for us to decide. There was a registration law prescribing certain 
 
SIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 489 
 
 qualifications for voters and prescribing that they should be registered. 
 And then delegates were to be chosen to a convention, and if, upon the 
 question of convention or no convention, more than half of the voters who 
 had registered did not vote, convention should not carry. So, therefore 
 every man who had registered and didn t vote was counted against the con 
 vention. My idea was that the best way to defeat the convention was to 
 register and not vote, so that if we kept more than one-half of the voters 
 who had registered from voting, the thing was defeated. 
 
 I will give you a little history. Having few advisers, I took the train 
 and went to Washington to advise with Andrew Johnson, the then Presi 
 dent of the United States. We took the Reconstruction acts and went over 
 them together, and came to the conclusion that the best way to oppose Re 
 construction was to register and then not to vote. There was a manifest 
 disadvantage in it, but after that interview with Andrew Johnson, I went 
 to the hotel and wrote the letter in which I gave that advice to the people of 
 Georgia through the Chronicle and Sentinel of Augusta. The President 
 concurred in that view. 
 
 This thing went on to 1870, when the election of members to the Legis 
 lature was coming on. I knew that it was going to be Democratic. I knew 
 that we could not keep it so, unless we could keep the hand of the Federal 
 Government off. How was that to be done ? Some people think that all 
 we had to do was to carry the election. Why, you can find all through my 
 writings that no matter how we voted, the Radicals would keep in if they 
 could. I said then, and say now, that General Gordon was elected gover 
 nor, and Bullock was counted in. You can say now, for you all know 
 it now, that majorities won t restrain the Republican party. And 
 here, while I am talking, they are devising schemes to defeat the 
 will of the people with a majority of 250,000 against them. He is a sim 
 pleton who thinks majorities will ever restrain the Republican party. That 
 was the most bothering question of my life. The Democratic platform of 
 1868 declared that the Reconstruction acts were revolutionary --null and 
 void. With us, to hold the Legislature Democratic was the point. My idea 
 was that we could do nothing without being in harmony with the Democratic 
 party of the North, and it had no power in Washington. I went there and 
 stayed during two visits, talked with them, and read their newspapers in 
 order to find out, if I could, what they intended to do. This was September 
 and December, 1868. And I came to the conclusion that though they were 
 not conscious of it, yet that the logic of events was such that in 1872 the 
 Democratic party would accept Reconstruction and go back on the platform 
 of 1868. The question then was how to get it before the people of Georgia. 
 So I thought that if I took the position in 1870 that Reconstruction was an 
 accomplished fact, that Grant could be induced to hold hands off. Then 
 it was that I wrote that letter. I expected to be abused a little by the 
 Democrats, but never to be abused as much as I have been. Grant made the 
 mistake, and I knew he would do so, for he was not statesman enough to 
 see that when a man admitted that Reconstruction was an accomplished 
 fact, he had not taken and subscribed to the Republican platform. We went 
 on and there was an election. And about that time a member of the Cabinet 
 and other influential men from the North came down here, and they were 
 here at the time that Bullock was trying to turn the Democrats out. I said 
 that when that Legislature meets it will approve the amendments to the Con 
 stitution of the United States and will not interfere with the rights of the 
 
490 SENATOR B. S. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 negroes or the Union men, and therefore don t interfere with the Legislature. 
 And after a week s conversation with this member of the cabinet, I got him 
 to consent to it. 
 
 That banquet about which you have heard so much and so often, was 
 given to him by Bullock to aid that Reconstruction policy, and I went 
 there to show my respect for the guest, and only after he had assured me 
 that he was going to support me, and I remember well, and shall never for 
 get the words that I used upon that occasion, when I said, " Thank God, 
 Reconstruction is over, at last over over over ! You can see that 
 there was meaning in those words, and I well remember how he nodded his 
 approval to me from the head of the table ; and right there I broke up 
 Bullock s scheme of Reconstruction. I went to Washington to carry out 
 the plan, and I kept General Grant from interfering. People said that I 
 " tricked General Grant. I didn t. I " tricked no man. I opposed 
 Reconstruction, yet, when it was accomplished, I submitted. The only 
 point here is, whether, irl 1870, I did correctly forecast the policy of the 
 Democratic party in 1872 ? And sure enough they did, only they went a 
 little further. Is there a man in this country that don t submit to it to 
 day ? There was no trick in this matter. I thought I ought to save the 
 Legislature of Georgia, and save Georgia from further Radical domination. 
 I believed that by taking that position in 1870 I could get into position to 
 do it. It was a naked wrestle of intellect, and the redemption of Georgia 
 was the wager, and I threw my antagonist and won. That is the truth, 
 and yet every little fellow that came along afterward and got on the plat 
 form is crying out, " Ben Hill is not reliable ! It is said that I was collud 
 ing with the Radicals to get office, and go to the Senate. One little paper 
 down here in Warrenton, that ought to have been sent to the lunatic asy 
 lum, the paper, I mean, of course, made that charge. How could I be 
 seeking office from the Republicans when I was trying to keep in the Demo 
 crats ? And during all that long eleven months, when I had to carry this 
 burden amid the anathemas of my friends, and was simply waiting for the 
 Democratic party to come to the platform I had predicted for it, and until 
 that had been done, I was all that time under disabilities and could not 
 hold office under any party, and did not do a single thing to have them 
 removed. These things show you how unjustly I was dealt with in those 
 days. I would not have them removed only in order that I might raise 
 myself in my labors above even the suspicion of selfishness. 
 
 But, fellow-citizens, in 1871 the Federal arm which had torn down so 
 many State Governments stayed in Georgia, and she was the first of her 
 sisters to achieve her redemption. You admire justly the patience of 
 Hampton, and the gallantry of Nicholls, McEnry, and Penn, and say that 
 their grand struggle to get rid of Radical government is worthy of all 
 promise and all success ; but for five years you have been free, and you 
 were made free as I have told you. Now, whether I was wise or unwise, I 
 put the question to you, Where was the selfishness in this act ? Whatever 
 was my motive, whatever was the efficiency of the motive, you are obliged 
 to agree with me in the result. 
 
 But I pass on. So things rested from 1872. Where is the selfishness 
 since ? I did express a desire to go to the Forty-fourth Congress when I 
 found that the Democrats had a majority in that body. I thought I might 
 be of some use, and the people were kind enough to send me, and I did go. 
 I went to Washington, and after I had been there a short time, I found my- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 491 
 
 self in a very embarrassing situation. I found that those who had been there 
 before had taken the passive policy, and deemed it wise and prudent not to 
 reply to anything that might be said against them or their people. I had 
 been there but a little while when the South was assailed for barbarism, cruelty, 
 and savagery, by one of the most accomplished political combatants of the 
 Radical party, a man of large influence, long in service, a leader of his 
 party, a splendid tactician, a thorough master of the rules, and who had held 
 the Speaker s gavel for six years. If I had consulted my own ease when 
 this attack was made, I would have sat there and let it pass unmet. What 
 was I to do ? I felt, fellow-citizens, that it was better for me to be sacri 
 ficed in a manly eifort to repel false and malicious charges against my people 
 than to sit there and submit to them in silence. Now, tell me I challenge 
 any man, I challenge every man, to put his finger upon a single word of my 
 history where I have shown a selfish purpose in any degree. I have been in 
 politics for twenty-two years, and during only six of them have I held public 
 office, counting my present position. During sixteen years I labored with 
 out office, and the best service I have done to Georgia was when I was doing 
 it single-handed as an individual. 
 
 It is a source of great pride to me when I hear people in Washington, as 
 I do almost every day, saying how much better off Georgia is than her sister 
 States. I do not doubt that I have made errors. They say I am egotistic. 
 It is not true. I state facts, not in an egotistic spirit, or in vain boasting. 
 All of them can be proven, and why should the man be assailed for stating 
 what he has done ? God knows, when I think of what should have been 
 done, I feel humbled ; but the people should be generous, for my history is 
 a peculiar one, for a large amount of what I had to do was done single- 
 handed and alone, and when I came here to Atlanta and made the " Davis 
 Hall Speech," in order to tell the people that they had a right to speak, and 
 Pope wrote to Grant to have me banished from the State, I felt complimented 
 by it. And if you will pardon me, I will state that I read the other day a 
 record made up by one of the most distinguished historians of Massachusetts, 
 which I did not know had ever been written. I do not know him, and have 
 never seen him ; nor does he know me. In reviewing Pope s letter he said : 
 " We have read the speech of Mr. Hill upon which General Pope s letter 
 was based," and he says of it this " with such men as Mr. Hill the country 
 can be saved ; without such men as Mr. Hill the country is not worth saving." 
 It was no compliment to me personally, but to my nerve and courage in that 
 dark hour, when I dared to defy the military tyrant. I find the places where 
 dangers are to be encountered, desolate, but become crowded thorough 
 fares when offices are to be distributed, but I never got one by myself, and 
 never was allowed to. I am always a criminal when I want one ; but I do 
 desire to go to the Senate. I desire it that the whole universe may be my 
 audience, and solely because I believe I can be of more service there to my 
 people than anywhere else. I do not say that I can be of service ; I don t 
 say that I can be of service anywhere. "That is for you to judge ; but if I 
 do say so myself, if you think I can be of service anywhere, the Senate is 
 the place where I can be of the most service, and that owing to the peculiar 
 rules of the Houses. I am told now that I am the very man for the House, 
 but even that was not discovered until after I got there. I am the only man 
 to whom the argument has ever been applied. It is the custom and has 
 always been so to transfer men from the House to the Senate. Already 
 during the present Congress four of them have been so transferred- -Mr. 
 
492 SENATOR B. If. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Lamar, of Mississippi ; Mr. Barnum, from Connecticut. Yesterday Massa 
 chusetts transferred Mr. Hoar from the House to the Senate, last Tuesday, 
 and even during this session, Maine took Mr. Blaine up and put him there. 
 When it comes to talking about Mr. Hill, it is said to be the worst thing in 
 the world. Why is it ? Now, because of its very large numbers, and the 
 amount of business it always has on hand, the rules of the House are restrain 
 ing upon debate ; a member can only speak there for one hour, unless by 
 consent, and never twice upon the same subject, save by unanimous consent, 
 and it is a very exceedingly noisy place, as all large bodies are. That is 
 the reason that I prefer the Senate ; and the man who is familiar with the 
 rules of the two Houses, and who says that the House is the better place for 
 a gentleman who has any pretensions to debating powers than the Senate, is 
 not telling the truth. 
 
 If I am not the proper man to represent you in the Senate, don t send me 
 there ; but if you defeat me, these conspirators will claim the credit for it. 
 What a jolly, rollicking crowd will be in the Washington Republican office 
 when they get the news that Ben Hill is defeated for the Senate ; and that 
 Republican who writes for the Cincinnati Enquirer, and all the rest of them, 
 will claim that they have won a triumph; and controlled the Georgia Legisla 
 ture. But if you defeat me, why leave me in the House with my forehead 
 branded "unworthy." That will be the interpretation of your action. Who 
 can I ask to believe me when you will not trust me, for that is what you 
 will say by that action. If you do not believe that I should be in the Senate, 
 don t send me ; but I am the only man on whom this personal issue has been 
 made. For in all times in peace, in the perils of war, in darkness and dis 
 tress I have always defended your honor, and now my honor is at stake ; 
 and it is for you to say whether you will defend it or not. I have reached 
 that point when I need a constituency. 
 
 People of Georgia, I say to you I can fight any enemy that assails you. 
 I have always fought for you, and I am ready, be their powers and strength 
 what they may, to fight them to the last. I can defy all these conspirators, 
 but when you give them voice and encouragement I am done. There is one 
 that I cannot fight, and that is Georgia ; and when Georgia speaks against 
 me, I am utterly undone. I know the extent of this conspiracy ; I do not 
 know its strength, but I know its purposes, and I warn you against it. 
 
 I have not said one word against the gentlemen who are my competitors. 
 They are gentlemen, all gentlemen, and this I will say, that if either of them 
 had been assailed by such a band of Radical conspirators in Washington, 
 as I have been, I would promptly decline in his favor. I wouldn t let any 
 Georgian in whose fame and in whose services I had an interest be defamed 
 with impunity. I say we stand within forty days of the possible wreck 
 and ruin of Constitutional government. If Hayes should be inaugurated, 
 although I believe him personally a vast improvement on Grant, if he is in 
 augurated, and is controlled by the same men who have controlled Grant, he 
 will be no improvement, and no pen can transcribe the terrors of what this 
 government will be when Radicalism is allowed to rule again. We will 
 suffer all and more than history has yet recorded, and our beautiful land will 
 become the Poland of America. 
 
 God close your eyes and mine before we ever see that day. Talk of 
 pur people submitting to usurpation ! When did I say that they would do 
 it? When did I advise them to do it? If they have not shown in the past 
 their courage in what they believe to be the right, no people has ; but if we 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 493 
 
 can lift the Democratic party above its mere party triumph, and Tilden can 
 be peaceably inaugurated, then we will have a new dawn, and the sunlight 
 of peace and prosperity will shine upon us again. Then the States will all 
 be States again, and our beautiful South spring up from the ashes of her 
 despair and gloom, and increase in beauty and power. Has the South now 
 the opportunity of absolutely becoming the savior of the Union ! Shall 
 the Southern people by their moderation, by their conservatism, by their 
 wisdom, step in at this crisis and demand the peace. It is a spectacle on 
 which the world will gaze with admiration, and on which angels will love 
 to look when the South, neck deep in the ashes of her prosperity and hopes, 
 shall lift her voice to those who sought to destroy her, and say, " Peace, 
 peace, civil war is not the remedy of the hour ! r If the South can accom 
 plish this she will march up to her old position in the Union with more 
 power than she ever possessed. 
 
 Fellow-citizens, it is to help, however humbly, in such a scheme that I 
 feel willing to become your senator. I have an ambition to serve my peo 
 ple so that when I come to die it shall not be counted how many offices I 
 have held, but how many I have deserved. 
 
 Now I shall take my leave of you. If I fail to get the proper telegram, 
 I shall leave on the first train. I feel that I have no right to be staying here, 
 while your property and interests are at stake. I left with the understand 
 ing that if needed, I would return at once. I shall leave you, and leave my 
 destiny in your hands. I have been charged with being a traitor and with 
 selling you out to your enemies in your hour of triumph. Here is the place 
 to test it, close to where Davis s Hall stood, within a stone s throw of where 
 the bush-arbor was erected, and next door to the headquarters where I 
 defied the bayonets of your enemies ; and here let the roll be called, and let 
 the men who kept watch at Andersonville answer. 
 
SPEECH DELIVERED IK THE SENATE OF THE UNITED 
 STATES ON THE PACIFIC RAILROAD FUNDING BILL, 
 MARCH 27, 1878. 
 
 This speech is an argument against the constitutionality of the bill reported by the 
 Judiciary Committee of the Senate to establish a sinking fund to secure the repayment 
 of a loan made by the United States to the Union and Central Pacific Railroad Compa 
 nies. Mr. Hill took the position that the bill was an impairment of the contracts here 
 tofore made with said railroad companies. He met in this debate the ablest lawyers in 
 the Senate, and demonstrated his remarkable power as a constitutional lawyer. For 
 close logic the speech is a model. 
 
 The Senate being as in Committee of the Whole, and having under 
 consideration the bill (S. No. 15) to alter and amend the act entitled "An 
 act to aid in the construction of a railroad and telegraph line from the 
 Missouri River to the Pacific Ocean, and to secure the government the use 
 of the same for postal, military, and other purposes," Mr. Hill said : 
 
 Mr. President: We have before us two bills, each proposing to establish 
 a sinking fund the better to secure the repayment of a loan made by the 
 United States to the Union Pacific and the Central Pacific Railroad Compa 
 nies. The comparative merits of the two bills as sinking-fund measures I 
 have not yet considered and shall not now discuss. I especially wish it dis 
 tinctly understood that nothing I may say in the way of dissenting from 
 the bill reported by the judiciary committee is to be taken as implying that 
 I will support the bill reported from the committee on railroads. I repeat I 
 have not considered, and much less formed an opinion upon either of these 
 bills as measures of wisdom, economy, or expediency. I have thus far con 
 fined my investigations, and shall now confine my remarks, to a Constitu 
 tional question, a question of congressional or legislative power which is 
 raised by these two bills. 
 
 The bill reported from the railroad committee proposes to establish a 
 sinking fund, with the assent of the companies, as matter of agreement 
 between the creditor and the debtor. The bill reported from the judiciary 
 committee proposes to establish a sinking fund by legislative act only, by the 
 sovereign will of the creditor, not only without the assent of the debtors, 
 but by a command, a failure or refusal to obey which by the debtors shall 
 work a forfeiture of estate and subject them or their agents to a criminal 
 prosecution. Such an exercise of power is, in my judgment, not only unau 
 thorized and unconstitutional, but is actually subversive of the great pur 
 poses to secure which the government itself was instituted. 
 
 In order to understand clearly the issue presented, I will state the mate 
 rial facts bearing upon the case, and I shall state the contracts as they were 
 finally agreed to : 
 
 First, by the act of 1862, Congress created a corporate being, a body- 
 politic, and named it the Union Pacific Railroad Company. 
 
 Second, this corporate being, thus created, Congress endowed with all 
 the powers, privileges, and franchises usually granted to corporations, and 
 especially authorized and empowered it " to lay out, locate, construct, fur 
 nish, maintain, and enjoy a continuous railroad and telegraph, with the 
 appurtenances," between designated points. 
 
 494 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 495 
 
 Third, to this being, thus created and endowed, the Congress also 
 granted certain privileges, such as the right of way through the public 
 lands without compensation, and through other lands with compensation, 
 and also certain property, and especially alternate sections of the public 
 lands amounting to several million acres. All these rights, powers, privi 
 leges, and grants were granted without money and without price by the 
 sovereign grace and favor to the child thus born of the sovereign s loins. 
 
 Fourth and I ask the Senate to mark the difference after thus creat 
 ing this corporate being, and after thus clothing it with powers and with 
 authority to contract and be contracted with, the Congress itself proposed 
 to authorize at once a contract with it in behalf of the United States. The 
 Congress deemed that the construction of a railroad to the Pacific Ocean 
 would be a great benefit to the government in the way of saving in trans 
 portation, would greatly increase the wealth and power of the people, and 
 perhape maintain the integrity of the Union. To enable the Union Pacific 
 Railroad Company to construct, equip, and maintain its portion of this rail 
 road and telegraph line to the Pacific Ocean, Congress proposed to make it 
 a loan in bonds ; and to secure the completion of the entire line Congress 
 made a like offer of loan to the Central Pacific Railroad Company, a cor 
 poration created by the State of California, and also authorized the latter 
 company to extend its line east until it should meet the Union Pacific line 
 going west. 
 
 It is important now to understand with accuracy the terms and condi 
 tions of this loan, for these terms and conditions formed the inducement to 
 accept the offer and thus enter into the substance of the contract. The 
 material terms and conditions are these : The bonds were to be issued 
 directly by the government and delivered to the companies. The secretary 
 of the treasury was authorized to deliver the bonds as the roads were com 
 pleted in sections. The bonds were to mature after thirty years to bear 
 interest at the rate of six per cent, per annum, payable semi-annually. The 
 loans were to be repaid to the government as follows : Previous to the 
 maturity of the bonds the companies were to pay to the government five 
 per cent, of their net earnings and one-half the sums due by the govern 
 ment for transportation over the road ; and it is especially stipulated that 
 the government shall at all times have the preference in the use of the road 
 and telegraph " for all the purposes aforesaid " ; that is, " to transmit mes 
 sages and transport mails, troops, munitions of war, supplies, and public 
 stores," and " at fair and reasonable rates of compensation, not to exceed the 
 amount paid by private parties for the same kind of service." Whatever 
 balance should remain unpaid by this five per cent, and the half of the gov 
 ernment transportation, the companies were to repay at the maturity of the 
 bonds. It is so expressly nominated. To secure its repayment it is stipu 
 lated that : 
 
 The issue of said bonds and delivery to the company shall ipso facto constitute a first 
 mortgage on the whole line of the railroad and telegraph, together with the rolling 
 stock, fixtures, and property of every kind and description, and in consideration of 
 which said bonds may be issued. 
 
 And in case of default by the companies, the secretary of the treasury 
 is directed to take possession of the property so covered by mortgage " for 
 the use and benefit of the United States." 
 
 I am stating the contract of loan as finally made. In the first offer in 
 1862 the United States were to have a first lien. In 1864 the offer was 
 
496 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 changed by Congress, so that other bonds might be issued by the companies 
 of like amount with those of the government, and the lien of the government 
 was to be subordinated to those bonds of the companies, and in this form 
 the offer was accepted. 
 
 The entire railroad and telegraph from the Missouri River to the Pacific 
 Ocean were completed in all respects as required, and all the conditions 
 precedent to the issue and delivery of the bonds under the contract of loan 
 were complied with, and the bonds were actually issued and delivered in 
 execution of the authority ; and all the rights of the creditor and all the 
 liabilities of the debtor thus became complete, definite, and fixed, and so, as 
 I shall prove, became unchangeable, except by consent of the parties, by 
 every rule of law known, administered, and respected in every just govern 
 ment under the sun. That no power, executive, legislative, or judicial, 
 can, under any pretext whatever, by reservation or otherwise, change, add 
 to, alter, or rescind this contract, except upon allegation and proof of mis 
 take or fraud in its procurement, and that no power or department of gov 
 ernment can grant any remedy or relief touching this contract, its payment, 
 or further security, or can listen to any complaint touching it by either party, 
 except upon allegation and proof of default in some respect by the other 
 party, is the proposition I propose now to establish. 
 
 "As the tree falleth,so it must lie," and equally certain is it that as com 
 petent parties legally and knowingly contract, so must they abide their 
 contract, and government has no power to interfere except to protect and 
 enforce on default such contracts according to their terms. In my opinion 
 the bill reported from the judiciary committee does propose to interfere 
 with this contract, does propose to affect and even to change the rights and 
 liabilities of the parties to this contract, and without any allegation of default, 
 without any pretense of default, either real or intended, and it proposes that 
 this interference shall come from the most unauthorized of all departments 
 of the government, the legislative department. 
 
 I have examined this bill carefully, and in all its long string of whereases 
 it alleges no default of any kind or character as the reason for its passage. 
 It meets the question boldly and fearlessly and is a broad assertion that 
 Congress, by virtue of its poioer alone, has authority to change the contract 
 in the manner proposed by the bill. I have listened with anxious attention 
 to the various senators who have so ably advocated the passage of this bill. 
 I have listened to them all the more anxiously because I desire to co-operate 
 with them in all efforts to secure the government in the premises, and I am 
 ready to vote for any plan looking to that security which Congress has the 
 Constitutional power to adopt. 
 
 The advocates of the bill do not agree among themselves in the reasons 
 which they assign for the power claimed. After carefully considering them, 
 [ am satisfied that all the advocates of this bill are embraced in the three 
 following classes : 
 
 1. One class contend that the bill does not change or alter the contract 
 of loan nor the rights or liabilities of the parties to it. 
 
 2. The second class insist that the mortgagers are in possession of the 
 property under a trust, first for the benefit of creditors and afterward for the 
 benefit of the owners, and that if the corpus of the property covered by the 
 mortgage is insufficient to secure the debt and the mortgagers have become 
 or are likely to become insolvent, the mortgagees have a right to have a 
 sufficiency of the income or earnings dedicated to pay the debt before 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 497 
 
 dividends shall be retained and to accumulate the income or earnings by a 
 sinking fund until the debt shall be discharged. 
 
 3. A third class claim that in this case Congress has the power to alter, 
 amend, add to, or rescind this contract in order to secure the debt. Some 
 claim this power as inherent in the government, and others claim it under 
 the provisions of the acts of 1862 and 1864, which expressly reserve to 
 Congress the right to " alter, add to, amend, or repeal " each of said acts. 
 On this last ground the bill itself is based. But as there are senators who 
 do not concur with that reason for the power claimed but insist upon one or 
 the other of the two reasons I have previously specified, it is proper that I 
 should notice all these grounds, and I will consider them in their order. 
 
 First, does the bill reported from the judiciary committee in fact alter, 
 or propose to alter, or will it have the effect to alter this contract of loan or 
 the rights and liabilities of the parties to it ? It is certain that the bill does 
 not propose to alter or in any manner affect either of the acts of 1862 and 
 1864, except those provisions which relate to this debt and which authorize 
 and prescribe the terms of the loan by which the debt was created. The 
 whole bill relates to the establishment of a sinking fund to secure the ulti 
 mate payment of the debt, the manner of accumulating that sinking fund, 
 the custody and final distribution of the fund so accumulated, and prescribes 
 the penalties that shall be visited on the company or companies failing or 
 refusing to pay the amount required into that sinking fund. So that, if the 
 bill alters or amends anything in these acts or either of them, it can only be 
 those provisions to which this bill alone refers ; that is, those provisions 
 which authorized this loan and the terms and stipulations of it. You 
 nowhere propose to change a single franchise ; you nowhere propose to 
 withdraw a single power or privilege granted to these companies ; you 
 nowhere propose to interfere with the regulation and administration of the 
 franchise. It is a naked proposition to secure the debt and prescribe such 
 terms as in your judgment will secure the debt without the assent of the 
 companies, and without alleging any default or maladministration by the 
 companies or either of them. 
 
 Now, let us look, first, to the title of the act. What does that propose? 
 I am now discussing the question, mark you, whether the bill does propose 
 to alter and change the contract, for there are senators around me who 
 have said that they did not look upon it as a bill to alter and change the 
 contract. Let us look, first, to the title of the act itself. In terras it is " a 
 bill to alter and amend " the act of 1862, and also " to alter and amend " the 
 act of 1864. " Alter and amend" what ? There is not a provision of this 
 judiciary committee bill that refers to anything but the contract and the 
 
 11. 1 1 -V 1*11 W. ^V \ i f \ 1 T 1 
 
 in the premises, and in respect of all the matters set forth in said act, require 
 that the said act of 1862 be altered and amended as hereinafter enacted. 
 And that " by reason of the premises also, as well as for other causes of 
 public good and justice, the powers provided and reserved in said act of 
 1864 for the amendment and alteration thereof ought also to be exercised as 
 hereinafter enacted." " Hereinafter enacted " how ? You do not hereinafter 
 enact a single alteration or change in a franchise, a power, or privilege 
 the companies. You hereinafter enact nothing on earth but an alteration ol 
 the debt and the terms of its payment. All the alterations and amendment! 
 
498 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 thus proposed relate exclusively to contract of loan and none to the franchises 
 granted in the acts. 
 
 Then, again, the thirteenth section of the bill is in these words : 
 
 That each and every of the provisions in this act contained shall severally and respect 
 ively be deemed, taken, and held as in alteration and amendment of said act of 1862 and 
 of said act of 1864, respectively, and of both said acts. 
 
 Thus in the most emphatic manner the judiciary committee bill declares 
 its purpose to be " to alter and amend," and every alteration and amendment 
 proposed is of the contract of loan and of the rights and liabilities of the 
 parties to that contract. Not only are the liabilities of the debtors changed, 
 but their burdens are added to by this bill. Thus, under the original con 
 tract it is distinctly stipulated that until the bonds mature the debtors shall 
 only pay the creditor five per cent, of the net earnings and one-half of the 
 government transportation, and in the fifth section of the act of 1864 the 
 word " only " is used ; " shall only pay." Under this bill you require all 
 the government transportation to be paid and large sums in addition, so that 
 the whole payment shall amount to twenty-five per cent, of the net earnings. 
 It is no answer to say the additional sums paid are not to be actually or 
 formally applied to the debt until the bonds mature. The burden upon the 
 debtors is to pay. The fact that the creditor does not formally credit the 
 debt does not lessen the burden of the payment. Besides, the payment is 
 to be made into the treasury of the creditor by the act and order of the 
 creditor ; and how can you pay the creditor except by payment into his 
 treasury ? And the payment therefore is as legally and actually complete 
 as if the money paid were formally applied and credited on the bonds or the 
 debt. 
 
 So the eighteenth section of the act of 1862 can have no meaning ex 
 cept that the stockholders shall have ninety-five per cent, of the net earn 
 ings after deducting all expenditures, and that the government shall not 
 interfere to regulate the rates of fare and freight until such ninety-five per 
 cent, of the net earnings shall exceed ten per cent, of the cost of the road. 
 This bill reduces that ninety-five per cent, to seventy-five per cent. 
 
 Again, this bill not only creates new obligations upon the companies, 
 but provides penalties for their violation. You not only create additional 
 obligations on the companies but you decree, by virtue of your own legisla 
 tive will, penalties for the disregard by the companies of these obligations. 
 The bill creates new and additional defaults to authorize the seizure of the 
 road by the government, and acts which are perfectly legal under existing 
 laws are made illegal under this bill and subject the parties committing 
 them to criminal prosecutions. 
 
 Will any man tell me that this is not a bill changing all the terms of this 
 contract? It changes the stipulations; it changes its obligations ; it pre- 
 scribes additional penalties ; and it makes acts which are now legal and 
 proper, and according to the stipulations of the contract, actual crimes, for 
 which the parties or their agents can be prosecuted in a court of justice. 
 You not only decree by your sovereign will a change of the contract, but 
 you decree that the agents of the defendants who shall be faithful to the 
 contract already made shall be criminals. 
 
 It is needless to add further statements to show that the judiciary com 
 mittee bill does really propose to change and does in effect change the 
 terms of the contract of loan terms, too, which were offered as induce 
 ments to the companies to accept the loan and undertake the construction 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 49 J 
 
 of the road. To offer terms as an inducement to a party to do a work or 
 take a risk, and then withdraw or change those terms after the work has 
 been done or the risk taken, would be declared fraud if done by an indi 
 vidual, and surely it cannot be denominated less than tyranny and oppres 
 sion when done by a government. 
 
 The second class that support this bill of the judiciary committee upon 
 a theory of a trust and I invite the lawyers in this body to hear this 
 argument are, I must say, in my judgment, easily answered. In the first 
 place, if the power claimed exists at all, it is clearly a judicial and not a 
 legislative power. But the position to justify this bill could not be sus 
 tained under the facts of this case, as far as they have been presented to 
 the Senate, even in a court of equity. The rule upon this subject is familiar 
 to lawyers and has been decided in a great number of cases. To authorize 
 courts to interfere in the manner proposed by this bill, three facts must 
 clearly appear : first, that the corpus of the property mortgaged is insuffi 
 cient to pay the debt ; second, that the mortgager is insolvent ; and, third, 
 that the mortgager is in default. Now, mark me, I do not say that the 
 only default is non-payment at the maturity. Any act of the debtor which 
 is wrong and which threatens to destroy the corpus covered by the lien of 
 the mortgage is a default. Without the last fact, the first two will not be 
 considered. It matters not that the mortgager is insolvent ; it matters not 
 that the property which the creditor selected to secure his debt is insufficient 
 to pay it ; those were circumstances he ought to have looked to before he 
 made the contract. Superadded to these two conditions there must be de 
 fault ; some wrongful act or failure to act by the debtor. There can be no 
 remedy where there is no wrong, and there can be no wrong where there is 
 no default, and courts have no right to anticipate and much less to redress 
 a default which has not occurred. This rule is strongly stated by Mr. 
 Thomas in his work on mortgages, in the following language : 
 
 The right of entry by the mortgagee having been abolished, the mortgager is, both 
 at law and in equity, entitled to the complete enjoyment of the mortgaged premises and 
 of their rents and profits until the debt is due, unless such rents are expressly pledged 
 for the payment of the debt. If no proceedings are taken for the appointment of a re 
 ceiver, his right to the rents continues until it has been divested by a foreclosure sale, 
 and until the purchaser has become entitled to possession under the sheriff s deed. Where, 
 however, the security is insufficient and the mortgager or other person who is personally 
 liable for the payment of the debt is insolvent, the mortgagee may apply for a receiver of 
 the rents and profits of the mortgaged premises which have not yet been collected, and 
 this relief will be granted, unless the person in possession shall give security to account 
 for such rents in case there shall be a deficiency. 
 
 . . 
 
 The right to this relief does not result from the relations of the parties, but from equi 
 table considerations alone. It is not a matter of strict right, and each application is ad 
 dressed to the sound discretion of the court. Thomas on Mortgage*, pp. 301 and 302. 
 
 In support of this authority and this rule Mr. Thomas refers to a large 
 number of cases, every one of which I have examined, and every one of 
 them was a case of foreclosure after default in payment ; and I challenge 
 any gentleman to produce a book where a case has ever been decided in 
 which the court took jurisdiction to require additional security or to take 
 the rents, issues, and profits from the mortgager before default, however 
 insufficient the property might become in the natural course of events, or 
 however insolvent the mortgager might become. Insolvency in law may 
 be a misfortune ; it is not a fault that furnishes a remedy unless it be ac 
 companied by actual waste and wrong to the creditor. The rule is thus 
 
500 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 stated in the case of the Syracuse City Bank vs. Tallman and others, in 31 
 Barbour, and it is well stated in this decision : 
 
 
 
 Unless there be a special clause to that effect, in a mortgage, the mortgagee has no 
 lien upon the rents and profits ; and as a general rule the mortgager, until the sale, is 
 entitled to remain in possession. 
 
 But courts of equity, under certain circumstances, will, after default in an action 
 for foreclosure and sale, anticipate the final judgment by the appointment of a receiver, 
 and in effect put the mortgagee in possession and allow him to divert the rents and prof 
 its of the mortgaged premises from the hands of the mortgager, and hold them as addi 
 tional security for the payment of the mortgage. 
 
 To entitle him to this relief, it must appear that the mortgaged premises are an inade 
 quate security for the debt, and that the mortgager, or other person liable for the mort 
 gage debt, is insolvent. 
 
 This relief does not grow directly out of the relations of the parties or the stipula 
 tions contained in the mortgage, but out of equitable considerations alone. It is not a 
 matter of strict right, but is addressed to the sound discretion of the court. 
 
 It seems that when the mortgager is insolvent, and fails to pay at the day appointed, 
 and the mortgaged premises are an inadequate security, as between the mortgager and 
 mortgagee it is within the equitable discretion of the court to allow the latter to intercept 
 the rents and profits, for his better protection from loss. And that this is the utmost ex 
 tent to which the relief has been granted, or to which it can be granted, within any ad 
 mitted principle of equity. The Syracuse City Bank vs. Tallman and others, 31 Bar- 
 hour s Supreme Court Reports, 201. 
 
 This judge says the farthest the rule has ever gone is, that after a de 
 fault and before judgment of foreclosure, a court of equity will appoint a 
 receiver and divert the rents and profits to the payment of the debt until 
 that judgment of foreclosure and sale under it, if the premises are insuffi 
 cient to pay the debt, if the mortgager is insolvent, and if the mortgager 
 is in default ; and I challenge any lawyer on this floor to present a case 
 on record to the contrary where any proceeding was taken in law or 
 equity to divert rents, issues, and profits or earnings, which are not expressly 
 included in the lien, from the mortgager to the mortgagee until after de 
 fault by the mortgager. Whether I am justified in quoting legal rules to 
 a body of men who claim to be bound by no law is a question I will con 
 sider directly. 
 
 The government as a creditor can have no more rights than other credi 
 tors. That is the next proposition I propose to establish. When the gov 
 ernment loans money and enters into trade with individuals or corpora 
 tions, it does so, not as a sovereign, but as a ( civil corporation, and is subject 
 to all the laws of contract like other persons ; and I ask the attention of 
 senators to this point who tell me that this government is sovereign ; that 
 it has a right in contracts that individuals have not ; that you are not 
 bound by the rules of law like individuals. 
 
 In Smoot s case, 15 Wallace, 36, the court held "that in the construction 
 and enforcement of contracts made by private parties with the government, 
 the court is bound to apply the ordinary principles which govern such con 
 tracts between individuals." So in the case of Elliot vs. Van Voorst and 
 others, reported in 3 Wallace, Jr., and decided by Mr. Justice Grier. That 
 eminent justice said : 
 
 The government of the United States, though limited in its powers, is supreme in its 
 sphere of action. But its rights as a sovereign, and its prerogatives as such, are cc- 
 extensive with the functions of government committed to them, and extend no further. 
 Its position as to prerogative is anomalous, owing to our peculiar institutions. 
 
 . 
 
 When the government, in the exercise of the rights and functions of a civil corpora 
 tion, purchases lands to secure a debt, the accident of its sovereignty in other functions 
 
SIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WHITINGS. 501 
 
 cannot be set up to destroy or affect the rights of persons ch-.iming a title or lien on the 
 same lands. Thus when the government of the United States becomes a partner in a 
 trading corporation, such as the United States Bank, it divested itself, so far as con 
 cerned the transactions of that company, of its sovereign character, and took that of a 
 citizen ; consequently its property and interests were subjects to the decrees and judg 
 ments of courts equally with that of its copartners. 
 
 It may be broadly asserted that no case can be found in all the books 
 where a court of equity has entertained an application to do what this bill 
 proposes to do, unless the debtor was in default ; and when the govern- 
 ment, abandoning its own courts, seeks to use its sovereign legislative power 
 to enforce, to alter, or even to protect its rights as a civil corporation or 
 contract creditor, it is guilty of the grossest possible usurpation, tyranny, 
 and oppression. The government is a contractor in the loan of money as a 
 civil corporation. It cannot resort to its sovereign power as a legislative 
 body to claim rights in the construction or remedies in the enforcement of 
 that contract which are not common to the humblest individual in the land. 
 Legislation may authorize contracts to be made, but after they are made 
 legislative power over them ends, I care not whether made by government 
 or citizen. Courts alone can construe them ; courts alone can reform them; 
 courts alone can enforce them ; and courts alone can administer them ; and 
 even courts can construe them, or reform them, or enforce them, or adminis 
 ter them only as made and agreed to by both the parties. 
 
 Let us next proceed to examine the position taken by the third class who 
 support this bill reported from the judiciary committee. These are they 
 who take the bold position that Congress has the power by legislation to 
 " add to, alter, amend, or repeal" this contract of loan between the govern 
 ment and the railroad companies. And, first, I will notice those of this class 
 who hold that this power is inherent in the government. " One Congress 
 cannot bind another Congress," we are told. " What one Congress can do, 
 another Congress can undo," is repeated. That I believe is the position of 
 my friend from North Carolina (Mr. Merrimon). It is true as to general 
 laws ; but a contract is not a law. The law is the authority to make the 
 contract, mark the distinction, and nothing more. Congress may repeal the 
 authority to make the contract ; it may change or modify the authority 
 to make the contract ; and if the authority be repealed before the 
 contract is made, the authority ceases, and the contract cannot afterward 
 be made. But if the contract be made and rights under it vest or obliga 
 tions by it are incurred, the subsequent repeal of the authority cannot annul 
 or impair the contract of its rights and obligations. I think much of the 
 confusion in this case has grown out of confounding the law which author 
 izes the contract with the contract itself. And I will say at this point 
 that Congress is not the government, and Congress is not the party to the 
 contract in question. Congress did authorize the contract to be made and 
 did prescribe the terms on which it should be made ; but one Congress did 
 not make the contract, and another Congress cannot undo it. It was not 
 the acts of Congress, but the loan of the bonds and their acceptance by 1 
 company that constituted the consideration of the contract. It was the 
 completion of the work in the manner prescribed that entitled the companies 
 to the issue and delivery of the bonds. The act for that purpose would have 
 been a dead letter, would have formed no contract, if the work had not 
 been done ; and it was not Congress, as seems to be so commonly supposed, 
 but the " issue and delivery of the bonds that ipso facto" constituted the 
 mortgage to secure the repayment of the bonds. 
 
502 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 i 
 
 Congress can repeal the authority, and Congress can do it without re 
 serving the power ; but can Congress annul the acts done and the rights 
 vested under the authority before its repeal ? Can Congress repeal or annul 
 the issue and delivery of the bonds? Can Congress repeal or annul the 
 work done, which entitled the companies to the issue and delivery of the 
 bonds? But the contract cannot subsist independently of its terms. The 
 terms of the contract authorize, constitute the contract itself, as the blocks 
 of marble in this building make the building. Take away those blocks, and 
 the building will not exist. 
 
 As Congress cannot repeal, annul, impair, or change the contract, so Con 
 gress cannot repeal, annul, impair, or change the terms of the contract ; and 
 the time of payment, the manner of payment, the terms of payment, the 
 quantities of payment, the security for payment, and the penalty for default 
 in payment are included among the essential, material terms of the contract. 
 
 It is suggested as a query in the report made by the judiciary committee 
 in support of their bill, whether Congress may not impair the obligations of 
 a contract other than by a uniform law of bankruptcy. It is suggested that 
 the inhibition in the Constitution to impair the obligations of contracts is 
 upon the States, and not upon Congress. Is an inhibition upon the States 
 a delegation to Congress ? Can Congress do anything because it is not pro 
 hibited from doing it ? Congress may do many things from which the de 
 struction or impairment of contracts may result. Congress may lay em- 
 bargos and declare war, and this may impair or destroy the value of 
 contracts ; but does it follow that Congress may therefore enact laws to 
 impair and annul contracts ? Congress may declare war, and war does de 
 stroy life and liberty as well as property. Can Congress therefore pass laws 
 enacting that the homes of the people shall be burned, or that the citizens 
 shall all be imprisoned or enslaved, or that their heads shall be taken off ? 
 Yet all these things may result from a war which Congress has power to de 
 clare. If Congress has power directly to declare the result which may come 
 from another power, then Congress may declare that our homes shall be 
 burned, that ourselves shall be imprisoned and our heads taken off at the 
 block. The mission of government, it can never be too often repeated, is to 
 preserve and protect life, liberty, and property, and not to destroy or impair 
 either, except it be necessary to expose some to loss or hazard that all may 
 be protected and defended. 
 
 I affirm to-day, without qualification, that no legislative power in this 
 country, State or Federal, can pass any act with intent to annul or impair 
 the obligations of contract ; and even the power to pass a bankrupt law 
 forms no exception to this rule, as that power stands on a different princi 
 ple. I affirm that this power would not exist even if the prohibition in the 
 Federal Constitution upon the States in this regard did not exist. 
 
 A few days ago the senator from Ohio (Mr. Thurman) in a colloquy 
 with the senator from Oregon (Mr. Mitchell) made the remarkable state 
 ment in this Senate that "not one lawyer who argued the Dartmouth Col 
 lege case pretended for one single moment that, if it were not for the pro 
 vision in the Federal Constitution that no State should make any law im 
 pairing the obligation of a contract, the act of the New Hampshire Legisla 
 ture would not have been perfectly valid." That is the exact language of 
 the honorable senator from Ohio. Coming from such a distinguished source, 
 this startling statement ought to wake up this Senate to the dangerous mis 
 take we are asked to make in the passage of this judiciary bill, when the 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 503 
 
 great Ajax in favor of its passage intimates by such a statement so roundly 
 made that Congress has the power to impair the obligation of contracts, and 
 that the States would have held that power but for the provisions in the 
 Federal Constitution. He says that no lawyer pretended to assert the con 
 trary in the Dartmouth College case. Now, sir, Mr. Webster was one of 
 the great lawyers who argued that Dartmouth College case. Hear what he 
 said. Mr. Webster said : 
 
 It will be contended by the plaintiffs that these acts 
 of the New Hampshire Legislature 
 
 are not valid and binding on them without their assent : 1. Because they are against com 
 mon right and the constitution of New Hampshire. 2. Because they are repugnant to the 
 Constitution of the United States. 
 
 Then, after stating that it was only that clause in the Constitution which 
 enabled the Federal courts to get jurisdiction of the question, he adds these 
 grand words, which I commend to the distinguished senator from Ohio and 
 to the country, in this time, it seems to me, of demoralization on this ques 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. Webster said : 
 
 It is not too much to assert that the Legislature of New Hampshire would not have 
 been competent to pass the acts in question, and to make them binding on the plaintiffs 
 without their assent, even if there had been in the Constitution of New Hampshire or of 
 the United States no special restriction on their power. 
 
 Why? < : 9i 
 
 Because these acts are not the exercise of a power properly legislative. Their object 
 and effect is to take away from one rights, property, and franchises, and to grant them to 
 another. This is not the exercise of a legislative power. To justify the taking away of 
 vested rights, there must be a forfeiture ; to adjudge upon and declare which, is the 
 proper province of the judiciary. 
 
 Even Chief Justice Marshall, in pronouncing the decision of the court, 
 said almost as much, for he uses this strong language : 
 
 A repeal of this charter 
 the Dartmouth College charter, granted by the king in 1769 
 
 A repeal of this charter at any time prior to the adoption of the present Constitution 
 of the United States would have been an extraordinary and unprecedented act of power. 
 
 So the distinguished senator from Ohio was clearly mistaken. 
 
 In the forty-fourth number of the Federalist Mr. Madison declared that 
 "laws impairing the obligation of contracts are contrary to what? Con 
 trary to the first principles of the social compact and to every principle of 
 sound legislation." The prohibition was not inserted in the Federal Consti 
 tution to take from the States a power they would possess without the pro 
 hibition. They mi<?ht arbitrarily exercise a power they did not possess and 
 oppress a citizen. Mr. Madison speaks of it as only an "additional fence 
 against the danger of invasion of the "first principles of the social compact 
 and the proper fundamental charters of natural rights. This prohibition, 
 this " additional fence " was placed in the Federal Constitution to bring the 
 citizen within the protection of the Federal jurisdiction against such danger 
 ous and unnatural legislation in the States. What a commentary upon this 
 purpose of protection it will be if the Federal Government shall itself turn 
 upon the citizen it takes into its protection and itself make him the helpless 
 victim of this dangerous legislation against the first principles of the social 
 
 ^j <f ^~^ 
 
504 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 compact and the fundamental charters of natural rights ! This would be 
 saving the dear lambs from exposure by fencing them for slaughter. 
 
 I will proceed now, sir, to the last stronghold of the supporters of this 
 judiciary bill, and I do so with a confident conviction that it is the weakest 
 of all the positions assumed to justify the bill. It is that Congress derives 
 the power claimed from these provisions of the acts of 1862 and 1864 which 
 expressly reserve to Congress the right at any time " to add to, alter, 
 amend, or repeal " said acts. I invite the attention of the Senate to several 
 considerations, either one of which is and in its nature must be a complete 
 and conclusive negative to the proposition that Congress retains or can have 
 at this time any power whatever to interfere with these contracts as against 
 the companies by virtue of these reservations in the acts named. In the first 
 place, the power reserved must be legislative power. Congress possesses no 
 other power in the matter. But the making of a contract is not a legisla 
 tive act. So the enforcing of a contract is not a legislative function. 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. May I ask the senator from Georgia, then, where we 
 got the power to make the contract which is in this law which we propose to 
 amend ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. If the senator will listen, I will answer that question. You 
 get the power to authorize the contract and you do by law authorize the 
 contract to be made ; but it is expressly decided that not the Congress 
 but the Government is the party to the contract and not a party in its sov 
 ereign character but as a civil corporation. 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. But, if the senator will pardon me, he has stated that it 
 is no part of the function of the legislative power to make a contract. Now, 
 then, the only power that has been exerted in respect of these railroads by 
 the acts of 1862 and 1864 was a power exerted by Congress, and the senator 
 says that that made a contract. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I do not so understand that the acts are all. I say here now 
 that if nothing had been done but to pass the acts there would have been no 
 contract. Would there ? Answer that. The senator says there was noth 
 ing done but to pass the acts. If there had been nothing done but to pass 
 the acts there would have been corporations created ; those corporations 
 would have been vested with corporate powers and privileges, because that 
 is done by the direct act of Congress ; but if the acts had been passed and 
 if nothing else had been done would there have been any contract ? 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. No, if the senator will again pardon me, no more than if 
 I write to my friend and ask him to lend me a hundred dollars and he does 
 not reply, there is no contract ; but if he sends me the money there is a 
 contract that I am to repay him. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Ah ! precisely so, sir. It"Vas the act of the party under the 
 judgment and adjudication of the executive department, and the issue and 
 the delivery of the bonds in compliance with the authority of Congress, to 
 make the contract that created the obligations and the rights. That is the 
 point. Congress gives the authority to make the contracts. I grant that 
 without the authority the contracts cannot be made, but equally the author 
 ity without the other acts makes no contract. Legislation only authorized 
 the contracts to be made. Legislation did not complete the roads nor deter 
 mine when the roads were completed ; nor did legislation issue or deliver 
 the bonds. The acts of Congress constituted the power of attorney which 
 authorized all these things to be done, which prescribed the manner of doing 
 them, and the terms and conditions upon which they should be done. I 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 505 
 
 admit that power of attorney was in its nature and by its terms revocable at 
 will. Note that. Congress can revoke the authority as a mere act of power, 
 but Congress cannot annul the acts done under that authority before that 
 revocation. 
 
 Suppose I give the senator from Michigan (Mr. Christiancy) a power of 
 attorney to sell a piece of land and in that power prescribe, as I have a right 
 to do, the terms upon which he shall make the sale, and I also say in the 
 power what it is not necessary to say, that it is revocable at will. Is that 
 power of attorney a contract ? Without the power the senator would have 
 no authority to make a contract, but is that power of attorney a contract? 
 Will any man say so ? The senator proceeds, under that power, and on the 
 terms therein prescribed, sells the land to the senator from Vermont, places 
 the senator in possession, and takes his promissory note due at a distant time. 
 After this sale, and before the purchase-money is paid, suppose I undertake 
 to revoke the power to sell or change the terms of the sale. Does that revo 
 cation annul or impair the sale ? Can I even complain that the terms of the 
 contract as required by my own power of attorney do not sufficiently secure 
 me, and demand a change in the terms, or additional security before there is 
 any default in payment by the purchaser ? Congress reserved the power 
 "to add to, alter, amend, or repeal the acts" of 1862 and 1864. We re 
 served no right or power " to add to, alter, amend, or repeal " the contracts 
 made in pursuance and under the authority of these acts. I am dwelling 
 upon this because I consider it important. When so good a lawyer as the 
 senator from Vermont, the chairman of the judiciary committee, intimates 
 that an act of Congress is the contract when it is the authority for the con 
 tract, it is time, I think, for us to watch the distinction. The contract was 
 made, the work was done, the obligations were all incurred, the promises were 
 all made and the bonds were all issued and delivered according to the 
 authority, and by virtue of the authority, and while the authority remained 
 unrevoked. The proposition that, under a reserved power to change or re 
 voke the authority, to make the contracts, Congress can change or interfere 
 with the contracts made, or can do anything that will affect to the weight 
 of a hair the rights or liabilities of the other parties to the contracts without 
 their consent and before their default, is most monstrous in its character, 
 and can find nothing to excuse or palliate it in good faith, just precedent, 
 or sound law. 
 
 Sir, Congress can do nothing, absolutely nothing, touching tliese con 
 tracts against the other parties thereto without their consent and before 
 their default. 
 
 The view I am presenting is, if possible, rendered still more conclusive 
 when we apply to it another well-settled principle which I have before 
 stated upon authorities cited, and which could be strengthened by a great 
 number of decisions. It is that the government is not a party to contracts 
 like these contracts of loan in its character as a sovereign but only as a civi 
 corporation. As a sovereign the government does not lend money, 
 civil corporation it does not legislate. As a civil corporation it is subject 
 to the law of contracts precisely as are individuals. When, therefore, the 
 government as a civil corporation enters into such contracts it cannot re 
 serve the right to use its legislative power as a sovereign to alter, change, 
 or annul that contract to which it is a party. As a civil corporation it can 
 reserve no power which in its character as a civil corporation it does 
 possess. 
 
506 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Mr. Thurman. I wish to understand my friend, but will not put a 
 question if it interrupts him at all. He has spoken repeatedly of the govern 
 ment lending this money as a civil corporation and of what rights the 
 government has as a mere corporator. I can understand very well how that 
 may be applied were the government a shareholder in a bank, as in the old 
 United States Bank, or a shareholder in a railroad, or the like ; but I am 
 totally at a loss to understand what my friend means by speaking of the 
 government granting a loan of its credit acting as a private or mere civil 
 corporation apart and distinct from its character as a government. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I will answer the senator by referring to the decision made 
 that I have just read, by Justice Grier, in which he announced that when the 
 government purchased land and took a deed to it, it was a party to that con 
 tract only as a civil corporation and it so acted, and that its sovereignty had 
 nothing to do with it. 
 
 Mr. Thurman. That was a government loan. 
 
 Mr. Hill. It is the same thing whether the government loans money or 
 takes a deed. The judge added that whenever the government becomes a 
 trader it trades only as a civil corporation. Its authority is derived from 
 Congress, it is true. The civil corporation has no authority to make a con 
 tract unless Congress grants it, but it is a party to the contract only in its 
 character as a civil corporation. That is what I mean, and I tell the senator 
 I am using the language of the court ; and if the senator takes issue with it 
 he makes as great a mistake, as he did in the colloquy with the senator from 
 Oregon, when he said that no lawyer in the argument of the Dartmouth 
 College case pretended that but for the provision in the Federal Constitu 
 tion, the laws of New Hampshire would not have been valid. 
 
 The power reserved in the acts of 1862 and 1864 is a legislative power to 
 alter, amend, or repeal legislative acts, and not to alter or rescind contracts, 
 though made by the authority of legislative acts. It was a power reserved 
 by and for the benefit of the sovereign, and was not and could not be re 
 served by or for the benefit of the civil corporation as such. To say that 
 the government reserves the right to alter or rescind a contract made, be 
 cause it reserves the right to alter or repeal the legislative act which author 
 ized the contract to be made, is to utterly ignore the distinction between the 
 sovereign and the civil corporation and absolves the government from all 
 the law and all the obligations of contracts. 
 
 Mr. Thurman. If it does not interrupt the senator, will he let me ask 
 him a question ? 
 
 Mr. Hill Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Thurman. Will the senator tell us what there is in these acts of 
 1862 and 1864 that Congress can amend, add to, alter, or repeal? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Oh, I will do that. I am going to show that. 
 
 Mr. Thurman. I should like to have the senator do so. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I assure the senator I will do that with a great deal of pleas 
 ure, and I shall leave that question, I trust, as clear as the other, although I 
 am afraid that, like that, it will not be clear to the distinguished senator 
 from Ohio. 
 
 The Congress is vested by the Constitution with express authority " to 
 borrow money on the credit of the United States." It borrows in its char 
 acter as a sovereign, and for that reason Cannot be sued without its consent, 
 because that express power is given in the Constitution. The difference is 
 between the authority which created the government. There is no sove- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 507 
 
 reign power conferred to lend money, and when the government does lend 
 money it does so as a civil corporation upon the authority of sovereign power, 
 and, in case of default, must come to the courts like other individuals or 
 corporations, and can there be impleaded like the humblest citizen in the 
 land. This may seem anomalous, bnt, nevertheless, it is true. Judge Grier, 
 in the decision referred to, spoke of the anomalous character of our institu 
 tions. 
 
 The allusion by the senator from Michigan (Mr. Christiancy) to mail 
 contractors and the powers of the government over their contracts has no 
 relevancy whatever to the question before us. Surely, that senator is too 
 good a constitutional lawyer not to see the difference between the relations 
 of the government with its servants, employees, officers, and agents, and 
 with those who do not sustain that relation. 
 
 And now, Mr. President, what is the true meaning of the reservation 
 to "add to, alter, amend, or repeal," found in slightly varying phraseology 
 in both the act of 1862 and the amendatory act of 1864? I shall come 
 directly to answer the question of the senator from Ohio, and I will show 
 him to what these words do apply, to what they can only apply, and I 
 affirm it with very great confidence. This point in the case I deem im 
 portant and I have studied it thoroughly to the best of my humble ability. 
 I say I will prove to the Senate, I trust (I have certainly satisfied my own 
 mind beyond the shadow of a shade of doubt), that these words do not only 
 not apply to these contracts of loan, but in their nature cannot be made to 
 apply to the contracts of loan or to the portions of the charter relating to 
 the contracts as such. These words have a meaning and a history which 
 identifies that meaning beyond the possibility of mistake. First, these 
 words are never used in ordinary legislation, because such use is wholly un 
 necessary. The right to " add to, alter, amend, or repeal " legislative acts is 
 an inherent part of ordinary legislative power. The legislation, then, in 
 which it is necessary to retain such a reservation, must stand upon some 
 peculiar footing by reason of some peculiar character different from ordinary 
 legislation. When we find this peculiarity of legislation we shall be able to 
 comprehend the true purpose, application, and meaning of this reservation. 
 The habit of making this reservation is of modern origin, and has grown 
 into its great importance and general use by a great and enlightened expe 
 rience. 
 
 This peculiarity of legislation applies only to the creation of corporations 
 and to the granting and regulating the exercise of the privileges, powers, 
 and franchises of corporations. In every constitutional provision, and- 
 invite the senator s attention to this in every act of legislation, general 
 or special, in which this reservation is found, it relates to corporations. 
 Every case which has been read or referred to in this debate, and every case 
 reported in which these words of reservation have been brought before the 
 courts for adjudication, is a case of a corporation, a case involving questions 
 relating to the franchises of a corporation, the franchises proper, granted by 
 direct fiat of the legislative will, not by the intervention of executive 
 authority. By the Jaw of inductive reasoning, then, we are brought to 
 the conclusion that there is some peculiar reason in the character of the 
 legislation creating corporations and fixing and regulating their franchises, 
 which makes this reservation wise and necessary, and which reason does not 
 apply to ordinary legislation. Now, let us find this reason. What is i 
 is deemed necessary to reserve the power to alter, amend, or repeal and add 
 
508 SENATOR . H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 words which are never found necessary to be used in any other legislation ? 
 Evidently it is because of some peculiarity in the nature of the legislation 
 creating corporations and granting corporate powers and franchises. The 
 creation of artificial persons and the granting of powers, privileges, and 
 functions to such persons is a prerogative, a sovereign prerogative power. 
 In England it formerly rested in the Crown ; in this country it rests in the 
 States, to be exercised by the Legislature, or by such other power or body 
 as the people in the Constitution may direct. 
 
 I will not stop now to inquire whether or to what extent it may be exer 
 cised by Congress. The exercise of this prerogative power is an act of sove 
 reign grace and favor. It is not bought. There is no consideration for it 
 passing from the favored grantee to the sovereign grantor ; but there is gen 
 erally an inducement for the exercise of this power by the sovereign. That 
 inducement is the public good a public good which is to be secured and 
 promoted by the manner in which the grantee, the corporation, shall exer 
 cise the franchises graciously bestowed upon it. It was held even in Eng 
 land, that the sovereign having once granted a charter of incorporation 
 could not revoke it. Having called the child into life it could not destroy 
 it without a judgment of its peers, the courts. Parliament, under a claim of 
 omnipotent power, did sometimes revoke charters, but even this power was 
 not cordially conceded. Thus a corporation once created (except corpora 
 tions exclusively political) could not afterward be dissolved, except by a 
 judgment of a competent court, after trial, that the franchises had been for 
 feited, either by a nonuser or misuser of the charter. That was the case in 
 England when the colonies were part of that country. 
 
 Early in our history, after the formation of our constitutional system, it 
 was decided both by State courts and the Federal courts that a charter, not 
 political, once granted and accepted, could not be changed or revoked by 
 thelegislative power without the consent of the corporation. I quote several 
 cases for that. See University vs. Fox, 2 Haywood s Reports ; Terrill vs. 
 Taylor, 9 Cranch ; Pawlett vs. Clarke, 9 Cranch. But the great struggle 
 was made in the case of the Trustees of Dartmouth College vs. Woodward, 
 4 Wheaton, 518. That case was elaborately argued, and has since been 
 accepted as settling this question. Settling what question ? That the charter 
 once granted could not be changed or altered by the granting power, 
 although freely granted, as an act of favor simply, for the public good, and 
 not altogether or chiefly for the personal good of the grantee. 
 
 But the creation of corporations and the grant to them of franchise powers 
 and privileges is a voluntary act by the legislative power, and the only 
 consideration for such exercise of this prerogative power is the public good. 
 The grant being thus voluntary, it followed from a well-established principle 
 that the grantor when making it could qualify the grant according to his 
 will, and, among other qualifications, could reserve the right to alter, amend, 
 or withdraw the franchise, and this reservation would become a condition 
 of the grant. Just like an individual person, if he makes a conveyance for 
 value he must follow the terms of the contract. If he makes a voluntary 
 conveyance, if it is a mere grant without consideration, even though it may 
 be for natural love and affection, the grantor can prescribe such terms as he 
 pleases; and in the case of a mere voluntary grant at any time before 
 execution and delivery it can be revoked. The object of the grant being 
 the public good, it was wise and proper that the grantor should retain this 
 control over its exercise, so as to secure more certainly and effectively this 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 509 
 
 object. In this way the habit of making the reservation we are considering 
 originated, and I repeat these words of reservation are only found in char 
 ters gran ted to corporations and they apply to nothing but franchises granted 
 to corporations. The fact that there is something else included in the act 
 which creates a charter besides the franchise does not applv the words of 
 the reservation to those other matters. The words of reservation are put in 
 under this law of necessity to reserve the right to revoke, alter, or change 
 the charter if the grantee, who is the recipient of sovereign power, does not 
 execute the grant to accomplish the object for which it was made. The 
 wonderful increase in the number, kind, and power of corporations in late 
 years has made this reservation all the more important in character and the 
 more frequent in its exercise. This reservation is now to be found in nearly 
 all the States of the Union, sometimes in the constitutions, sometimes as 
 provisions of general laws, and often in special charters ; but in all cases the 
 reservations are made to apply to corporations and special legislative grants, 
 and to them only. To apply them to any other kind of legislation is utterly 
 unwarranted and cannot be justified by principle, precedent, reason, or 
 authority. 
 
 Now, let us apply these principles to the acts of 1862 and 1864 creating 
 these operations, and I will tell the senator from Ohio what, in all those acts, 
 is subject to the power of Congress to alter, repeal, modify, add to, or change. 
 The corporations are created by direct fiat of the legislative will. All the 
 usual and special corporate powers, privileges, and franchises are granted, 
 in like manner, to the corporations so created, and they are granted directly. 
 None of these grants are to be executed by the Secretary of the Treasury 
 or by the executive department. I call the senator s attention to that. 
 None of these grants in the creation of the corporation, the granting of the 
 corporate privileges, powers, and franchises, are to be executed by the 
 Secretary of the Treasury or by the executive department. They are per 
 fect and complete the moment that they are passed. They are made so by 
 the very act. They are complete and perfect, and executed by the legisla 
 tive act, and are not made so by another power under authority of the legis 
 lative act. 
 
 Mr. Thurman. Let me understand the senator, if I do not interrupt him 
 too much ? If I understand my friend, he makes this distinction, that 
 because these bonds issued by the government were required to be signed by 
 the Secretary of the Treasury and handed over by the Secretary of the 
 Treasury, that was a different thing from a contract made by Congress on 
 behalf of the Government of the United States. 
 
 Mr. Hill. The senator will hear me. My point is that those provisions 
 of the act of 1862 and 1864 which authorized a loan of money do not perfect 
 any right in anybody. They simply authorized the executive department 
 to do certain things to be done by the department. But I say the creation 
 of the corporation itself, the granting of the franchises to that corporation, 
 is complete by a simple act of legislation without the intervention of execu 
 tive agencies. 
 
 Mr. Thurmaji.Now let me put a question to my friend, for he does 
 not seem to have considered it, at least I have not heard it. I ask him when 
 Congress passed this act and promised this loan of bonds, whether the moment 
 the company accepted the charter that was not, according to his view of 
 the case, a contract between the government and the company, and 
 good faitli the government was bound then to issue the bonds, the company 
 
510 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 doing what would entitle it to the bonds ? I ask him, further, whether any 
 executive officer of this government had the slightest discretion in the world 
 in the business to refuse to issue the bonds or not ; whether the Secretary 
 of the Treasury was not bound to issue them according to the mandate of 
 Congress if the company complied ? 
 
 Now, may I ask the senator one further question, whether or not in that 
 respect there is the slightest difference between the franchises granted by 
 the charter and this loan promised by the government? The franchises 
 granted by the charter were not granted upon the mere approval by the 
 President of the act. They did not take effect until the company accepted 
 them, for you cannot force a grant on anybody. Therefore, it required two 
 to make those franchises come into being, just as much as it required two 
 to make this loan come into existence. 
 
 Mr. Hill. And the point is that it requires more than two to give effect 
 to this legislation for the loan. My point is that the corporation is created 
 and the franchises conferred by the act of Congress, of course by consent 
 of the other party, and that no executive agency intervened for any purpose ; 
 that it becomes complete in the parties by the passage of the act. 
 
 Mr. Thurman. Now let me ask 
 
 Mr. Hill. But I will answer the senator. Just wait and see if I do not. 
 I answer the senator that the passage of those provisions of these laws 
 authorizing the loan do not make the loan. It created a right to have a 
 loan, but I say to the senator before the right to those loans could accrue 
 not only must the company accept the proposition, but they must go to work 
 and earn the consideration which entitled them to it ; and the executive 
 department and not the legislative is to determine by its judgment whether 
 they have complied with the contract. The corporations might act until 
 doomsday, and they might have had a thousand acts by Congress, but if the 
 executive department had not pronounced and adjudged that they had com 
 plied with their contract their right would have been only inchoate and not 
 perfect to the loan. So there is a difference and I want the Senate to note 
 it. It is the difference in the books ; it is the difference upon reason. It is 
 the very secret of these reservations in these charters. In a charter granted 
 directly by the sovereign power nothing is required to perfect the grant ex 
 cept the acceptance from the grantee, whereas authority to lend money, an 
 act of Congress to lend money, is only a power conferred to one of the ex 
 ecutive departments. It is true they must obey authority as they do in every 
 other case, but it is true, as the courts have often decided, that they are the 
 judges whether the acts are complied with, and they must adjudge and deter 
 mine that the work has been completed in the manner required before any 
 right to the loan can vest in these corporations. 
 
 Mr. TJiurman. I ask the senator if the corporation does the work, fully 
 and fairly entitling itself to the loan, and a Secretary of the Interior or of the 
 Treasury should refuse willfully and without cause to issue the bonds, 
 whether a mandamus would not lie ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Certainly, if the Secretary of the Treasury adjudged that the 
 work was complete ; but suppose the executive authority denied that the 
 work was complete. How then ? Suppose they will not issue the bonds, 
 will a mandamus lie? Certainly a mandamus will lie where the right is per 
 fect and complete and it is conceded, but what is needed is for the bonds to 
 be issued, signed, and delivered. 
 
 But suppose the judges of the contract will not execute it. Suppose the 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 511 
 
 Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of the Interior in the respective 
 parts they have got to perform in this agency adjudge that the work is not 
 completed according to the contract, would a thousand acts entitle them to 
 the bonds, would a thousand mandamuses secure them ? Sir, it is expressly 
 decided by the Supreme Court in the celebrated case of Decatur vs. Spauld- 
 ing and others, that the Department is the judge of the evidence in such 
 case ; that while we have to command the Department they have a right to 
 judge in certain matters ; that when it is referred by Congress to them to 
 judge when a contract had been executed, when a right has become vested 
 which Congress has strictly authorized, the courts cannot interfere with that 
 question ; but if the Executive Department says, " You have complied but I 
 am not bound to obey the act of Congress," then the courts will come in by 
 mandamus and compel obedience, but the courts cannot interfere with the 
 judgment of the Secretary or of the Executive Department. I do say to the 
 senator that before these parties are entitled to this loan they not only had 
 to do the work but the Executive Department had to adjudge the work as 
 rightfully done under the act. Therefore in the matter of this loan another 
 department of the Government was introduced to perfect it and it does not 
 take place upon the mere grant of incorporation and the granting of the 
 franchises to the companies. The Legislature grants those, and the grant is 
 not dependent on the executive authority or any judgment or adjudication 
 by the executive authority for the absolute and unconditional vesting of their 
 rights. 
 
 Mr. Thurman. If the President does not approve the bill, I do not 
 think they will have it. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Oh, well, of course that is a part of the legislation. I say the 
 legislation is completed, and when I say that, of course I mean the approval 
 of the President or the passage of the bill by two-thirds over his veto. My 
 friend from Ohio is getting decidedly hypercritical. 
 
 How different are the contracts of loan authorized by these acts. Here 
 the legislation becomes mere authority to the Executive Department. The 
 loans are for a valuable consideration. The inducements which make the 
 Congress willing to authorize the loans are all set out. The terms and con 
 ditions of the loans are prescribed. What shall be done to entitle the cor 
 porations to the loans ; how the loans shall be secured and how repaid ; 
 what shall be the liabilities of the corporations accepting the loans ; and 
 when, in what manner, and on what terms the loans shall be repaid are all 
 declared. But all these provisions are nothing but directions to the Execu 
 tive Department, who are authorized by these legislative provisionsthese 
 powers of attorney to complete the work and deliver the bonds, or adjudge 
 that they shall not be delivered as the case may be, and Congress actually 
 has nothing to do. The executive power is to ascertain and determine when 
 the corporations have completed the roads in sections ; the executive au 
 thority is to determine and make known when the entire roads are completed. 
 The Secretary of the Treasury is to issue and deliver the bonds, and here is 
 a point to which I challenge the attention of senators. It is in that very 
 act of 1862 declared to be the "issue and delivery of the bonds " that con 
 stitute the mortgage. You may have a thousand acts, and without all this 
 executive agency intervening, and the actual execution, issue, and delivery 
 of the bonds there would be no mortgage. 
 
 Without these executive acts there were no contracts, no loans, and no 
 obligations created, and none could have existed, although by the legislative 
 
512 SENATOR B. H, HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 acts they were all authorized to be made and created. The legislative acts 
 created the corporations and invested them with corporate powers, privileges, 
 and franchises without any intervening executive agency ; but the legisla 
 tive acts did not make but only authorized the contracts of loan to be made 
 by the intervention of executive agency, and without the actual execution of 
 that agency the contracts would have had no existence. 
 
 Without the reservations " to add to, alter, amend, or repeal the acts," 
 the charters granted and the franchises conferred could never have been 
 changed or revoked. The reservations were only necessary to retain legisla 
 tive control over the corporations and their franchises, and for that purpose 
 ojily were they made. It was not necessary to reserve the right to alter or 
 repeal the authority to make the loans. 
 
 There is another distinction to which I call the attention of the senator 
 from Ohio : under the Dartmouth College decision and under all the deci 
 sions of all the courts, State and Federal, it was necessary to reserve the 
 right to alter, repeal, or change the franchises granted to a corporation, but 
 it was never held by any court that it was necessary to reserve the right to 
 alter or change the authority to make a loan. The Congress had inherent 
 power to change or repeal the legislative authority, to make the loans, but 
 Congress has and can have no authority inherent or reserved to alter or 
 rescind the contracts of loan after the authority to make them had been ex 
 ecuted. From the moment of that execution the authority became ex 
 hausted, dead, and the contract became instinct with life, which life it will 
 be crime to destroy by force. From that moment the loans became plain 
 contract debts which no power can destroy or impair save the power that 
 made them, the consent of both parties. As the Supreme Court justly say 
 in a recent case (3 Otto, 255) : " Two minds are required to make a contract 
 or to change its terms and conditions after it is executed." 
 
 It can make no difference that the authority to make the loans was 
 created in the acts granting the corporate charters, and that is where all 
 this trouble has come from. These gentlemen have never got the true 
 view, because the offer to loan was included in the acts granting the charter. 
 That fact cannot change either the nature or the law of the contracts as 
 made. They stand precisely as if the authority had been given by separate 
 and independent acts of Congress. 
 
 Thus, sir, I have shown : 
 
 First. That the bill reported from the Judiciary committee, under the 
 form of altering the acts under authority of which these contracts were 
 made, does in fact seek to alter and change the contracts themselves, and 
 without the consent of the parties to those contracts. 
 
 Second. That such legislative power cannot be found in the theory of 
 trusts. That the power to interfere under that theoiy Exists only in the 
 courts, and that even the courts can exercise such a power only after de 
 fault. 
 
 Third. That the reservations " to alter, amend, or repeal," contained in 
 the acts of 1862 and 1864, apply, and were intended to apply, and can only 
 apply to the corporate existence, powers, and franchises of the railroad com 
 panies created and confirmed by those acts. That the reservations were not 
 needed or intended to give to Congress the power to alter or repeal the 
 authority to make the loans provided for in those acts and that no authority 
 can exist in Congress, inherently or by reservation, to alter or rescind the 
 contracts actually made under that authority after tluit authority had been 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 513 
 
 executed, after the contract had been made, and after the rights and liabili 
 ties of the parties to those contracts had become vested and fixed. 
 
 I beg to call the attention of the Senate to some considerations upon 
 the assumption, for argument s sake, that the words " to alter, amend, or 
 repeal," do apply to the contract, to the authority to make the contract, and 
 to the terms of the contract, as well as the creation of the corporation and 
 the granting of the franchise. First, I want to call the attention of the 
 Senate to this point : If this reservation to alter or amend does apply, for 
 instance, to that stipulation in the contract which says that one-half of the 
 transportation by the government shall be paid before the maturity of the 
 bonds, suppose that power to change that is retained by the act of 1862 or 
 the act of 1864. Here is the act of 1871, which expressly directs that that 
 half transportation shall be paid, and that act reserves no right to alter or 
 amend. I wish the senator from Ohio to hear this. I wish him to reply to 
 it if he can. I say the act of 1871, being the ninth section of an act making 
 appropriations for the support of the army for the year ending June 30, 
 1872, and for other purposes, provides that 
 
 The Secretary of the Treasury is hereby directed to pay over in money to the Pacific 
 Railroad Companies mentioned in said act, and performing services for the United States, 
 one-half of the compensation at the rate provided by law for such services heretofore or 
 hereafter rendered. 
 
 And it distinctly says : 
 
 Provided, That this section shall not be construed to affect the legal rights of the 
 government or the obligations of the companies, except as herein specifically provided. 
 
 Now, here is the act of 1871, which enacts and declares that the half of 
 this transportation shall be paid by the Secretary of the Treasury to the 
 companies, and no power is reserved in the act of 1871 to alter, amend, or 
 repeal that act. Take the case proposed by my friend here from the Judici 
 ary Committee, and you see that the bill provides in the fourth section : 
 
 That there shall be carried to the credit of the said fund, on the 1st day of February 
 in each year, the one-half of the compensation for services hereinbefore named, rendered 
 for the government by said Central Pacific Railroad Company, not applied in liquidation 
 of interest. 
 
 Mr. Thurman. Do I understand the senator from Georgia to say that 
 that act of 1871 is irrepealable ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I say it is after the parties have acted under it. 
 
 Mr. Thurman. That is all I wanted to know, if the senator so stated. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I do. Is it not part of the contract? 
 
 Mr. Thurman. Part of what contract ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Part of the contract authorized by the acts of 1862 and 1864. 
 
 Mr. Thurman. Now the senator is coming precisely to where I wanted 
 him to come. He has now got beyond the loan, and I want him to tel 
 this 
 
 Mr. Hill I am now arguing the case upon the assumption 
 words " to alter, amend, or repeal " apply. 
 
 Mr. Thurman. Then I want to know what in the world it 
 charter which can come within that power of amendment, alteration, or 
 repeal. 
 
 Mr. Hill. The senator does not see the point. I am arguing i 
 now upon the assumption that the word " alter " applies to everything there. 
 Do you not perceive ? But by the act of 1864 Congress agreed that one 
 half the transportation should be paid to the companies. Congress reserve 
 
514 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 the right to alter, as the senator says, in the acts of 1862 and 1864, and for 
 some reason the government did not pay it. Then you come in with the 
 act of 1871 and re-enact that they should have that one-half. 
 
 Mr. Bayard. May I ask the senator a question ? Does he consider 
 that the power reserved to the government to amend the law of 1864 at will 
 is exhausted by making an amendment in 1871 ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I certainly do as to that particular thing, because the last act 
 repeals the first. I think if you in a subsequent act make a direct enactment, 
 and do not reserve the power to repeal, you cannot afterward alter or change 
 that act. 
 
 Mr. Thurman. The senator himself, if he will allow me to interrupt 
 him, has stated the matter which shows what the act of 1871 was. Under 
 the act of 1864 the companies were entitled to receive pay for half the 
 transportation account. The Secretary of the Treasury refused to pay them 
 that half under an opinion of Mr. Attorney General Akerman. The matter 
 was referred to Congress ; that is to say, the companies petitioned Congress 
 on the subject. The Judiciary Committees of the Senate and the House 
 reported that under the act of 1864 the companies were entitled to this 
 money, half the transportation account, and the act of 1871 was passed to 
 compel the secretary to execute the law ; not to change fc the law or to make 
 any new law, but simply to compel him to execute it. 
 
 Mr. Hill. No ; but you did declare in the act of 1864 that one-half of 
 the transportation shall be paid with a reservation. 
 
 Mr. Thurman. What reservation ? 
 
 Mr. Sill. The reservation of the right to alter. That is -what you say. 
 I am arguing on that assumption now, which the senator from Ohio does 
 not seem to take. I am arguing upon the assumption that you are right, 
 and yet I show that your bill is unconstitutional : for I say that afterward 
 you enacted again that these companies should have the half transportation 
 without reservation, and that they should not only have it for the past but 
 should have it forever. That is the act of 1871. 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. Will the senator read the act of 1871 which shows 
 that? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I have just read it. 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. I wish he would read it again for general information. 
 
 Mr. Hill.li is as follow : 
 
 The Secretary of the Treasury is hereby directed to pay over in money to the Pacific 
 Railroad Companies mentioned in said act, and performing services for the United States, 
 one-half of the compensation at the rate provided by law for such services, heretofore or 
 hereafter rendered. 
 
 And lest this act might be construed to interfere with the reservation in 
 the act of 1864 in some other point besides this, you go on and provide 
 
 That this section shall not be construed to affect the legal rights of the government or 
 the obligations of the companies except as herein specifically provided. 
 
 That is as to the half transportation account. 
 
 Mr. Bailey. May I ask the senator a question ? 
 
 Mr. Hill Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Bailey. The senator says the act of 1871 exhausted the power to 
 amend or repeal the act of 1864. 
 
 Mr. Hill. As to this particular provision. 
 
 Mr. Bailey. --Will the senator point out in what particular the act of 
 1871 alters, amends, or repeals the act of 1864? 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 515 
 
 Mr. Hill. It re-enacts. Gentlemen will not understand me. In the act 
 of 1864 you enacted a right with a reservation, and you claim the right to 
 change it by virtue of that reservation. In the act of 1871 you enacted the 
 same right without reservation. That is the point ; and I defy any lawyer 
 to get over it. Is not the right without a reservation an amendment and im 
 provement upon a right with a reservation ? Is not an absolute right better 
 than a qualified right? 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. May I ask the senator whether he thinks the act of 
 1871 became a contract by the mere passage of it? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I did not say so. On the contrary, I have previously said that 
 I take it for granted that the companies have been acting under this act. 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. Now the senator who is so very careful about taking 
 nothing for granted, had better not take that, because the companies have 
 not got a cent under that act. 
 
 Mr. Hill. They have accepted the act, and therefore have got their 
 rights under it. 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. 1. should be glad to see the proof that they have 
 accepted it. They have not got the money, and that is all the act says. 
 
 Mr. Hill. There is no proof that shows that they have accepted any act. 
 If the Executive Department has not done its duty, then, under the position of 
 my friend from Ohio, the companies ought to apply for a mandamus. I say 
 the right became complete upon the passage of the act and its acceptance by 
 the companies. 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. Yes ; but the difficulty about the senator s argument is, 
 whatever there is of it, and I will express no opinion about that- 
 
 Mr. Hill. It makes no difference what the senator s opinion is about it. 
 
 Mr Edmunds. The difficulty about it is that according to his previous 
 proposition these acts do not become contracts or authorized contracts in an} 
 effective sense until they are accepted by the other side ; it takes two minds. 
 A corporation can only act not by the general force of nature, but by some 
 corporate performance. Now, then, if the senator will only look at the 
 published reports officially made to us, he will see in the reports and the 
 evidence that none of the money mentioned in the act of 1871 has been paid 
 to any of the companies ; it is in the Treasury still. Therefore the payment 
 of the money does not raise any implication that the company has accepted 
 this new contract. Where, then, does the senator get the authority to say 
 that this new contract, as he calls it, is binding, and therefore prevents our 
 amending the act of 1864? 
 
 Mr. JSill. I have no evidence that any act passed in relation to these 
 companies has been accepted. 
 
 Mr Edmunds. If the senator will look into the reports, he will find it. 
 
 Mr. Hill I have no evidence myself that the acts of 1862 and 1864 have 
 been accepted. I understand they have been, and as those acts are all pub 
 lished and there has been no protest against them I assume that they have 
 been accepted, and as it was for the benefit of the companies and not their 
 injury, a formal acceptance was not necessary. I take it for granted they 
 have accepted them. If the act of 1871 passed, and they accepted it by act 
 ing on it, the right became perfect, whether the Secretary of the Treasury 
 paid the money or not. 
 
 Now, the senator from Vermont wants to get to the point that the Secre 
 tary of the Treasury must pay the money. If there had been a condition of 
 this grant which made the Secretary of the Treasury the judge as to whether 
 
516 SENATOR B. K HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 f 
 
 he should pay it, then I grant your position ; but as there is no condition to 
 the grant, as the act is absolute and unconditional and without reservation, all 
 that is necessary to make it a contract is for the companies to accept it ; and 
 indeed a formal acceptance is not necessary as it is for their benefit. Of 
 course, I admit, that if the companies have not accepted it or rejected it, it is 
 no contract. An act of Congress is never a contract per se. Sometimes it 
 is called so, and in common parlance sometimes spoken of as such ; but no 
 lawyer when he comes down to technically correct language would call an 
 act of Congress a contract. It is an element of it of course. 
 
 But I go on to another point. Even if the general reservation to alter and 
 repeal applied to the contract and its terms, then I say it cannot be used to 
 take away specific gift or provision, but only to aid such specific grant. I 
 call the attention of the lawyers of the Senate to this position. The reser 
 vation is general ; the grant of the authority to make the loan is specific. 
 Mr. Sedgwick says : 
 
 But a particular thing given by the preceding part of a statute shall not be taken away 
 or altered by any subsequent general words. Sedgwick on Statutes, pp. 60, 61. 
 
 I say these words, " to alter, amend, or appeal," cannot be used to destroy 
 any specific stipulation. There is one case in which the repeal may be, and 
 that is where the object of the grant is not carried out, where there is a for 
 feiture of the charter ; but while the companies comply with the contract, 
 while they on their part comply with the specific stipulations, Congress cannot 
 under the general power of reservation negative or destroy a specific grant. 
 The Senator from Indiana (Mr. McDonald) laid down the direct reverse of that 
 proposition the other day, and he will find on examination of the authorities 
 that he is incorrect. 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. I did not wish to interrupt the senator to his annoyance 
 at all, but I desire to ask him a question with his permission. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Certainly. 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. I am interested in the observations of the senator, and 
 wish to get at preciseh^ what he means. Do I understand him to mean on 
 this last point he has advanced, that if Congress grant a charter for a par 
 ticular national bank, to be called the National Bank of North America in the 
 District of Columbia, for twenty years, and that bank accepts the charter and 
 complies with every provision in it, there being at the end a section which 
 says Congress may repeal this act at any time, Congess cannot repeal it with 
 in the twenty years unless the company have violated some of the provisions 
 of the charter ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. That is just exactly my position. 
 
 Mr. Edmunds.- -Then I understand the senator. 
 
 Mr. Hill. And I state it precisely in the language, almost, of Chief 
 Justice Shaw, of Massachusetts. 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. Not applied to any such subject as that. 
 
 Mr. Hill. But he says that these reservations to alter, amend, and repeal, 
 though unlimited in terms, are not unlimited in effect, and one of the limita 
 tions is that they must be used to effectuate the original purpose. That is 
 what it is done for. The history of this reservation shows that that is exactly 
 why it was made. The courts had decided that where a charter was once 
 granted it could not be revoked, even though they did not comply with the 
 terms ; you had to go to the courts to get a judgment of forfeiture. These 
 reservations are made to meet that difficulty ; and I need not stop here to 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 
 
 discuss it ; but I do say to the Senator from Vermont, although that is not 
 material to this discussion, whenever this question comes to be firmly and 
 finally settled and the courts are now struggling with it wherever a cor 
 porate charter or privilege has been specifically granted and accepted, and 
 the company is complying with it in good faith, the power to repeal does 
 not authorize its destruction, and you can use that power to repeal only to 
 carry out the original purposes of the grant. If the companies, for instance, 
 did not build this road, if they did not keep it up, if they did not accom 
 plish the object the United States had in granting them the franchise, then 
 the United States reserved the right to take back the franchise and give it to 
 persons who would carry out the object. That is the purpose of it 
 exactly. 
 
 Mr. Christiancy. Or refuse to give it to anybody ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Certainly ; or refuse to give it to anybody. 
 
 Mr. Christiancy. I can see how amendments might be made to the charter 
 for the purpose of carrying out the original purposes of the charter ; but 
 when you come to repealing it, it seems to me that is a very different thing. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I have just stated it. I can give the case to the senator again. 
 Suppose the company does not build the road ; suppose the company does 
 not keep up the road. 
 
 Mr. Christiancy. --The original purpose of the grant. 
 
 Mr. Hill. That is it. What is the original purpose of the grant ? The 
 original purpose of the grant was to construct the road and keep it up. 
 
 Mr. Christiancy. How will repeal do that? 
 
 Mr. Hill. The repeal and giving the right to somebody else would do it. 
 This is not original with me ; it is stated in the books. The very purpose 
 of this reservation is to enable Congress to keep it within its power to com 
 plete the purpose of the grant ; and if it had selected an unfortunate grantee 
 in the first place, one who does not carry out the power, then Congress may 
 revoke the grant and grant it to anothor, or not grant it at all if it abandons 
 the purpose. But I do say, and I am not going to shrink from it, because 
 the courts have said so, that, though this reservation be unlimited in terms, 
 you cannot construe it to destroy the rights of the company as long as they 
 are faithful to the purposes of the grant. 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. Has the senator any case in mind in which any supreme 
 court of any state%or country has decided that in such a case as he has been 
 supposing and as I have supposed, an out-and-out repeal of the charter would 
 be unconstitutional? 
 
 Mr. Hill. No, sir. 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. I should think not. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Simply because I never knew a Legislature that would do it 
 where other parties were complying with the terms. Therefore, that case 
 has never been made. But I wi ll tell the senator what I have seen. I have 
 not the case here before me, but one of the best decisions ever made upon 
 the meaning of these words to alter, amend, or repeal, and the extent 
 which the power goes, was made by Chief Justice Shaw under this very kind 
 of language, the unlimited language used in Massachusetts. 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. That, was the^fish-way case. 
 
 Mr. Hill. And he says that the object is to secure the original purpc 
 of the grant. 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. That was the fish-way case. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I do not remember the name of it. 
 
518 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. Has the senator seen the latest decision of Chief Jus 
 tice Shaw in the insurance case where the Legislature provided that an in 
 surance company should accumulate a sinking fund to pay its debts, and 
 which he held was lawful legislation ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Certainly ; I can understand that. 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. Very well. 
 
 Mr. Hill. It stands upon a different principle altogether. 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. Then the senator ought to understand this. 
 
 Mr. Hill. To be sure ; and I do. Perhaps the senator from Vermont 
 is not as wise as he imagines. 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. No, I presume not. 
 
 Mr. Hill. If he is all wise, some of the courts are not and some of the 
 highest judges in this country. I am not at all intimidated when I stand be 
 fore these lawyers of the committee, when I heard one of them here the other 
 day say that no lawyer in the Dartmouth College case ever made such and 
 such a declaration. And I say that when learned members of the Judiciary 
 Committee come in here, learned and able as they are, and tell me that in this 
 country, under a government of limitations upon its powers, there is a right 
 to impair the obligation of a contract, I am not prepared to concede that 
 they are infinitely wise, though they be wiser than I. 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. The Senator will give me leave to suggest to him that 
 I was not expressing any opinion of my own ; I was only asking him, as he 
 had referred to a decision of Chief Justice Shaw in respect of the fish-way 
 case, what view he took of the later decision of the same court respecting 
 the insurance case, where the Legislature had required the accumulation of 
 a sinking fund to pay its debts. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Certainly, and I can perfectly understand that, but I do not 
 wish to stop now to argue it. 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. Very well. 
 
 Mr. Hill. But there is a broad difference between an insurance case and 
 a contract of loan to a railroad corporation ; a very broad difference. The 
 very object and terms and conditions of the creation of an insurance com 
 pany are that it shall be safe for the people to take risks in. That is the 
 very object of a grant to an insurance company, that it shall be safe to the 
 people, and the government is but effectuating its object and carrying out 
 the purpose of the grant to an insurance company when it sees to it that it 
 makes it perfectly secure for the. people to insure in. The business of an 
 insurance company is to take risks ; the business of a railroad corporation is 
 not to take risks upon life or fire either. 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. But is it not its business to pay its debts that the law 
 authorized it to contract ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Certainly, according to the terms of the contract ; certainly, 
 when the debt is due. 
 
 Mr. Eaton. Just what the insurance company did not do. 
 
 Mr Hill. Precisely, for the insurance company stands on a wholly dif 
 ferent principle. The very purpose of incorporating it is to enable it to take 
 risks, and it is the duty of the government to see that it is safe for the peo 
 ple to insure in it. This a different thing. 
 
 Mr. Bailey. May I ask the senator, is it not also the duty of the rail 
 road company so to manage its affairs that it may be able to perform the 
 functions for which it was organized ? 
 
 Mr. Hill Yes, sir. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 519 
 
 Mr. Bailey. And remain in a state of solvency and preserve its railroad 
 to the corporation ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. -Certainly ; and does anybody allege here that this corpora 
 tion is not doing this ? Does anybody here allege that this corporation is 
 not keeping up the road ? 
 
 Mr. Bailey. Does not the Direction of the road in its communication to 
 the Judiciary Committee state that unless there shall be a sinking fund this 
 corporation will become insolvent and the road will pass into other hands ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Supposing it does ; is that insolvency to result from the ad 
 ministration of the road or from the natural course of events and the natural 
 shrinkage of property? The debtor is not responsible for natural shrinkage 
 in the value of his property. He is not responsible for misfortunes; he is 
 only responsible for default. If this company will say that by reason of 
 their management they are destroying the corporation, that its insolvency 
 is resulting from their maladministration, I can concede the case, because 
 then there is default. 
 
 Mr. Bailey. Permit me to ask another question. Does not the com 
 pany avow that it is distributing from year to year its assets, its income or 
 net earnings, and that that course of procedure will bring about the very 
 condition which it predicts in the future ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I do not know what the companies have said, nor do I care ; 
 but I do say that, if the companies are paying their debts as they fall due, 
 and paying the interest as it falls due, and keeping up the road and operat 
 ing the road justly, they have a right to the dividends, because the eighteenth 
 section of the charter says so ; but, because the mortgager is insolvent and 
 because the property mortgaged is insufficient to pay the debt, that does 
 not give the creditor a right to the earnings before his debt is due. I ad 
 mit and contend that the earnings uncollected when this debt falls due the 
 court may seize and apply to the debt ; but I defy the senator to find a case 
 where there is no default or maladministration, where a debtor is compelled 
 to apply the income of the property to the payment of his debt before the 
 debt falls due. 
 
 But this view can be made still stronger. If, under the general reserva 
 tion to alter or amend, Congress retained the power to change or^ annul the 
 specific terms of the contract, then Congress has reserved the power to com 
 mit a fraud on the companies, and this cannot be true. Now, I put it to 
 the Senate, I put it to my friend the able senator from Michigan a man 
 whose mind is so able and whose heart is so just why did the government 
 agree to these liberal terms with the companies ? 
 
 Mr. Christiancy. I will answer, if the senator will allow me, exactly 
 why they agreed to them : because they reserved all the power they ever 
 had and parted with none of it. 
 
 Mr. fflll.Then I understand the senator to say that the government 
 agreed with the companies, " If you will take the risk, undergo the labor, 
 and build a road which the government desires built, which is important to 
 the integrity of the Union, which is important for the uses of the govern 
 ment, and the government therefore needs that road ; if you gentlemen will 
 go forward and build this road, we will advance you so much money and 
 we will not require you to pay that money back for thirty years, except 
 half transportation and five per cent, of the net earnings"; and I understand 
 the senator to say that, when the government said that to the companies as 
 an inducement for them to take the contract and build the road, the moment 
 
520 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 the road is built the government can take back the inducement. Do I under 
 stand any man to say that ? 
 
 Mr. Christiancy. I understand that the government understood and 
 that the corporators understood that their rights under such a reservation 
 of power would rest upon the sound discretion of Congress, and I see no 
 absurdity in any man trusting to that sound discretion of Congress. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Mr. President, if the subject had been bound to trust to the 
 discretion of a legislative body, our fathers acted unwisely when they declared 
 independence of Great Britain, who asserted the right to levy a tax but 
 would not do it. Sir, the Revolution was fought upon the assertion of a power, 
 and not solely upon the manner of its exercise ; and I put it to the senator, 
 and I put it to the Senate, when this contract was made and the govern 
 ment agreed to take only one-half the transportation to apply to the inter 
 est before the maturity of the bonds, was it not an inducement to the com 
 panies to build the road ? When they actually built the road, have you a 
 right to take the whole compensation away from them? That is the point. 
 You say " trust to the discretion of Congress ! 
 
 Mr. Beck. Will the senator allow me ? I do not desire to interrupt the 
 senator, but I wish to have information. In the case of Miller vs. The State, 
 15 Wallace s Reports, the court say : 
 
 Power to legislate, founded upon such a reservation in a charter to a private corpora 
 tion, is certainly not without limit, and it may well be admitted that it cannot be exer 
 cised to take away or destroy rights acquired by virtue of such a charter, and which, 
 by a legitimate use of the powers granted have become vested in the corporation, but it 
 may be safely affirmed that the reserved power may be exercised, and to almost any ex 
 tent, to carry into effect the original purposes of the grant. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Exactly. 
 
 Mr. Beck. " Or to secure the due administration of its affairs." 
 
 Mr. Hill. Certainly. 
 
 Mr. Beck. " So as to protect the rights of the stockholders and of 
 creditors, and for the proper disposition of the assets ? 
 
 Mr. Hill Certainly. 
 
 Mr. Beck. Now the question I desire to ask is, what is there in the bill 
 of the Judiciary Committee, that goes beyond the authority asserted in this 
 opinion, that may be exercised for the purpose of protecting the rights of 
 the creditors of the companies ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I will tell the senator. Those words are used in that book 
 according to their legal signification. Now, then, the government has no 
 right to interfere to protect creditors except where there is a default of the 
 debtor ; then there must be " a proper disposition of the assets." 
 
 Mr. Beck. Under the authority reserved to alter, amend, or change, 
 which was a part of the grant of course, if the power is as comprehensive 
 as this opinion says, and if it is admitted that the companies are not only 
 looking to insolvency but so far dividing the earnings as to become certainly 
 insolvent when this debt matures, under the decision of the Supreme Court, 
 which I have just read, is it not certain that Congress not only has the 
 power but ought to protect the creditors against that probability ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Whenever the creditors need protection, and whenever pro 
 tection is extended according to the contract. That is what it means. It 
 says " proper"; that is according to the rights of both parties. You cannot 
 protect the creditor by destroying the rights of the debtor. It does not 
 mean that the creditor shall have protection against a bad contract by mak- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 521 
 
 ing it a good one. He is entitled to protection, according to his contract, 
 against default or breaches by the debtor. 
 
 Mr. Beck. The great object in making the loan by the government was 
 to have this road perpetually held by the corporation for their use. Now 
 if that be true, and if the companies show themselves that in the near 
 future they will be certainly insolvent, that the road will be sold out and 
 bought in by other people who will be under no such obligation, and there 
 by the government will not have the perpetual use of it and the government 
 will not get its money, either its principal or interest, unless there is some 
 means taken to so regulate the administration of the road as to protect the 
 creditors of the companies, have we not a right to resort to such means? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I will say to the senator that may be all true, but you cannot 
 protect the creditors by denying the stockholders or the owners of the road 
 as the debtors the rights they are entitled to. You must protect the credi 
 tor by proper means ; you must protect the creditor by such means as the 
 existing law authorizes, as existing remedies permit. You cannot resort to 
 extraordinary remedies ; you cannot violate the charter ; you cannot protect 
 the creditor by destroying the rights of the debtor. You must do it in a 
 way that is consistent with the original purposes of the charter. This bill 
 does not allege the acts the senator states. It does not allege the companies 
 are doing anything to lessen the value of the security the government 
 agreed to take. Show me that the companies are doing such wrongs and I 
 will show ample remedies. Even other purchasers would get no new rights 
 other than the charter. 
 
 Mr. Beck. The original purpose of the charter was to secure a perpet 
 ual road ; another was to pay the debt of the companies ; another purpose 
 was of course to protect the stockholders ; but those stockholders have no 
 rights until the debts are paid ; and if the administration are dividing out 
 the assets of the road to stockholders, to the absolute, certain destruction of 
 the debts of the companies and the rights of the government, ought we not 
 to interfere by legislation before they go further ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. The senator will see the mistake he has made. He says the 
 stockholders have no rights until the creditors are paid. 
 
 Mr. Beck. No ultimate rights. 
 
 Mr. Hill. They have immediate rights. They have a right by the very 
 terms of the charter to ten per cent, dividends. 
 
 Mr. Beck. I mean that to the ultimate profits they have no right, and 
 therefore they can destroy the security by the course I have indicated. 
 
 Mr. Hill. If they are doing anything to destroy the security, if 
 destruction of the security is the result of their act, all right ; then they are 
 in default and then you can take the road out of their hands and put it 
 the hands of a receiver for the protection of the creditors, if you want 
 That is all that case is ; it is all any case is. If there is default, then 1 
 thing can be done ; but I tell the senator there is no case on earth whe 
 the proper protection of the creditor means anything but always the prope 
 discharge of the duties of the debtor ; and this contract, which says 
 are entitled to the ten per cent., was made with the distinct knowledge o 
 the fact that the road mi<?ht be insolvent before the debt became due. 
 power to alter was reserved ; but it must be resorted to so as not to impr 
 destroy vested rights. 
 
 Mr. Beck. I ask the senator what part of the bill of the Judiciary 
 
 mittee destroys any vested right ? 
 
522 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Mr. Hill. It destroys a vested right in this : it distinctly provides that 
 they shall pay twenty-five per cent, of the net earnings instead of five ; it 
 distinctly provides that they shall pay the government the whole of the 
 government transportation instead of half, and the charter distinctly said 
 they should not pay but five per cent, net earnings, and the charter distinctly 
 stipulated that they should not be required to pay but half the government 
 transportation. Now, take the law as you find it, make any act you please 
 to carry out the original purpose of the charter, to protect the creditors 
 from the wrong of the debtor, but do not protect the creditor be 
 cause the creditor made a bad contract. There is no such law as that. 
 You are proposing to protect the creditor because he made a bad contract at 
 first ; you are not proposing to protect the creditor against any maladminis 
 tration of the debtor. Nobody alleges that it is the bad management of the 
 road that is bringing about this result ; it is the mere opinion of the natural 
 course of events. I take this occasion to say that for myself I think the 
 road is worth the money or will be in thirty years or by the time these 
 bonds are due ; but that is a mere matter of opinion. You would have no 
 right to take charge of a corporation and administer its assets because 
 twenty years hereafter it may be in default. It is an absurdity. 
 
 Again, the rule is distinctly laid down that the conditions or reservations 
 in a contract "which are repugnant to the grant or gift by which they are 
 created or to which they are annexed are void" (2d Story s Equity Juris 
 prudence, section 1304). If the reservation would be void if literally repug 
 nant, much less can you put a construction on the reservation which would 
 make it repugnant. Now, you put a construction on this right reserved 
 which negatives a specific right granted in the charter. The law is that if 
 the reservation literally meant that, it would be void ; and now you seek to 
 put a construction on it to make it mean that. That you cannot do. 
 
 Still again, you cannot use or construe this reservation to " alter, amend, 
 and repeal " so as to defeat or annul the known meaning or understanding 
 of the parties at the time the contract was made ; and upon this subject I 
 have authorities here from Judge Kent that are very explicit and clear. 
 
 Judge Kent, after citing Bacon s rule, says : 
 
 The modern and more reasonable practice is to give to the language its just sense and 
 to search for the precise meaning and one requisite to give due and fair effect to the con 
 tract, without adopting either the rule of a rigid or of even indulgent construction. . . . 
 The true principle of sound ethics is to give the contract the sense in which the person 
 making the promise believed the other party to have accepted it, if he in fact did so under 
 stand and accept it. 2 Kent s Com. 556, 557. 
 
 That is also the rule of construction of treaties, says Vattel. 
 
 The mutual intention of the parties to the instrument is the great and sometimes the 
 difficult object of inquiry when the terms of it are not free from ambiguity. To reach 
 and carry that intention into effect, the law when it becomes necessary will control even 
 the literal terms of the contract, if they manifestly contravene the purpose ; and many 
 cases are given in the books in which the plain intent has prevailed over the strict letter 
 of the contract. 2 Kent, 555. 
 
 Now I put to every senator here, when these debtors accepted this 
 charter with a distinct stipulation that the government, until the maturity of 
 the bonds, would not exact from them anything in payment but half the 
 government transportation and five per cent, net earnings, was it under 
 stood by either party that the government should change that and exact all 
 or exact more ? For if you have power to exact more, you have power to 
 exact all. How did the companies understand it ? How did the govern- 
 
HIS LIFE, 8PE8CW18, AND WRITINGS. 523 
 
 ment say they understood it? How have the Supreme Court decided they 
 understood it? They understood it according to its very language. That 
 is the way they took it. Now for you to exert a general power of reserva 
 tion to destroy the sense of a specific grant, to destroy the sense in which 
 both parties understood it, in which especially the debtor understood it to 
 exert that general power to destroy that specific grant on that specific stipu 
 lation, is a fraud in law, say the books, and you have no power to do it. I 
 admit the full force of the decision read by the senator from Kentucky, and 
 I wish the senator from Vermont had heard it. It shows that the reserva 
 tion of the power to alter, amend, or repeal, is to be used to effectuate the 
 original purpose of the grant. 
 Chancellor Kent continues : 
 
 So the mutual intention of the parties to the instrument is the great and sometimes the 
 difficult object of inquiry when the terms of it are not free from ambiguity ; and to reach 
 and carry that intention into effect, the law, when it becomes necessary, will control the 
 literal terms of the contract, and if manifestly the contrary is the purpose, and many 
 cases are given in the books in which the plain intent has prevailed over the strict letter 
 of the contract. 
 
 Why ? Because if you induce a man to undertake a risk, to perform a 
 labor under a promise which was specifically given that he shall reap certain 
 rewards, and after he has performed the labor and taken the risk, for you, 
 under your reservation of a general power which means to carry out the 
 original purpose, destroy that specific grant, you commit a fraud. See 
 what an absurdity. Here the Supreme Court has decided that under this 
 contract no interest is to be paid except the five per cent, of the net earn 
 ings until the maturity of the debt. Now, you come in here by legislative 
 power, contrary to the adjudicated intention of the parties (for the Supreme 
 Court of the United States in their decision adjudicated the original inten 
 tion and understanding), and attempt to unsettle the adjudication by declar 
 ing that in some form an amount shall be paid more than was stipulated. 
 The Supreme Court says the original intention of the parties was that noth 
 ing but half transportation and five per cent, should be paid. Here Kent 
 says, you cannot by a general reservation alter the original intention, you 
 must carry out that original intention and understanding of the parties, and 
 you by this very bill seek to defeat and destroy that original intention. 
 
 In" his able " argument the senator from Michigan (Mr. Christiancy) 
 said in substance that it was no argument against the existence of this 
 power to show it might be injudiciously used. So I tell that senator it is no 
 argument in favor of the existence of the power to show it might be wisely 
 or even usefully used. If the power does not exist, it cannot be used either 
 wisely or unwisely. 
 
 If Congress can change this contract in any respect it can change it in 
 all respects. If this general reservation to alter or amend gives Congress 
 power to compel the p ayment of one dollar more than the stipulations 
 require before the maturity of the bonds, then Congress can require every 
 dollar to be paid before maturity. 
 
 Can Congress by legislation declare that the interest shall be more than 
 six per cent.? I ask the senator from Kentucky that question. The origi 
 nal act declares that the interest shall be six per cent. Can Congress now 
 by virtue of its reserved power alter that interest and say it shall be eight per 
 cent, or ten per cent.? Can it declare that the bonds shall be due now 
 The original contract said the bonds should be due inthirty years and the 
 
524 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 debt sbould be paid at tbe maturity of tbe bonds. Can you under tbis 
 power to alter or amend declare that tbe bonds sball be due to-morrow ? 
 If you bave tbe power to declare that tbe whole transportation shall be paid 
 when the contract requires that only one -half shall be paid, then you have 
 power to declare that the interest shall be ten per cent., though the contract 
 says six ; then you have the power to declare that the bonds shall be due to 
 morrow, though the contract says they shall be due in thirty years from 
 their date. 
 
 But I appeal to gentlemen on another point, and I wish they would 
 answer the question : Can Congress repeal the act of 1864 and reinstate the 
 first lien of the Government bonds? If so, that is what you ought to do. 
 If the position occupied by the gentlemen of the Judiciary Committee, an 
 able committee I concede, is true, as one of them intimates, that the act of 
 1864 was a fraud one of them has intimated even that it was the result of 
 bribery if that be true, why not repeal the act of 1864 ? 
 
 Mr. Christiancy. The rights of third persons would be affected. 
 
 Mr. Hill.- -The bondholders are not third persons. The bondholders 
 took under that act ; the bondholders took with notice of that act. That 
 act was part of their rights. Now, when the bondholder took his bond, lie 
 took it with notice in the law that Congress had a right to change the lien 
 that was given in his bond. That is what you say you cannot get rid of. 
 Everybody who takes that bond takes it with notice of that law ; he takes 
 it with notice that there is power to alter, amend, or repeal ; and if you 
 bave power to alter, amend, or repeal anything in that act, you have a 
 right to repeal it all, and I put it to the senator, can you now repeal the act 
 of 1864 anci reinstate the first lien of the government debt? You can if 
 you can do what you propose here. If you can change the contract in one 
 respect you can change it in all. If you can say that the whole transporta 
 tion shall be paid when the contract said only half, you can say that the 
 first lien, which was given by the act of 1862 and subordinated to other 
 bonds by the act of 1864, can be reinstated, because every man that bought 
 these bonds purchased them with notice of the law, with the law before 
 him ; and if the construction the gentlemen put on the law be correct, he 
 buys it with distinct notice that his bond may be destroyed to-morrow. It 
 is perfectly legitimate to say that you have not the power when the power 
 is absurd. You cannot escape the argument that if you have power to 
 change in one respect you have power to change in all. Y*ou reserved the 
 power in the act of 1864 to repeal that act ; now let any lawyer answer me, 
 will the repeal reinstate the first lien of the government bonds ? 
 
 Mr. Christiancy. No man says that it would. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I say it is so if the other position is correct, and you cannot 
 show the difference. The bonds may be in the hands of the stockholders ; 
 the bonds may be in the hands of the corporation ; I cannot tell. I do not 
 care where they are ; whoever took them took them with notice of the law ; 
 and on the terms of the law if you can change the contract in one respect 
 by reason of that reservation, you can change it in all. If you can change 
 it in all, you can change it in any. You must abide the contract or not. 
 
 Mr J3eck.--T\\Q act of 1864 gives the right to alter, amend, and repeal. 
 In your mind that is an absolute nullity on that position. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I say those words apply to the exercise of the corporate 
 franchise ; but they are an absolute nullity as applied to the contract. The 
 senator does not understand me. I have already made a long argument to 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 525 
 
 show that the words " alter, amend, or repeal retain the power to the gov 
 ernment to see that the original purpose of the charter is carried out. 
 
 Mr. Beck.-A.ndi one purpose is, of course, to protect the creditors ; and 
 now you say we have no power to protect them, although the management of 
 the corporation may come and admit that they intend to make it impossible 
 to pay its debts. The senator s position is that under the power to alter, 
 amend, or repeal we have no right to require any security of the corpora 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I am not aware that this body acts on assertion. The Judi 
 ciary Committee has not informed* us that the company said they intend to 
 make the property insolvent. Show me that, and put your bill on that 
 ground. 
 
 Mr. JBeck.- -They have proved by the treasurer of the company himself 
 that that would be the effect. 
 
 Mr. jfifcYJ. Tjien I ask the Senate to amend the bill and put this legis 
 lation on that ground. But I tell the senator, if that is true, his remedy is 
 not here. That decision says " by proper means the creditors shall be pro 
 tected." If it be true that these corporations are using the property for the 
 purpose of destroying its value, for the purpose of preventing the collection 
 of its debts, I tell you you have got an ample remedy. Go into the courts 
 and the courts will restrain them, and the courts will require them to give 
 an additional security. What I am arguing against is this monstrous claim 
 of legislative power to exercise judicial functions. There is no trouble 
 about protecting creditors. I admit the creditors are entitled to protection. 
 The senator is wrong when he says I deny that. I admit it, but it is pro 
 tection known to the law ; it is protection given according to tlie forms and 
 rules of law under the remedies provided by law, and not by the exertion of 
 an extraordinary legislative power. 
 
 If Congress can do what is proposed, it can do all these things ; if it 
 cannot do all these things, it can do none of them. Mr. President, take it 
 as you please, this is the most remarkable bill that has ever been introduced 
 into a legislative body, and I say it with profound respect for the distin 
 guished members of the Judiciary Committee. I believe the doctrine I am 
 laying down here to-day will be sustained thoroughly by the Supreme Court 
 if you pass this bill. I have come to the conclusions I have announced con 
 trary to my will. I took it for granted that I should vote with the Judiciary 
 Committee; I took it for granted that they were correct in their construction 
 of power until the discussion sprang up and I got possession of the question 
 and investigated it for myself. I do say with all due deference to that 
 committee that this bill asserts a most monstrous power. What dp you 
 propose to do ? Why, sir, speaking in the language of a lawyer, this is a 
 bill filed in a legislative body to construe the contract. How ? By declar 
 ing the words "net earnings 1 shall mean what the legislative will shall 
 declare them to mean and not what the law says they do mean. 
 
 Mr. Christiancy. Will the senator allow me ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Yes, if I am wrong. 
 
 Mr. Christiancy. -The committee have not by the bill endeavored to 
 define what " net earnings " mean under the original law at all. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Certai nly . 
 
 Mr. Christiancy. --They have simply provided what they shall 
 
 hereafter. 
 
 Mr. Hill. That is exactly what I understand. It is claimed by the sen- 
 
526 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 ator from Ohio that here is an existing contract where the words " net earn 
 ings " are used, and that you can by legislation, after that contract was made, 
 give a new meaning to the words. That is the proposition. 
 
 Mr. Christiancy. We can amend the law. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Amend and destroy. 
 
 Mr. Sargent. A case is now pending in the Supreme Court, brought in 
 obedience to legislation of Congress, for the Supreme Court to define what 
 " net earnings : mean, and this bill simply provides that this decision or 
 definition of the Supreme Court shall apply to matters heretofore, but here 
 after the will of Congress shall be substituted for the rule the Supreme 
 Court shall lay down. 
 
 Mr. Christiancy. But under the power of amendment we require them 
 to proceed hereafter on the basis fixed by law. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Precisely ; that you can provide by the legislative will that 
 hereafter net earnings shall mean gross earnings. You cannot do that. 
 That is the power claimed. There is no escape from it. Will you tell me 
 that the Legislature can legislate absurdity into truth ? And yet, if your 
 position is true that you have the right to declare what "net earnings" 
 shall be in the future and that you shall give to these words a meaning 
 Avhich the law never heretofore gave them, and which was not the meaning 
 when the parties agreed to these words, you declare that you have a right 
 to say that "net earnings" shall hereafter mean gross earnings. That is 
 your bill. 
 
 This is not only a bill to construe the words not according to the mean 
 ing the words have by law and in the lexicons, but what the legislative will 
 shall say they ought to have ; but it is, in the second place, a bill filed to re 
 form the contract by inserting in it not what the parties intended, but what 
 Congress now wills shall be the contract. 
 
 Mr. Christiancy. Under the power to amend. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Ah ! The decision read by the senator from Kentucky, 
 which I am glad he read a wise decision says that the power to alter and 
 amend must be exercised to carry out the original purpose, and not to 
 destroy it. 
 
 Mr. Christiancy. That is only one of them. 
 
 Mr. Hill. And to do everything in accordance with the laws of the 
 land in the protection of the rights of all companies and creditors. But you 
 are doing now what is a destruction of the contract. If you have a right 
 to say now that you can reform the contract by an act of Congress, why 
 can you not repeal the act of 1864 and reinstate the first lien of the govern 
 ment bonds ? You say you cannot do that. Why ? Where is the limita 
 tion, and why can you do one and not the other? Why can you not say the 
 companies shall pay ten per cent, interest instead of six ! Why can you not 
 say they shall pay fifty per cent.? You say you have the power to do it. If 
 you can change the meaning of words, if you can change legal definitions, if 
 you can make a new contract not according to the intention of the parties 
 when the old contract was made, but you can make a contract according to 
 your will now, what is it you cannot do ? There is no pretense that any 
 thing was omitted which the parties intended to insert or that anything was 
 inserted which was agreed to be omitted ; and yet you bring into this legis 
 lative body a bill to reform a contract and make a new one, and you give no 
 earthly reason for it but that you made a bad bargain and now you want to 
 make a good one. The one you made by consent and agreement you say is 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 527 
 
 i 
 
 a bad one, and you will make another by your own act without consent or 
 agreement. 
 
 Again, it is a bill filed to foreclose a mortgage before the mortgager is 
 in default, and to collect the debts of other mortgagees without their request 
 or authority and without their foreclosure in the courts. Here is a remark 
 able provision of this bill of the Judiciary Committee. These other mort 
 gages of the companies, of course, have to be foreclosed in the ordinary 
 way, if the companies shall be in default when they are due ; but you pro 
 pose to command these companies to pay money into your treasury, and 
 which money shall be paid to these bondholders when they become due 
 without a foreclosure ; that is, you assert not only your own "rights and the 
 rights of others, but relieve the other mortgagees of the obligation to fore 
 close their mortgages according to the law and the contract. 
 
 Then, again, it is a common-law action of debt to collect a debt before 
 it is due. It is a bill, I repeat, to make the acts of the debtors crimes, 
 which acts the contract stipulated they might do and which were offered 
 them as inducements to make the contract. Sir, I affirm that the Legis 
 lature of England in the time of James I never asserted a more absolute 
 power. Here certain things that these corporators might do were provided 
 for in the charter ; you stipulated that they might do them ; and now you 
 come in by this bill and propose to make it a crime if they do them ! Was 
 such a monstrous power ever heard of to be exercised by legislators? Surely, 
 if this be true, the legislative power of this body is indeed omnipotent. 
 
 In plain language, I repeat what I have said ; it is a bill to make a good 
 contract without agreement solely because the government apprehends it 
 made a bad contract by agreement, and after the chief inducements to the 
 government to make the contract have been fully realized. 
 
 It is a bill which can find no precedent in the courts of law, no authority 
 in the powers of legislation, and I say it respectfully in my judgment, no 
 justification in the forum of conscience. 
 
 Mr. President, fortunately for me I was not here when this contract was 
 made. I had no agency in it or connection with it. I am not going to visit 
 criticism upon those who did make it. I can see one marked difference be 
 tween the temper of the gentlemen here now and those who were here then 
 when this contract was made. I see the great purpose of the government 
 then was to get the roads constructed. The great purpose of the govern 
 ment was to link together the Union, to get cheap transportation and keep 
 up those works, and it was said over and over that the government to do 
 that was willing to make this loan, even if it lost it. Now the road is built, 
 now the road is kept up, now the labor and the risk have been taken, no\v 
 the government has accomplished its great object, now the Union is saved 
 and bound together by bonds of iron from sea to sea, now all this is done, 
 isuddenlv there wakes up a new spirit to say that the whole principle of the 
 loan shall be changed. Precedents are to be disregarded, courts are to be 
 abandoned, and rights aie to be trampled upon, powers unknown to the 
 British Parliament in its most omnipotent days are to be exercised, and acts, 
 just in themselves, are denounced as crimes to enable you to collect your 
 debt before it is due. Fortunately for me, I have no prejudice pro or con ; 
 I regard myself in this matter as a judge ; but if I should exhibit the passion 
 and temper against these corporations that some gentlemen have exhibited 
 on this floor, I should think I was not a proper judge. I should be afraid 
 that I was acting under some influence of bias or prejudice. Sir, if 
 
528 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 government has made a bad contract so far as the money venture is con 
 cerned, let it abide that contract. 
 
 I do not share the apprehensions which some gentlemen have uttered on 
 this floor of danger from these corporations. The learned senator from 
 Alabama (Mr. Morgan) said if we did not govern these corporations the 
 corporations would soon govern the country. I have no apprehension of 
 that kind. The senator from North Carolina (Mr. Merrimon) also pursued 
 that line of argument. The idea that a few moneyed corporations are to 
 
 fovern this country ! Sir, is there no power to control these corporations ? 
 concede that under this reservation you have the power to control these 
 corporations in the exercise of the franchises ; you have the power to pre 
 serve the road ; you have the power to keep up the road ; you have the 
 power to regulate the freights ; you have the power under the act and the 
 decisions of the courts to protect the people from unjust oppression. All 
 these things you can do ; but it does not follow that you can make a new 
 contract, that you can break an old contract, and that you can collect your 
 money before it is due, or that you can take steps against a debtor unknown 
 to the courts of any civilized country. 
 
 Sir, you can control these corporations ; you have power to control 
 them ; the interest of the country will control them ; the natural loss of 
 trade will control them ; competition will affect them. There are a thousand 
 agencies at work that will control these corporations, and I tell you this 
 great government, with its forty-five million people, will not become a sick 
 and fainting Caesar to cry to these corporations " Give me some drink, 
 Titinius ! " 
 
 But while I have no fear that these moneyed corporations are going to 
 subjugate this great government, I have a fear, I do dread the principle 
 asserted in this bill, which is to give Congress a perpetual right of interfer 
 ence with these companies. If you have a right to pass this bill, you have 
 a right to change your notions next session, and pass another, and the next 
 session to pass another, and the next session to pass another, and so with all 
 bills in relation to the contract. If you find at the next session that you 
 think the money you ought to have paid into the sinking fund is not enough 
 to secure the debt, then you will pass a bill to get more, and what is the re 
 sult? You keep these companies constantly in legislative litigation ; you 
 keep them constantly uneasy; you keep them constantly paralyzed; you keep 
 them constantly interested in coming here to control legislation. Sir, I 
 tell you if you would stop the evils of which you complain, take these 
 companies out of Congress, take these companies out of politics ; do not 
 make it the interest of these companies to have an active part in every 
 presidential and congressional election ; do not subject the companies to 
 keep agents here at every session of Congress to watch and prevent inter 
 ference by Congress with their rights. 
 
 My reflections lead me strongly to the conclusion that the best way to 
 secure your debt, the best way to relieve the country of the scandals con 
 nected with these corporations, is to say to them, " Go, keep your contract ; 
 operate your roads just as you contracted ; keep up your work, fulfill your 
 contract in all respects, and pay your debts when they become due, and Con 
 gress will not interfere with you. Do not be afraid of Congress as long as 
 you keep your contracts." Whenever they do not do it, then you have the 
 power to interfere. I concede it ; but you cannot administer relief in 
 anticipation of default : you must wait till the default comes. That is the 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 529 
 
 power you have over them. They will know that if they violate the char 
 ter, if they get extravagant, if they are not just to the people, then you will 
 step in and interfere ; but you do not put this bill on this ground. If the 
 Judiciary Committee would put this bill upon the ground of default in the 
 companies in any sense, or malfeasance by the companies, or maladministra 
 tion by the companies, I would yield, except to say that as to this loan the 
 proper remedy would be in the courts, but I would admit there ought to be 
 some interference either by the courts or by the Legislature ; but so far as 
 the franchises are concerned, if they do not execute them, you have a right 
 to interfere by legislation, and you have that power always. That is the 
 power you have ; that is the power you intended to have. 
 , Sir, there is another thing I dread in addition to this perpetual interfer 
 ence of Congress with these corporations the very source of infinite scan 
 dal if you do not get rid of it. I am for non-intervention until the contract 
 is violated ; then I am for intervention, and upon the ground of the viola 
 tion of the contract. But this I dread. It looks like a will on the part of 
 the government to repudiate its contracts. Sir, if there is any influence in 
 this country that is more demoralizing than another, it is the idea that has 
 gone abroad that shows a weakening in the sense of obligation of contracts. 
 If the government would have the people be faithful to their contracts, let the 
 government be faithful to its own ; but if the government has made a bad 
 contract, so long as the contractor complies with the terms of that contract, 
 abide by it. It is better to submit to a wrong than to do a wrong ; it is 
 better to lose money than to exercise an ungranted power, a doubtful power. 
 It is better to lose your interest than to keep up a perpetual congressional 
 interference with these railroad companies and compel them to come here, 
 subjected to the necessity by your action of pandering to cupidity to avert 
 the oppression of power. You drive them into the courts and you are your 
 selves weakening the corporations by exhausting the fund in useless litiga 
 tion which ought to be accumulated for the debt. You have already sent 
 these companies to the courts before and the courts have decided against 
 you. You are constantly proposing to send these companies to the courts 
 with new expenses to be incurred, and yet you complain that the companies 
 are likely to be insolvent. Sir, if this system of perpetual interference by 
 Congress is to continue, you will work their insolvency. 
 
 But, sir, I have said I do not dread these corporations as instruments of 
 power to destroy this country, because there are a thousand agencies which 
 can regulate, restrain, and control them ; but there is a corporation we may 
 all well dread. That corporation is the Federal Government. From the 
 aggressions of this corporation there can be no safety, if it be allowed to go 
 beyond the well-defined limits of its power. I dread nothing so much as the 
 exercise of ungranted and doubtful powers by this government. It is in my 
 opinion the danger of dangers to the future of this country. Let us be sure 
 we keep it always within its limits. If this great, ambitious, ever-growing 
 corporation become oppressive, who shall check it ? If it become wayward, 
 who shall control it ? If it become unjust, who shall trust it? As sentinels 
 on the country s watch-tower, senators, I beseech you watch and guard will 
 sleepless dread that corporation which can make all property and rights, all 
 States and people, and all liberty and hope its playthings in an hour, and 
 victims forever. 
 
SPEECH DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED 
 STATES, ON THE COINAGE OF SILVER DOLLARS, FEBRU 
 ARY 8, 1878. 
 
 The Vice- President. The morning hour has expired, and the Senate as 
 in Committee of the Whole resumes the consideration of the bill (H. R. No. 
 1093) to authorize the free coinage of the silver dollar, and to restore its 
 legal-tender character, on which the Senator from Georgia (Mr. Hill) is en 
 titled to the floor. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Mr. President, I fear that sensationalism, that sensationalism 
 which breeds licentiousness, is fast becoming, if it has not already become, 
 one of the chiefest features of our American politics. We have had before 
 us for two months a very plain, practical business question. I cannot imag 
 ine that any senator or any citizen should have any desire whatever in con 
 nection with this question, except to arrive at the plain, honest truth. It is 
 certainly no occasion for rhetoric. There is nothing in the nature of the 
 subject to enlist feeling. It is a question which eminently requires exact 
 ness in facts and clear strength in logic. That is all. It is a question upon 
 which men ought to be able to differ without controversy. Yet, sir, either 
 because of the debate in this body or for other reasons, we see a great 
 excitement growing up in the country upon this question ; public meetings 
 are being held ; immense petitions are being sent in to this body, and perhaps 
 a thousand newspapers are to-day engaged in the patriotic work of impressing 
 the people of this country with the idea that one-half of the members of Con 
 gress have been bought up by the bullion-holders and the other half by the 
 bondholder, with now and then an exception of some gentleman of extraor 
 dinary patriotism, who indulges in rhapsodical rhetoric to satisfy the people 
 that lie is the peculiar friend of " the dear people," and an exception to all 
 the rest. 
 
 In striking contrast with this is the disposition of this same subject 
 which has been made in another nation during the time this debate has been 
 progressing. The question of the continued suspension of the silver coin 
 age came up in France but a few days ago, and in less time than, perhaps, 
 it has required me to state the fact, the Senate, representing a people 
 proverbially excitable, absolutely disposed of the measure unani 
 mously. 
 
 Now, Mr. President, I shall deal with this question as I endeavor to deal 
 i with all questions that come before me. I shall speak my honest convic 
 tions, and I shall speak them as plainly as I know how. I shall certainly 
 question no other gentleman s patriotism and arraign no other gentleman s 
 love of truth and fidelity to right. I take my position with those who sin 
 cerely and earnestly desire the restoration of the silver dollar to the coinage. 
 I believe that the silver dollar ought to be recoined and remonetized. I am 
 not influenced in that opinion in the slightest degree by an argument that 
 fell from the senator from Maine (Mr. Elaine) yesterday. That senator cer 
 tainly entertained us with a most charming and beautiful speech, in much 
 of which I agree, but he made a constitutional argument in the beginning, 
 to the point that Congress had no power to demonetize silver, and he called 
 
 530 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 531 
 
 to his aid the celebrated dictum of a very celebrated constitutional lawyer 
 Mr. Webster. The senator says : 
 
 No power was conferred on Congress to declare that either metal should not be money 
 Congress has, therefore, in my judgment, no power to demonetize silver any more than 
 
 4 1 y^ f-1 i-vk" ^vw^ f\t 1 r* y-v rty- I r\ . >-x * n. . . .,..*. _ A. - _ * A 1 . *? 
 
 fixed by Congress, constitute the legal standard of value in this country, and that neither 
 Congress nor any State has authority to establish any other standard or to displace t\^ 
 standard." 
 
 Now, sir, what was Mr. Webster asserting in that? Only that the Con- 
 stitutional money of this country is metallic, and he intended to assert, and 
 did assert, what I trust every man in this country will weigh, that there is 
 no power in Congress to establish any other money than metallic money. 
 Congress cannot, under the power to coin money and regulate its value, 
 make a money of paper or of any promise to pay. The senator s logic is as 
 faulty as his opinion of the Constitution and of Mr. Webster s view of it, of 
 which also he savs : 
 
 */ 
 
 Congress has, therefore, in my judgment, no power to demonetize silver any more than 
 to demonetize gold ; no power to demonetize either any more than to demonetize both. 
 
 Therefore the senator concludes that Congress is. compelled to monetize 
 both, and has no power to refuse to monetize either. I regret that the sen 
 ator is not in his seat. How would his logic work ? Congress has no more 
 right to refuse to demonetize one ounce of silver than another ounce of sil 
 ver. Therefore, Congress is compelled to monetize every ounce of silver ! 
 Congress has no more power to demonetize one ounce of gold than another 
 ounce of gold. Therefore, Congress is compelled by the Constitution to mon 
 etize every ounce of gold ! And the conclusion to be derived from the sen 
 ator s logic would be that every ounce of silver and every ounce of gold in 
 this country would have actually to be coined into money, and that Con 
 gress would not be performing its Constitutional duty unless it did. Why, 
 sir, Congress has the power to coin money, and this power must be construed, 
 as every other power, to be exercised wisely and according to the wants and 
 needs of the country. It cannot make money of paper. It can alone make 
 money of metal gold, silver, or copper something of that kind, and it 
 must make just as much money of that kind as the wants and conditions of 
 the country shall demand. Congress has power to declare war ; but does 
 that mean that Congress is under Constitutional obligation always to keep 
 the country in a state of war? If that be the Constitutional obligation of 
 Congress for ten years it has been discharging its duty very faithfully. 
 
 Mr. Elaine. -Do I understand the senator from Georgia, then, to main 
 tain that Congress has the right to declare that neither gold nor silver shall 
 be money? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I certainly think Congress has the power not to monetize 
 either gold or silver. 
 
 Mr. Elaine. Has the power not to do it ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. It is the same thing. 
 
 Mr. Elaine. I think Congress has the power not to do a great many 
 things. Does the gentleman desire his proposition to be put in that form, 
 that Congress has the power not to do it ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. The senator can put it in any form he desires. 
 
 Mr. Elaine. No ; I desire the senator to put his proposition in his own 
 
532 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 form. I understand the senator now to rest his logic on this, that Congress 
 has the power not to do a certain thing. Is that it ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Yes, sir ; I did say so. 
 
 Mr. jBlaine. I understood the senator to say so. As he referred to me, 
 I shall be glad to have him state his position. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I say this : Congress, in coining money, has the power to 
 coin gold, or silver, or copper, or either one, or all, or two of them. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. There is no issue on that. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Very well ; and it has the right to drop either from the coin 
 age, and not make it money. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. And it has the right, then, to drop all ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. If it is wise and proper to do so, it has. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. Then I understand the senator to say that under the Con 
 stitution of the United States, in his judgment, Congress has the right to 
 declare that neither gold nor silver shall be money in this country ? 
 
 Mr Hill. Mr. President, I do not believe myself it would be wise or 
 anything but an abuse of power. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. Oh, no. I do not care about wisdom. That is not the 
 point. We want to know what is the power. Expediency we will settle foi- 
 ourselves. I want the senator to define his Constitutional view of the poweb 
 of Congress. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I have defined my Constitutional view of the power of Con 
 gress, and I regret it does not satisfy the senator from Maine. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. I wanted to satisfy the senator from Georgia. 
 
 Mr. Hill. That is impossible for the senator to do with his ideas of Con 
 stitutional law. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. I want the senator from Georgia to satisfy himself. 
 
 Mr. Hill. If the senator will take his seat, I will endeavor to do that. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. I still want, before I take my seat, if the senator will perv 
 mit me 
 
 Mr. Hill. I do not permit the gentleman 
 
 Mr. Blame. Will not permit what? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Any further questioning on this subject. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. All right. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I have simply said, what I repeat, that this power to coil* 
 money is like every other power in the Constitution vested in Congress, to 
 be wisely exercised, according to the wants and needs of the country ; and 
 if Congress shall conclude in its wisdom that the coin of one metal will 
 furnish a sufficient standard of value for the country, Congress has the right 
 to coin but one. If Congress believes that it should coin both metals, and 
 that the condition of the country needs both metals, Congress has the right 
 to coin both metals. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. And the right to coin neither ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Certainly, if the needs and conditions of the country require 
 that it should coin neither ; but I cannot answer an argument, constitutional 
 in its pretensions, which is absurd in its character. I assume that Congress 
 will be wise ; I assume that it will exercise an admitted power wisely that 
 is all ; and the senator s questioning has nothing to do with this view. I 
 did not mean to criticise the senator, except to enter my protest against the 
 idea that because Congress has the power to do a thing", therefore it is com 
 pelled to do it. Congress must exercise its power wisety according to the 
 wants and needs of the country ; and the act of Congress which strikes 
 
BIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 533 
 
 silver from the coinage or demonetizes silver, or any act of Congress which 
 should demonetize either metal, must be admitted by every lawyer to be a 
 Constitutional act. Congress is responsible to the people for the wise manner 
 in which it exercises its powers. That is all. 
 
 Now, another thing. The senator from Maine gave us a most beautiful 
 peroration. I must say that I have rarely heard anything in any assembly, 
 on any occasion, more beautiful and interesting, and I assure the senator I am 
 not doing this now for the purpose of replying to his argument, which lie 
 seems to misunderstand, but for the purpose of emphasizing some points in 
 which he himself would agree. The senator said : 
 
 The two metals have existed side by side, in harmonious, honorable companionship, as 
 money, ever since intelligent trade was known among men. 
 
 What I wish to say is that there has always been a condition of that 
 companionship between the two metals. Never in any history of the world, 
 in any country, Pagan or Christian, despotic or republican, either while 
 revolution was raging or subsiding, while islands were rising or sinking, 
 while empires were prospering or crumbling, did silver and gold ever keep 
 company with each other except upon the inflexible rule of equality in 
 value. The moment one metal becomes depreciated the other metal flies 
 away, and the moment a depreciated paper currency comes in sight both 
 metals hurry to their hiding-places. The American Congress has done what 
 the gentleman seems to think is so absurd, it has actually made a money of 
 paper and given that money a legal tender which has practically for fifteen 
 years demonetized both gold and silver. But, sir, they had a reason for 
 that, and I make no point on it. 
 
 I favor the remonetization of silver, Mr. President, not because, there 
 fore, of the Constitutional point made by the senator from Maine, but 
 because I think its remonetization would be wise and proper in the present 
 condition of the country. I believe in the first place the people desire it, 
 and, as there is no Constitutional difficulty in the way, I think the desires of 
 the people ought to receive the respectful consideration of Congress. I 
 think in the second place that a wise and proper remonetization of silver 
 would add to the now too limited amount of metallic money in the country, 
 and I think that we greatly need a proper addition to our metallic money. 
 
 I think, too, that as silver is a product of our own country, that as we 
 make as much silver as the rest of the world combined, it is proper that we 
 should do whatever is well calculated to encourage its production and 
 increase the demand for it. 
 
 Then, again, I state to the Senate, what was so much better said by 
 distinguished senator from Alabama (Mr. Morgan), that in the country 
 where I live there is a population, the negro population, who have a peculiar 
 attachment to silver money. Naturally unthrifty, naturally disposed not to 
 take care of their money, they ought to be encouraged to be frugal, and, 
 therefore, I believe that to give them silver money will create the passion 
 for hoarding it, keeping it, and as a necessary consequence to economize, 
 think for these and many other reasons that silver ought to be remonetized 
 and the silver dollar ought to be recoined. 
 
 But, Mr. President, I cannot support the bill before the Senate in the 
 shape it came to us from the house. At this time I ask the Senate to give 
 me its attention while I undertake to state the reasons why I cannot sup 
 port that bill. 
 
534 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 I believe that if the bill s .iall pass unamended it will enrich a few indi 
 viduals ; it will give no relief to the financial embarrassments of the country ; 
 it will confuse values, prolong the present painful uncertainties of business, 
 increase the want of confidence which is contracting the circulation of 
 money, will necessitate early additional legislation, and will finally take its 
 place in history as the pickpocket bill of American legislation. 
 
 On the other hand I believe a few amendments to this bill will avert all 
 these evils, will secure an addition to the limited currency of the country, 
 and will restore confidence and aid in the work of resumption. But in no 
 event, whether amended or unamended, will it bring a tithe of the blessings 
 the people are encouraged to expect, and it will not make one failure less in 
 the catalogue of bankruptcies. I oppose this bill because I favor all its 
 professed objects and oppose all its real effects, as I believe those effects will 
 be found on experience to be. 
 
 Mr. Allison. The House bill? 
 
 Mr. Hill.- -The bill as it came from the house. That is what I am now 
 debating. The amendments I would make to the bill will be naturally 
 suggested by the objections I shall state. There are some amendments 
 already pending which will cover most of my objections if adopted. 
 
 In the first place I object to the free-coinage feature. We do not allow 
 the free coinage of the present fractional silver coin. Will some senator tell 
 me why the silver dollar should be admitted to free coinage and fractional 
 silver not ? We are told by the director of the Mint that during the year 
 1877 the bullion purchased for coining fractional silver cost $34,118,973.74 ; 
 that that produced a coinage in fractional silver of $39,685,688, and gave a 
 seigniorage to the government of $5,566,714.74. Now to say that you will 
 place the coinage of the silver dollar upon a different footing from the 
 coinage of fractional silver, make one free and the other not, is to throw 
 upon the government all the expense of coining the silver and give the silver- 
 bullion holder all the profits of its coinage. It is said that this is the case 
 with gold ; that there is a free coinage of gold. That is true. Why ? Is 
 it right to give the silver dollar free coinage because gold has free coinage ? 
 It is right if the condition of the two metals is precisely alike ; but if the 
 condition of the two metals is different, then it is wrong. 
 
 Now, what is the condition of gold? It is at a premium ; it is not in 
 circulation ; it does not seek circulation ; it is in demand for exportation as 
 bullion. But the government needs gold, and it is very important to 
 encourage its coinage ; and the government to encourage the coinage of 
 gold may well allow it free coinage in the present condition of that metal. 
 But do any of these reasons apply to silver? Silver bullion is not at a 
 premium. Silver bullion is at a very great discount. Silver bullion is ten 
 per cent, below par ; silver bullion will rush for coinage as soon as you make 
 the law, because of that fact. It needs no encouragement from the govern 
 ment to be coined. There will be a tendency in the rush of silver to 
 displace the coinage of gold and to absorb the power of your Mint. The 
 holder of gold bullion does not derive the profit from the free coinage of 
 gold that the holder of silver bullion would derive from the free coinage of 
 silver. Now, when gentlemen tell me that silver ought to be put upon the 
 same condition of coinage with gold, then I say you must first put silver 
 upon the same condition of value or position before the country. Otherwise 
 the argument fails. 
 
 Then, again, the expense of coining silver is four times as great as the 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 535 
 
 expense of coining gold. So we are informed by the director of the Mint ; 
 and he tells us indeed that it costs no more laborer expense to coin a twenty- 
 dollar gold piece than to coin one dollar of silver. 
 
 So you perceive that the metals do not stand in the same condition or in 
 the same relation of value in any respect ; and what might be wise to encour 
 age the coinage of gold is not needed or wise to encourage the coinage of 
 silver, and I beg my friends to consider that there can be no excuse for this 
 government, under the pretense of relieving the people, to adopt a system 
 of coinage that will put millions of dollars into the pockets of a few private 
 individuals, silver bullion holders. It is the skill and the labor and the cost 
 of the United States which convert this bullion into coin. There is no 
 reason why the holder of bullion should get all the benefit of this skill and 
 labor and expense employed by the government. There is no reason why 
 he should have any more than the market value of his bullion. Such a 
 remarkable provision has never been made in any country that I know of 
 under like circumstances. 
 
 The next amendment which I think ought to be adopted to this bill is to 
 limit the coinage of silver the amount to be coined. The bill, as it comes 
 from the House, is without limit. Now, I wish to call the attention of the 
 Senate to the statistics of the Mint. The director of the Mint says : 
 
 With our present minting capacity we could, with a full working force, coin silver 
 dollar pieces at the rate of $2,000,000 per month, and at the same time manufacture the 
 necessary gold, trade, and fractional silver coinage. 
 
 Now, if you open your mints to the unlimited coinage of the silver dollar, 
 giving the silver dollar free coinage, while you give to fractional currency 
 not free coinage, you see at once that you would have no silver going to 
 your mints except for coinage into silver dollars, and the whole capacity of 
 the mints would be employed in coining the silver dollar. What is the 
 result ? The coinage of gold is stopped. You cannot coin gold, with the 
 present capacity of your mints, if you admit silver without limit to the coin 
 age and with the privilege of free coinage. Every senator can see that. 
 
 Then you have to do one of two things, if you admit unlimited free coin 
 age of silver : you have either to appropriate money and multiply your 
 mints and increase your labor and expenses immensely, or you have to stop 
 the coinage of gold and fractional silver. One of these two results is inevi 
 table ; but will you increase your mints, and will you increase your labor and 
 expense to relieve a suffering people, in order to increase the amount of silver 
 coinage for the benefit of silver bullion holders ? The country is in no con 
 dition at present, in my judgment, for large appropriations to increase the 
 minting power. 
 
 Then, again, we are told that if you employ the whole capacity of the 
 mints as they now stand to coin silver dollars, the extent of that capacity is 
 to coin $50,000,000 per annum, while at the present coinage of gold and 
 silver we can coin from eighty to one hundred millions. You will lessen the 
 amount of metallic money by driving off gold in order to coin unlimited 
 silver. That is not the way to relieve the people. 
 
 Without these two amendments, which are covered by the amendment of 
 the finance committee of the Senate, you drive us to the necessity of stopping 
 the coinage of gold without any reference now to the question of value 
 between the two metals ; you drive us to that necessity as a matter of 
 physical capacity of the mints or you drive us to the necessity of increasing 
 the mints by laro- e appropriations in order to enable bullion holders to have 
 
536 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 free coinage of silver dollars and make individual fortunes. I trust, there 
 fore, that these two amendments will be adopted. They are embraced in 
 the one reported by the finance committee of the Senate, and if adopted, I 
 say, will greatly improve this bill. 
 
 Now, Mr. President, I come to the main question that I think is involved 
 under this bill, and I shall discuss it as briefly as I can. 
 
 */ 
 
 I object, in the third place, to the unlimited tender power which it is pro 
 posed by this bill to give to the silver dollar. On the subject of the power 
 of the general government to make anything a legal tender, if it were an 
 original question, I have my views. I think the power "to coin money and 
 regulate the value thereof " does not include the power to make a legal 
 tender, and I do not believe that Congress in fact has the power to make a 
 legal tender of anything, even gold and silver. Money is a legal tender ; 
 and Congress has power to make money ; but money becomes a legal tender 
 not because Congress says so but because it is the law of the contract. 
 When a man gives his obligation to pay dollars, his promise is to pay the 
 stamped coin of the government ; and because dollars are the stamped coin 
 of the government, and because the contract promised to pay dollars, there 
 fore he tenders what under his contract he promised to pay, and for that 
 reason it is a legal tender. But the legal tender power, strictly speaking, is 
 a different power. What is that ? It is the law which prescribes the evi 
 dence which shall establish a tender, and the evidence to establish a refusal, 
 and the effect on the contract of the tender and refusal. 
 
 Now the evidence necessary to prove a tender, the evidence necessary to 
 prove a refusal, and the effect of the tender and the refusal upon the contract 
 are questions for each State to determine for itself, not for this government. 
 If I give a man my note by which I promise to pay him five bushels of 
 wheat, if on the day that note falls due I tender him five bushels of wheat, 
 it is a legal tender. Why ? Not because Congress has said wheat is a legal 
 tender, but because it is the obligation of my contract. But the terms upon 
 which the tender shall be made and the evidence by which the refusal shall 
 be proven, and the reasons for refusal and the effect of refusal of the tender 
 are all questions which must be regulated by the statutes of the State, and 
 each State for itself ; and that is what we mean by the law of legal tender. 
 
 But I pass that, because I see it has been the custom of the government 
 to give this legal-tender power to gold and silver, and even to minor coins, 
 and therefore I will assume, in deference to the precedents of the past, that 
 the power to make silver a legal tender does exist ; and if the power to 
 make silver or gold a legal tender does exist in Congress, then, of course, it 
 follows that Congress has power to qualify that tender in any way it sees 
 proper. 
 
 Here comes the main point of difference between me and my friends here. 
 I take it, from all the discussions I have heard in this body, that every man 
 on this floor desires a silver dollar that shall be equal to the gold dollar ; I 
 mean equal in commercial value. I do not believe any senator will sta-nd up 
 here and say to the country that he desires to coin a depreciated dollar, 
 worth less than one hundred cents. The government has issued paper 
 money which has circulated at less than par value ; but the government 
 never intended that should be so. It has issued all its greenback currency, 
 and what is it? A promise to pay so many dollars. Here is the bill : "I 
 promise to pay $5." The government never intended that that should be 
 worth less than $5. Commerce makes it worth less ; but when the govern- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 53 T 
 
 ment comes to redeem it, it must redeem it with $5. A very different tiling 
 is this of the government putting its stamp on a coin and saying, " this is a 
 dollar," when in point of fact the government knows it is "but ninety 
 cents. In that case the government coins a falsehood, and does it know 
 ingly. Now, then, I say I do not believe there is a senator in my hearing 
 who will get up before this country and say that he desires to coin a silver 
 dollar which is really worth but ninety cents and make it pass for $1. In 
 other words, you do not desire to coin debased money. We all agree upon 
 this proposition, that 41 2 grains of silver, which formerly made a dollar in 
 silver, now only make ninety or ninety-two cents. There is no dispute here 
 as to that proposition. Four hundred and twelve and one-half grains of 
 silver are worth ninety cents. Why do you propose to coin it and call it a 
 dollar ? I am going to treat my friends fairly because I know they are 
 patriotic and honest. 
 
 Mr. Cockrell. Will the senator allow me to interrupt him? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Cockrell. I desire to state distinctly that I made no such admission 
 as he has stated. We do not admit that 41 2 \ grains of silver coined by law 
 with legal tender power are only worth ninety cents to the dollar. On the 
 contrary, we say that two silver half dollars containing only 385.8 grains sell 
 to-day in the New York market for 95.58 cents in gold. 
 
 Mr. Hill. If my friend will just wait, he will be astonished to see how 
 unnecessary his statement was. I am not stating what the silver dollar will 
 be worth after it is coined, for I know his opinion on that ; but he starts 
 out with the fact that is not proved. I say that the proposition is that 412| 
 grains of silver, nine-tenths fine, is to-day, in commercial value, worth ninety 
 cents. That is what I said. 
 
 Mr. CoclcreU. As bullion. 
 
 Mr. Hill: I said distinctly 41 2 J grains, which represented a dollar, 
 which is not a dollar now ; but we are talking about making it a dollar. - As 
 it now stands, we agree that in commerce it is worth ninety cents, or ninety- 
 two cents. Very well. Now, here is the difference. The Senators who 
 support this billys it stands, without amendment, insist that, if silver shall 
 be remonetized and given this legal-tender power, then the 412 grains, 
 which in bullion is worth but ninety cents, or ninety-two cents, will become 
 worth a dollar. That is your position. Do I not state it fairly ? Precisely; 
 and if you will just wait" with patience you will find that I state everything 
 with perfect fairness. I do not believe that the remonetization of silver with 
 unlimited legal-tender power will make it worth a dollar. If I believed it, 1 
 would vote with you. Coining a silver dollar equal to a gold dollar cannot 
 harm anybody. That is what my friend wants, and what we all want. We 
 will all vote for a silver dollar that is equal to a gold dollar. What are we 
 quarreling about, when all agree that nobody can be harmed by that ? 
 
 Why do you say that in your judgment the remonetization of silver by 
 the passage of this "bill will make ninety-two cents of silver worth a dollar \ 
 I state your argument fairly. You say that the demonetization of silver is 
 the cause of the depreciation of that money, and this singular logic has gone 
 all over the country. You can find it in a thousand newspapers to-day. 
 Every time that we say that 412J grains of silver are not worth a dollar we 
 are niet with the reply,"" that is because the Government of the United States 
 demonetized it ; the United States has disowned its money, and therefore 
 it has depreciated in value." Even the venerable senator from Ohio (Mr. 
 
538 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Thurrnan) uses that argument, and uses it with a great deal of earnestness. 
 Now, gentlemen, if your premises be true ; if it be true that the simple 
 demonetization of silver or its being stricken from the coinage of the United 
 States is the cause of its present depreciation, then your conclusion is correct, 
 and its restoration to the coinage and remonetization would increase its value 
 and carry it back ; because if you remove the cause you remove the effect. 
 But in order to remove an effect you must remove all the cause that pro 
 duced it. Do you not perceive that your position, that the demonetization 
 of silver by the United States is the cause of its depreciation, is itself an 
 assumption ? You do not prove that ; you assume it. The newspapers of 
 the country are filled with it and the whole country, therefore, hold us up as 
 intentionally keeping silver depreciated by refusing to repeal an act which 
 caused silver to be depreciated. You hold the government up as responsi 
 ble for its depreciation. 
 
 Is there any necessity for us to deceive ourselves upon this subject ? I 
 think none in the world. In the first place it seems to me illogical to say 
 that the act of 1873 was the cause of the depreciation in silver as money, 
 because silver at that time was not money ; it was not in circulation. The 
 act of 1873 did not destroy silver as a circulating medium in this country. 
 Depreciated paper did that work. 
 
 Mr. Saulsbury. Will the senator from Georgia permit me to ask him a 
 question just there ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Certainly. 
 
 Mr. Saulsbury. I ask the senator whether the position that he takes, 
 that to remonetize silver will not appreciate its value, is not itself a mere 
 assumption ; and in connection with that I ask him the further question 
 whether before our act of demonetization there had been a depreciation in 
 silver bullion ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. If my friend will just wait he will be perfectly astonished to 
 see how unnecessary his question is. 
 
 Mr. Saulsbury. Answer me. 
 
 Mr. Hill.- -What was your first question ? 
 
 Mr. Saulsbury. My first question was whether it is not mere assump 
 tion 
 
 Mr. Hill. I remember now. Yes, it is ; but I do not intend to let it rest 
 there as you do. I intend to prove my assumption and you do not prove 
 yours. That is the difference between us. I admit as far as I have gone it 
 is a mere assumption to say that remonetization will not restore its value ; 
 but wait and hear my reasons for it. 
 
 Mr. Wallace. Will the senator permit a question ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Yes, sir, if it is necessary I will ; but there are so many 
 unnecessary questions put to me that I am almost afraid to yield. 
 
 Mr. Wallace. The power given is " to coin money and regulate the value 
 thereof. The question I want to ask the senator is whether he will take a 
 piece of silver of 41 2 grains, not coined as money, and regulate its value, or 
 whether he will first coin the money and then regulate the value between 
 the money silver and the money gold ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I will come to my remedies, and I will tell the senator when I 
 get to that point. I am now discussing the question what produced the 
 depreciation in silver, and I will be exceedingly obliged if gentlemen will 
 let me go on and discuss the question I am discussing. 
 
 Then why do you say that the act of 1873 produced a depreciation in 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 539 
 
 silver as money when silver was not in fact money? How long after its 
 passage before that act ought to have had such an effect ? But, senators, 
 was the United States the only country that demonetized silver? I have 
 collated the facts on this subject and I invite the attention of the Senate to 
 them. The United States struck the silver dollar from the coinage, as we 
 all know, in 1873. We have heard a great deal to the effect that Germany 
 also adopted the single gold standard in 1873. That is true. Then, further, 
 Denmark, Norway, and Sweden demonetized silver in 1872-73, beginning 
 the work in 1872 and completing it in 1873. Holland commenced the 
 demonetization of silver in 1872 and completed its work in 1875. So here 
 are five countries besides the United States which between 1872 and 1875 
 demonetized silver. That is not all. France, Belgium, Switzerland, Italy, 
 and Greece, embracing the Latin monetary union, restricted the coinage of 
 silver, and finally suspended that coin in 1874. They did not destroy the 
 legal-tender power of silver already coined. They did not establish nominally 
 a single gold standard, but they stopped the coinage of silver, just as our 
 act of 1873 did. Here, then, are ten nations besides the United States, 
 great commercial nations, embracing the greatest commercial nations of the 
 earth, that demonetized silver about the same time the United States 
 demonetized it. 
 
 I ask my friends what right have you to say that the action of the United 
 States alone out of eleven nations produced a given result ? If all these 
 states had an agency in producing this result, I ask you what right you have 
 to say the reversion of its action by the United States alone will restore the 
 result and remedy the evil ? You cannot say that. You cannot say that a 
 result which is produced by the action of eleven nations will be remedied by 
 the change in its action of one of them. That is unreasonable. 
 
 But in my judgment and I am giving my opinion and no other man s 
 it was not the demonetization of silver, either by the United States or the 
 other ten nations, that alone produced the depreciation in silver. On the 
 contrary, it is my opinion that the wisdom of the statesmen of those countries 
 discerned coming events and they determined for other causes to demonetize 
 silver ; and now to those causes I invite the attention of the Senate. First, 
 let us look at the production of silver. I wish senators to direct their atten 
 tion to this question as it affects entirely the depreciation of the metal. In 
 1861 we are told that the American product of silver was $2,000,000 ; by 
 1864 it increased to $11, 000,000 ; in 1870 it increased to $16,000,000 ; in 1875 
 it increased to $32,000,000 ; and in 1877 it increased to about $40,000,000. 
 Mark you. Up to the time of the depreciation of silver the increase in the ^ 
 product of silver since 1861 in the United States had been 1500 per cent, by 
 the statistics. The production of the world up to 1861 had reached $40,- 
 000,000 per year. In 1875 it had reached $80,000,000, an increase of 100 
 per cent. That is the increase of the production, and this wonderful increase 
 in its production seems to have culminated to its higli point about the time 
 silver commenced to depreciate. Let us look at the demand in the mean 
 time. I will take only one country for a specimen. During the four yean 
 of the American war American cotton was cut off from Europe and i 
 world. India cotton therefore came into great demand and rose to a hij 
 price and increased largely in production. What was the result: 
 the four years of the war the exportation of silver to India alone amoun 
 to $67,000,000 per annum. 
 
 Mr. Butler. From where ? 
 
540 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Mr. Hill. From France and England. One year France itself exported 
 $65,000,000. Therefore the great demand for silver. It took $67,000,000 a 
 year on an average during the four years of the war. During the four years 
 succeeding the war, when our Southern cotton was coming back into demand, 
 thereby lessening the value and product of India cotton, and therefore 
 lessening the power of India to take silver, the demand of India alone fell to 
 $35,000,000 a year. This demand fell in 1868, so Dr. Linderman tells us, to 
 $8,000,000 ; in 1870-71, in twelve months there, it fell to $5,000,000. In 
 the four years after 1871, including 1875, the average exportation of silver 
 to India was $10,000,000. So that during this very period, when silver 
 commenced declining, its product had risen since 1861, 1500 per cent, in 
 the United States and 100 per cent, in the world, and its demand in one 
 great silver country alone had decreased 85 per cent.! So great was this 
 decrease in the demand and its effect upon silver that, notwithstanding, in 
 consequence of the famine the demand for India and China greatly increased 
 again in 1876, it had not the effect of restoring silver to its former value. 
 
 Now, I put it to your candor, when the production of silver had so 
 greatly increased, when the demand for silver had so greatly declined, both 
 from the failure and inability to get it in the countries of the East, and 
 when eleven countries had discarded it as money or stopped its coinage, why 
 is it, in the face of these great facts, that you insist upon saying that the 
 depreciation of silver was caused by the demonetization act of 1873? Do 
 you believe that the great increase in its production, the great decline in its 
 demand had no effect upon its value ? Do you not believe that they were 
 somewhat causes in producing that effect ? If they were, I ask every candid 
 senator upon this floor to tell me why it is that you insist upon telling the 
 country that the only cause of the depreciation of the commercial value of 
 silver was the act of 1873. Is it fair to make that statement? Eleven 
 nations during this very period have discarded silver from their coinage. 
 Fifteen hundred per cent, increase in its production by the United States, 
 100 percent, increase in its production in the world, and 85 per cent, decrease 
 in its demand ! Yet gentlemen tell me there is but one cause for the 
 depreciation of silver. Looking at this question fairly, with a perfectly 
 impartial mind, I must come to the conclusion that the cause of the deprecia 
 tion in silver is to be found not in the act of any one nation, but in the acts 
 of eleven nations and in the fact of its greatly increased production and the 
 great decline in the demand for it. I believe I am reasonable in the state 
 ment, and if I come to that conclusion, are you justified or is any one 
 justified in saying that but one part of the cause produced the whole effect? 
 
 Mr. Bailey. Will the senator permit me to ask him a question just in 
 that connection ? 
 
 Mr. //*7/.- -Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Bailey. I understand the senator to say that the position ta-ken by 
 the advocates of the silver bill on the floor of the Senate lias been that the 
 whole cause of the depreciated value of silver is to be found in its demone 
 tization by the Government of the United States. Do I understand him to 
 state that ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I have understood that to be the position of half a dozen 
 senators on this floor, and I have seen it in a thousand newspapers almost. 
 
 Mr. Bailey. I speak of the discussion on the floor of the Senate. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Oh, I do not say that all of you have said it. 
 
 Mr. Bailey. I do not say so. 
 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. . 541 
 
 Mr. Hill. Then you admit what I say, that the demonetization of silver 
 by the United States did not alone produce its depreciation. I put you on 
 one horn of the dilemma or the other. Do you admit that the demonetiza 
 tion by the United States alone did not produce the depreciation of silver ? 
 If you admit that, then I ask what right have you to say that the passage 
 of this bill remonetizing silver will .cure the depreciation and restore it to its 
 former value ? You have no right to say it. You must find out the cause 
 of the depreciation and remove the whole cause if you would remove the 
 whole effect. I will state fairly that I believe the remonetization of silver 
 by the United States will have some effect in restoring its value. I do not 
 know how much, and therefore, as you will find directly, I am unwilling to 
 adopt a measure which proposes simply to increase the weight of silver,be- 
 cause we cannot tell now exactly how much effect remonetization will have 
 in restoring its value. But that it will have the full effect of restoring its 
 value I cannot believe. It may have a temporary effect, more apparent than 
 real, and not by any means permanent. It may seemingly restore it for a 
 little while, but it cannot last. 
 
 Then I put this to senators : as you do not wish to coin a depreciated 
 money, as all the causes which we may reasonably say have united in pro 
 ducing its depreciation cannot be removed by us, as we can only remove one, 
 as we will in all probability fail to restore by the act of one nation the value 
 of silver in equal value to that of the gold dollar, you see the hazard at once 
 of passing this bill without any limitation upon it. If you do produce a 
 dollar that is not worth a gold dollar you see you derange the currency, you 
 confuse all values, and you inflict very great mischief upon the country. 
 You admit that you ought to avoid that. Will it not be better then, instead 
 of risking this terrible evil upon the country at this particular juncture to 
 avoid it if we possibly can ? 
 
 Mr. Maxey. Will the senator permit me to ask him a question ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Maxey. If silver were at a premium of three per cent, in 1873, 
 when it was demonetized, is it necessary to bring it back to that rate in order 
 to justify the recoinage of it. 
 
 Mr. *Hill. I must say to my friend from Texas that that is a very un 
 necessary question. I have said fifty times in language as strong as I can 
 use, that I would have a silver dollar equal to the gold dollar. 
 
 Mr. Maxey. It will be more than equal when remonetized. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I do not want either metal of superior value to the other. 
 All I want is equality. That is the condition of the companionship of the 
 two metals, as I said to the senator from Maine. How may you avoid these 
 disastrous consequences and yet give the people a silver dollar? You can 
 do it, in my opinion, in either one of three ways. You can do it by increas 
 ing the weight. I prefer not to adopt that method. I say to my eloquent 
 friend from Connecticut (Mr. Eaton) and the senator from Michigan (Mr. 
 Christiancy), and the senator from Maine (Mr. Klaine) who have already 
 offered amendments to increase the weight of the silver dollar, that is a wise 
 measure, it is a proper remed} T , but, in my opinion, it is not the best, and 
 give this reason for it, that you cannot tell now at what weight you should 
 fix the silver dollar. If you were to fix a weight to-morrow that would be 
 equal to o-olrl t.hp npvt i\*\r it, mio-ht not be and the same evil would occur. 
 
 ^- ^* ^J i I* A t . m v 1^* V * *** ** ** ^^ 
 
 gold, the next day it might not be and the same evil would occur. 
 We must adopt some system, if we can, by which we can keep the silver 
 equal to the ffold dollar in purchasing power and in commercial value. 
 
542 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 The whole difficulty of the double standard springs up when you under 
 take to equalize the dollar by weight. That is a very great difficulty in the 
 present condition of the country, when a majority of the commercial nations 
 of the earth are discarding the double standard. I am not going into the 
 question of the single and double standard. I only say that out of thirty- 
 three nations, not counting the United States, fifteen have already adopted 
 the single gold standard, ten have adhered to the single silver standard, and 
 only eight have the double standard of gold and silver ; so that the tendency 
 of the world is clearly to establish the single gold standard. At this time I 
 do not propose to discuss the single gold standard for this country, but for 
 the reason given I prefer not to increase the weight of the silver dollar. 
 Then I propose to retain 412J grains of silver nine-tenths fine as the silver 
 dollar. How, then, will you prevent its depreciation ? One way is to limit 
 the coinage. That is not the best way, but that is a way, and you may 
 have to come to that. Whenever you limit the supply of an article you ne 
 cessarily increase the value of that article. If you will limit the coinage of 
 your silver when you get the proper limitation upon its coinage, it will fill 
 the natural demand for it, and then of course you will increase its value. 
 The fact stated by the senator from Ohio that the ratio in France is only 
 15 of silver to 1 of gold, and yet it is equal to gold in circulation as money, 
 is true, but why? Because France absolutely prohibited the increase of 
 those dollars. 
 
 Mr. Allison. How many had they ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I do not remember. I suppose you know. 
 
 Mr. Allison. Between $300,000,000 and $400,000,000. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Very well ; still France has stopped the coinage and she keeps 
 silver at par. She closes down her mints, and why does she keep her mints 
 closed? Because, as my friend must admit, the French people know that if 
 they do what you propose to do by this bill, reopen the mints or restore the 
 unlimited free coinage of silver her silver would go down in twenty-four 
 hours and it would drive the other metal, gold, away, which is the same 
 thing. Whenever you depreciate one metal you drive the other away. 
 That is an established fact. France stopped the coinage of silver to prevent 
 that effect and retain her gold. 
 
 I am willing for you to have silver ; I am a silver man. I protest here 
 and now against the constantly repeated arguments on this floor that those 
 of us who cannot support this bill want to destroy all the silver in the coun 
 try. We want to regulate silver so as to keep it equal with gold and thus 
 keep both in the country. That is all I want, and then you can have as 
 much of it as you please. The example of France proves to us that it is 
 possible to have silver, and a large amount of silver even, at less than 41 2 1 
 grains, less. than 16 to 1, and it will keep at par, but it is done by a limitation 
 upon the coinage. There can be no other reason for it. Here you propose 
 an unlimited free coinage. 
 
 Mr. Allison. No. 
 
 Mr. Hill. You do not. I mean the advocates of the bill as it came from 
 the House. 
 
 But I believe the most effective way and the permanent way to keep the 
 purchasing power of the silver dollar equal to the purchasing power of the 
 gold dollar is to prescribe for silver an appropriate and fitting place in the 
 field of currency which will take it out of competition with gold. I do not 
 mean to make it alone in this country a subsidiary coin. I am willing to 
 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 543 
 
 compromise and get together and have accord on this subject, and make 
 silver more than a subsidiary coin, but I would limit its legal-tender power. 
 Why ? For the very reason of the example you have before you. The 
 senator from Missouri has thrown it in our faces that two of the present 
 half dollars are of less weight than 41 2 J grains and yet they pass at par. 
 Why? Is it because the value of the silver in them is equal to 25.8 grains 
 of gold ? No, sir ; but because of the limit in legal-tender power, and 
 because there is no other currency with which it conies into competition. 
 For the very same reason your minor coins pass at par. The nickel passes 
 at par and so the copper cent passes. They are not equal in commercial 
 value to gold or silver, but why is it that we all take a copper cent and the 
 nickel three-cent piece and the nickel five-cent piece ? Because they per 
 form the function of change, the function of a money which there is no 
 other money to perform. 
 
 So in England. Look at her case. England you say has demonetized 
 silver ; but yet England makes coined silver a subsidiary coin and she gives 
 the silver money higher legal-tender power than we have done with our 
 fractional currency. She makes it a legal tender for about $10. What is 
 the result ? England circulates from eighty to a hundred millions of silver, 
 and it is not equal in value to our silver dollar. She buys the silver bullion 
 at 53 pence, coins it and puts it in circulation at 66, thereby making 13 
 pence, or 26 per cent, nearly. 
 
 How does she do it? By simply limiting the legal-tender power, by 
 simply giving silver a field in which it does not come into competition with 
 gold. What should you do here ? Limit the legal-tender power of the 
 silver dollar, and give ample silver to supply the wants of the people. I am 
 willing to agree upon any reasonable amount. My own opinion is that if 
 you will make the silver dollar a legal tender for $100 the people will have 
 it for all the purposes they need or desire, and it will go just as much into 
 circulation as if you were to make it an unlimited legal tender, and it will 
 be just as valuable to the people, and it will not drive out the gold from 
 circulation or from the country. 
 
 In that event, I believe the silver dollar of 41 2 grains would have as 
 much purchasing power as the gold dollar. That is my opinion. Why not 
 do it if we can thus avoid this confusion and all hazard and yet gratify the 
 people? The people demand of you the silver dollar, but they do not 
 demand of you a silver dollar that shall drive out the gold from the country. 
 They do not tell you in what way to give them the silver dollar ; they 
 leave that to your wisdom, and they expect you to do it in a manner that 
 will be wise and that will secure equality between the silver dollar and the 
 gold dollar. The senator from Ohio said, and justly said, that the silver 
 money is the money of the common people. That is true, and will the 
 Senate take the hazard of throwing out to the country a money that is to be 
 used by the common people which will be less valuable than the gold which 
 is used by the rich people ? Will that be justice to the laboring claw will 
 that be justice to the poor class? Ah, gentlemen, when you go home and 
 tell the people that you have passed a bill which gives them a silver dollar, 
 and they find out that you have given them a silver dollar of less value than 
 the gold dollar, they will want to know why you have thus discriminated 
 against them. 
 
 Both by our own example and by the example of England and 
 reason of the thing, I think it would be wise to limit the legal- tender power 
 
544 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 of silver, giving it a place in the currency which it may occupy without 
 competition with gold, just as the minor coins occupy a distinct field. Then 
 silver will be always at par and have an equal purchasing power with gold 
 in the ordinary business of the country, and there will be no necessity to be 
 constantly re-enacting laws to keep silver and gold equal. 
 
 Mr. Morgan. Will the senator from Georgia allow me to ask him 
 whether he would favor the use of silver in the payment of the bonded 
 debt of the United States or the interest thereof? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I am corning to that directly, my friend. I am going to deal 
 with the bonds. My opinion is that the bonds ought to be lifted out of 
 this question, provided we can lessen taxation by it ; but I am coming to 
 that directly. I would give silver a legal-tender power for all payments in 
 any one payment not exceeding $100, or even more, for a compromise. I 
 arn willing to do that, and I believe the country would accept it, and would 
 be gratified by it. I believe it would preserve the value of the silver dollar 
 without increasing its weight. I do not insist upon $100 as the limit ; I 
 will be reasonable on that point. It is the principle I am after. I believe 
 at last you have got to come to that. I believe that is going to be the re 
 sult of all this confusion in the world about the single and double standard. 
 It is not natural, it never was intended by nature that silver should have the 
 same extent of circulation that gold has. Who would think of coining a 
 twenty-dollar silver piece ? No one ; any more than you would think of 
 coining a dollar copper piece. We will build our financial temple thus : 
 We will have copper and nickel for the mudsills ; let us then make silver 
 the basement, and let us make its superstructure of gold. Give each its 
 place. Give the copper and the nickel their place in circulation, silver its 
 place in circulation, gold its place ; and above gold let there be drafts, 
 checks, and such paper money as you may see proper to authorize. 
 
 That, I believe Mr. President, is a solution of this question. I submit 
 these views with diffidence because I admit that it is a very complicated and 
 difficult subject in any view, but I believe that is what we ought to do. I 
 do confess I do not contemplate with the slightest degree of pleasure the 
 proposition that we are to multiply the depreciated money of this country, 
 and prolong and increase the agonies of the people which result from that 
 depreciated money. I want to come to an honest standard. I would have 
 gold and silver both in airculation, each to equal the other, and a paper 
 money convertible into either, according to law. Then I believe confidence 
 will be restored ; then I believe business will revive ; then I believe these 
 failures and bankruptcies will begin to end ; then I believe the laborer will 
 begin to have bread and the naked will begin to have clothing. It is 
 strange to me, after the world has passed through so many revolutions, and 
 has so often felt the bad effects of a depreciated currency, in producing first 
 speculation and extravagance, then collapse, and then bankruptcies, that wo 
 will not see that it is precisely the ordeal through which this country is now 
 passing, and that there is no escape and no remedy for it until you get back 
 to a sound currency. But a sound currency in this country means gold and 
 silver money equal each to the other, and a paper money equal to either. 
 That is what it means and nothing else. 
 
 Give me good reasons for believing that remonetization alone will restore 
 silver to an equal value with gold and I will support the measure. But for 
 the reasons I have given, with the plain history of the world occurring at 
 the very time this silver began to depreciate (for the greatest depreciation 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 645 
 
 of silver occurred in 1876, when it fell twenty per cent.}, I am convinced 
 that all these causes culminating just at that time, this demonetization by 
 eleven nations, this great increase in production, and the great decline in 
 its demand, combined to produce that wonderful result in the history of 
 this country. Believing so I am not willing, anxious as I am to be in accord 
 with my friends on this subject, to take the hazard of driving the gold from 
 the country for money that I believe will be more depreciated than the 
 greenback and that will pull the greenback down to it, and postpone resump 
 tion and continue this condition of uncertainty and hardship and suffering 
 among the people. 
 
 Mr. President, I have taken so much longer than I expected that I shall 
 hurry on. I have disposed of the questions that I think are before the Sen 
 ate. I do not say that I will insist on all the amendments that I havo sug 
 gested as indispensable before I will vote for the bill. I never will vote for 
 it as it stands. I am willing to compromise. I believe that gentlemen who 
 differ with me on this question are as honest and patriotic as I am. They 
 are men whom I love. I desire to be in accord with you in all things 
 because I know your worth. I am willing therefore to unite with you to 
 bring about any method that will reasonably secure what we all say we 
 want, equality in value between these two metals, and hasten the period of 
 resumption. I will unite with you in anything that is reasonable to that 
 end ; but do not attach your support to a bill which I think is monstrous in 
 its character ; a bill that I think will relieve nobody but a few bullion 
 holders and will enrich them ; a bill that will multiply the bankruptcies of 
 this country, which will increase the sufferings of this country, which will 
 postpone the resumption of specie payments and the day of a sound cur 
 rency. Do not plant yourselves in favor of such a bill and say you will not 
 move an inch. Come, we are all together. Our people are interested. 
 They are suffering. We desire to relieve them. Why cannot we have 
 wisdom enough to adopt a proper measure that will avoid the evils on the 
 one hand and secure the good on the other? 
 
 Mr. Withers. Let us do it. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Exactly. Now let us go to work and do it ; but you say, 
 " this bill or nothing." 
 
 Having disposed of these questions that belong to the issue I want to 
 make a few more remarks upon matters which have been introduced into 
 the discussion which I think have no relevancy, but it is proper that I should 
 say something about them. 
 
 Mr. President, with all due deference to every man in my hearing and to 
 every member of the Senate, I enter my protest solemnly against two argu 
 ments which have been too often used in this hall, and which are used every 
 day through the country. I know of no way of dealing with a ques 
 with frankness and candor. I represent nobody but the people, and 
 ernment, and truth. I care nothing for bondholders, or creditors, or bankers, 
 or any other class of people. I believe that legislation which is 
 one class is wise for all classes. The man who attempts to array in 
 country the poor against the rich, and those who are not bankers and 
 holders against those who are, and talks about legislation for 
 a class, is doing Herculean work to destroy the happiness and 
 all classes. , f 
 
 It has been said, and it has gone over the country in a thousand 
 nating forms, that the bondholder bought his bond originally for sixty 
 
546 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 on the dollar or less. I have one word to say on the subject : When the 
 government first negotiated its bonds we were engaged in a terrible sec 
 tional war. One party to the sectional fight had possession of the govern 
 ment. It was uncertain what the result would be. The depreciation upon 
 that bond was the result of that uncertainty. I confess myself that I was 
 on the side that was against the bondholder, and I was doing my very best, 
 honestly and conscientiously, to make the bondholder lose not only the forty 
 cents he sought to make, but the sixty cents he paid for the bond. I say 
 frankly and conscientiously I do not feel that it is becoming in me now to 
 raise a hue and cry against the bondholder because in spite of my efforts to 
 the contrary he made a good bargain out of it. If he made a good bargain 
 it is not my fault. It was a fair fight and I took the consequences. I hope 
 no Southern man will ever urge that argument. I say it with profound 
 kindness. Then, again, every day it is said that originally the bonds were pay 
 able in currency, that they were payable in lawful money. That is clearly 
 true. I believe according to the original law the bonds were payable in 
 lawful money, which meant legal-tender currency. 
 
 Now, Mr. President, while upon this subject I will say that the credit of 
 the government is as dear to me as to any man. During the war I was do 
 ing what I thought was right. When I surrendered, I surrendered honestly. 
 I belong to this government ; it is my government, and mine forever, and I 
 intend to be just as faithful in all respects to the credit of the United States 
 as I would have been to the credit of the Confederate States if they had 
 succeeded. It is my country, and I am gratified to know that no Southern 
 man upon this floor has thus far uttered a sentiment to the contrary, nor do 
 I believe one will. 
 
 But it is said these bonds were originally payable in lawful money, that 
 is, in greenbacks. I admit that to be true. You say it was a great wrong 
 to change that law. Gentlemen, let us deal with perfect fairness and candor 
 here. The law which originally authorized the bonds to be payable in law 
 ful money also authorized that lawful money to be funded in six per cent, 
 bonds. Congress afterward repealed that funding portion of the law. 
 Now, if you will insist it was right to pay the bonds in lawful money, you 
 ought to restore the funding quality of the money in which you paid it. 
 That would be a singular idea. Where would be the gain and benefit of 
 paying for a bond in lawful money, when the man who got the lawful 
 money could turn right around and demand another bond. I suppose, if 
 you will make greenbacks fundable in six per cent, bonds, there is not a 
 bondholder now but what would take them for his bonds, because it would 
 be worth a large premium, and he would go immediately and fund them in 
 six per cent, bonds. 
 
 Mr. JTernan. Greenbacks would go up then. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Yes, greenbacks would go up to gold. I do not think that 
 we ought to rail against that act of 1869, for another reason. According 
 to my recollection, in the great Presidential contest of 1868, the Democratic 
 party took the distinct ground that these bonds were payable in lawful 
 money. That is my recollection of the great Ohio position. The Republi 
 can party took the contrary position, that they ought to be paid in coin. 
 The people, I think very unwisely, decided in favor of the Republican 
 party. 
 
 Mr. Voorhees. Will the senator from Georgia allow me to correct him ? 
 In the State of Ohio and jn the State of Jndiana the Republican party toot; 
 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 547 
 
 precisely the same ground that the Democratic party did on that question 
 by resolution in their State conventions. 
 
 Mr. Hill. The position was that the bonds were payable in lawful 
 money. 
 
 Mr. Vborhees. Yes. 
 
 Mr. Hill.- -That was right. Well, I am not going to get up a division 
 in the party here now. 
 Mr. Voorhees. Oh, no. 
 
 Mr. Hill I am opposed to that ; I say that position was taken ; I know 
 it was argued in the canvass. 
 
 Mr. Butler.- -That position was taken in the national convention. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Very well. The people decided against the Democratic 
 party, and I think very unwisely. The act of 1869 was the first act ap 
 proved by General Grant, who was elected, as I understand it, in response 
 to what they considered and claimed to be the verdict of the people in that 
 election. So that if the people have authorized this act, and it is an unwise 
 act, let the people who authorized it complain. In the mean time I accept it 
 as the law of the land, without any further controversy about it. 
 
 Then, as to the act of 1870, the great purpose of the act of 1870 was simply 
 to refund our debt at a lower interest. It authorized the refunding of our 
 debt into four, four and a half, and five per cent, bonds, chiefly, I believe, 
 four per cents. Nobody, I suppose, can complain of that ; but a great hue 
 and cry has gone out to the country about the act of 1873. I am not going 
 to defend that act or any of these acts ; I am not responsible for them ; but 
 I am only speaking of what I think the proper remedy is. Senators, what 
 difference does it make ? Suppose, for the sake of the argument, that it 
 was unwise to strike silver from the coinage in 1873 suppose it was done 
 surreptitiously that does not affect the question of restoring silver now or 
 not restoring it. We must determine, not whether it was wise to strike it from 
 the coinage of 1873, but whether it is wise to restore it now. We should 
 determine this question not according to the condition of things in 1873, but 
 according to the condition of things now. Suppose it was unwise to strike 
 silver from the coinage in 1873 under the condition of things then existing, 
 still if under the condition of things as they now stand it is unwise to re 
 store it with unlimited legal-tender power, will you do an unwise act now 
 because you condemn an unwise act then ? That is bad logic and worse 
 statesmanship. Pass this bill or not, according to the present condition of 
 the country. If it is wise now to restore silver, let us restore it ; if it is 
 wise not to restore it, let us not restore it. If it is wise to restore it with 
 limited legal-tender power, restore it on terms, and let us prescribe the terms 
 and do whatever is wise and best for the country. 
 
 There is another style of argument to which I wish to express my utter 
 dissent. There are some who claim that under these laws as they exist the 
 bonds are now payable in gold alone. In my judgment that is a totally un 
 tenable position. * It is true, I admit, that you cannot pay the bonds in 
 what was not coin ; but if silver is restored to the coinage, that moment the 
 bonds are payable in silver as well as gold because the pledge in the act of 
 1869 is not to pay in gold, is not to pay in silver, but to pay in coin, and 
 both silver and gold are coin. So the act of 1870 expressly says that this 
 bond is redeemable in coin. Silver at that time was of as much value as 
 gold, and the best way for everybody to meet this question is to meet it ac 
 cording to the facts, TJaere is not a- j ud ge on earth tf ho would not bold 
 
548 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 that "coin" in the act of 1869 and the act of 1870 meant gold and silver. 
 You may by virtue of your sovereign power have a right to strike either 
 from the coinage ; but if both are coined, then the bond is payable in either, 
 and that position is the true one the correct one. 
 
 Gentlemen who are anxious for the credit of the nation do an injustice 
 when they charge bad faith upon the government simply because it stands 
 up to its contract. There is no bad faith in executing the contract. 
 
 There is another thing I wish to say which has not been said. It is said, 
 increase the weight of the silver dollar before you pay it to the bondholder. 
 Under the act of 1869 all bonds issued before that day, or which have not 
 been refunded under the act of 1870, are payable in gold or silver at what 
 ever is the standard value of silver and gold when the bond is paid. But 
 that rule does not apply to the bonds that have been issued under the act of 
 1870, because that act expressly says they shall be redeemable in coin 
 at the standard value of that day ; that is, in silver of 41 2 J grains, in gold 
 of 25.8 grains. You cannot change that act by changing your coinage law. 
 That is fixed. You may pass my friend s (Mr. Eaton s) bill to make a silver 
 dollar of 440 grains ; but the bondholder is not entitled to 440 grains. He 
 is only entitled to 41 2 J, because that was the standard value in 1870. 
 
 Though silver may fall in commercial value to 50 per cent, on the dollar, 
 still if the United States chooses to pay in that coin, she has the legal naked 
 right to pay in silver worth 50 per cent, so it contains 41 2 ^ grains. That is 
 the true construction of the contract. If silver decreases in value the bond 
 holder can only get 41 2J grains to the dollar. If silver increases in value 
 the bondholder can still get his 41 2 J grains, because that was the standard 
 value of the silver dollar in 1870. That any lawyer or any judge on earth 
 I believe will be compelled to say. 
 
 Mr. Butler. Is it wise ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. The question of wisdom is another thing ; and here I want to 
 make a remark which I wish the country to hear. There is a vast distinc- 
 
 / 
 
 tion between the right of the bondholder and the policy and credit of the 
 government. This thing of charging every man who wants to maintain 
 the credit of the government with being on the side of the bondholder is 
 not only unfair but it assumes that the people whom such speakers represent 
 are against the credit of the government. My opinion is that it is the 
 interest of all classes of this country, and of none more than the laboring 
 classes, to maintain the very highest credit for the government. 
 
 Now how are statesmen to meet this question? Here is a condition of 
 things nobody anticipated at the time the law was passed. The object of 
 the act of 1870 was to lessen the burdens of the people by funding the debt 
 at a lower rate of interest. At the time of the passage of both these acts, 
 1869 and 1870, silver was fully equal to gold, if not better. Therefore the 
 Avord " coin " was used, Avhich included both silver and gold. But there has 
 followed a condition of things which nobody had anticipated, which the 
 government did not anticipate. The increase in the production of silver, 
 the decline of the demand for [it, the natural tendency of the commercial 
 world to discard silver and adopt the gold standard, have carried silver below 
 where any of us thought it would go. Now what is to be done in this 
 situation? I trust nobody on this floor Avill cater to a desire in anybody to 
 pay the bondholders as cheap as you can, or, as the common saying is, cheat 
 them as much as you can. Deal fairly, deal justly, deal honorably. A 
 government cannot afford to be anything else than honorable and just. The 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 549 
 
 bondholder must be content with his contract if the government insists upon 
 it. The government must stand up to its contract. There is no bad faith 
 when the contract is discharged according to its terms. 
 
 Now, what will you do ? I think this is the wise course for us to pursue. 
 I suppose every gentleman will admit that under the present state of things, 
 with the development made by this discussion that has been going on now 
 for two months, there will be no more four per cent, bonds negotiated. I 
 do not suppose that any capitalist, when he learns that he is to be compelled 
 to take silver at whatever depreciation, at the option of the government, and 
 when there is such a clamor raised in the country to make him take it, will 
 ever take a 4 per cent, bond under existing law. I do not suppose any man 
 on this floor thinks he will. Now, then, what will you do? If the present 
 laws remain as they are, the result is the people must pay a high rate of 
 interest. This generation will not pay the principal. You cannot expect 
 this generation to pay the principal. I do* not think we ought to require 
 this generation to pay the principal ; but this generation must pay the in 
 terest ; and now is it not wisdom, is it not our duty to adopt such a plan 
 as if possible will procure a lower rate of interest for the people ? We are 
 told officially by the Secretary of the Treasury that if we can fund our 
 existing debt in four per cent, bonds we shall save $23,000,000 annually in 
 interest to the tax-payers. Gentlemen, you who cry relief for the people, 
 you who talk about an overburdened people, here is an opportunity to serve 
 the people, serve them really, save t them $23,000,000 annually. How will you 
 do it ? The way is plain. Do not stand here trying to bring into disrepute 
 the existing laws of the country ; do not stand here abusing the bondholders 
 and arraying class against class. Do this : remove the confusion and uncer 
 tainty which have grown up since the enactment of the present law, and say 
 to the capitalists of the world that the Secretary of the Treasury may ne 
 gotiate a new bond payable in gold if they will take the bond at four percent. 
 
 We do not expect to see silver always less than gold. If silver depreci 
 ates, we cannot govern it by arguments. We expect to make silver equal to 
 gold and our paper equal to gold. There is no harm, therefore, in making a 
 new contract with a new law. It is a matter of business ; it is a matter of 
 common sense. The capitalist is ready to exchange a bond bearing 6 per 
 cent, to avoid the dangers of silver fluctuation ; but the capitalist is not 
 willing to change that and take a low rate of interest and continue that risk 
 of fluctuation under existing laws. He may for the purpose of a safe and 
 secure investment be willing to take a four per cent, bond, if it is certainly 
 payable in gold. 
 
 Now remove the doubt. Pass laws authorizing the Secretary of 
 Treasury to enter into negotiations by which he shall refund all our debt in 
 four per cent, bonds, and make them for that reason, to secure that con 
 sideration, payable in gold. Why not ? You remove the doubt ; you take 
 the bond out of this whole question ; and if you do give him a bond payable 
 in gold you simply do it for the benefit of the people by lessening 
 interest which the people have to pay. It is not for the benefit of the bond 
 holder that I am in favor of giving this bond ; it is for the benefit of the 
 people ; it is a question of taxation. Twenty-three million dollars 
 to the people is no small matter. I do not want to cheat the government 
 I do not want to cheat the boldholder ; but I am willing to make a new 
 contract, because the value of the present one is uncertain to the credit 
 and burdensome to the people. Now let both people and bondholder 
 satisfied, come together in the spirit of honesty and candor, and let us make 
 
550 SENATOR B. ff. HTLL, Of GEORGIA. 
 
 a new contract and remove the uncertainty which the bondholder dislikes, 
 and remove, on the other hand, the burden of interest which bears so heav 
 ily on the people. That is my proposition. 
 
 Mr. President, I protest, therefore, against everything that tends to bring 
 the laws of the country into disrepute, and I protest equally against every 
 thing that attempts to claim by interpolation a benefit for anybody under 
 the law that he is not entitled to. 
 
 Mr. President, I shall conclude what I have to say. I know what I am 
 going to say in conclusion is prompted by no feeling of passion or prejudice. 
 It is prompted by nothing but an honest purpose to offer in my place in this 
 Chamber a warning to the country against evils which I think are entirely 
 probable if certain courses are continued. My friend from Connecticut, 
 (Mr. Eaton), in a speech which he made, remarkable for ability, eloquence, 
 and patriotism, rarely surpassed, uses these words : 
 
 Agrarianism and communism will riever find a foothold in the United States. Ap 
 peals against classes and sections have been heretofore and doubtless will again be made, 
 but confiding as I do in the good sense of the people they pass by me as the " idle wind, 
 which I respect not." 
 
 These are noble words, worthy of the best men in the best ages of any 
 country. Would I could feel as my honorable friend says he feels. Would 
 I could feel justified in believing there was no danger of the evils to which 
 he alludes ; but, sir, I cannot do it. We all know that the passions of a 
 people may be lashed into a fury which no power can control. 
 
 Sir, the people of the United States, we know by sad experience, have 
 been persuaded to believe that it was a religious duty to destroy by force a 
 property recognized by the Constitution. Can my honorable friend the 
 senator from Connecticut read those lines of compulsory repudiation in the 
 Constitution of the country, which he and I are sworn to support, and will 
 support, and not feel his confidence weaken ? Sir, w T hat means it when w r e 
 hear speeches, and able speeches, deliberate speeches, eloquent speeches, 
 prepared speeches, seeking to prove to the country that all the laws which 
 form the basis to-day of the credit of the government were passed by fraud, 
 bought through Congress for the purpose of making slaves of the common 
 people to a moneyed aristocracy ? Sir, those words, " pirates," " bloated 
 money-holders," "fortunate men living in ease on the labor of others," 
 "tyrants seeking to enslave the poor," these are familiar words in the 
 vocabulary of American fanaticism and demagogism, and they have had 
 their career of blood and waste and terror. For myself I stand here to re 
 joice in the recollection that on no occasion, under no circumstances, have I 
 ever taught either individuals or a people that there is any possible contin 
 gency which can justify the disregard of a solemn obligation of any kind. 
 The first sin is not the easiest committed. Tell me not that there is no 
 danger of repudiation in this country ay, no danger of agrarianism and 
 communism and crusades against property, when the country has written 
 all over it in letters of blood a chapter of history which tells of nothing but 
 a crusade against property. 
 
 Sir, there is but one patriotic course for men to pursue in the high posi 
 tions of this country. Call back, if you can, the people to an honest, renewed 
 recognition of the obligations of contracts and of covenants. Teach the 
 present generation, teach all generations that unflinching fidelity to obliga 
 tions, fidelity to constitutional obligations, and fidelity to contract obligations, 
 through all trials and at any cost, is the purest religion, the wisest states 
 manship, and the highest patriotism. 
 
SPEECH DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED 
 STATES ON THE SUBJECT OF WAR CLAIMS, JANUARY 27, 
 
 1879. 
 
 The Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, having under consideration 
 the bill (S. No. 855) for the relief of Warren Mitchell, Mr. Hill said : 
 
 Mr. President : I suppose that we had as well meet here as anywhere the 
 question made by this bill. I shall vote against it. I shall vote against it 
 because I think it ought not to pass. I am not driven to this course by 
 what is called policy, because the gentlemen on the other side are seeking 
 to make political capital out of this and like claims. I am influenced by no 
 such consideration. On the contrary, if I were influenced in this case by 
 the precedents which Republicans have set us in previous Congresses, I 
 should feel constrained to vote for the passage of this bill. I know that by 
 act of Congress the United States Government have paid some very large 
 claims for cotton seized by General Sherman at Savannah ; and if the sena 
 tor from Massachusetts (Mr. Hoar), as is implied by the question he pro 
 pounded to the senator from Kentucky (Mr. McCreery), takes the position 
 that none of the cotton seized by General Sherman at Savannah ought to be 
 paid for by the goverment, then the senator from Massachusetts takes position 
 against the payment of claims that have been allowed by the United States 
 Government and by act of Congress. But I have not investigated to see 
 which way that senator voted on the question. It would be entertaining 
 and interesting to examine and see how he did vote. One claim for cotton 
 seized at Savannah by General Sherman, amounting to over $500,000, was 
 paid by the votes of a Republican Congress w^hen the House and the Senate 
 were both, I believe, about two-thirds Republican. 
 
 Mr. Conkling. What case was that? 
 
 Mr. Hill. The case of Lamar. That was a very large claim. It cer 
 tainly had very little loyalty behind it to push it through. I suppose we 
 must conclude that that case was large enough to go through Congress by 
 its own momentum. 
 
 Mr. Dawes. Was not that a judgment of the Court of Claims ? 
 
 Mr. Hill I have no recollection that it was. It may have been passed 
 upon by the Court of Claims. I do not remember. 
 
 Mr. Dawes. I think it was. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Certainly there was nothing in that case which made it bet 
 ter than this and many others either before either that court or before Con 
 gress. I do not know how that got through. 
 
 Mr. Dawes. I do not affirm that it was, but I will inquire, 
 was. 
 
 Mr. Hill I only say to the senator from Massachusetts that whether it 
 went through one tribunal or another, I happen to know it went througl 
 under Republican auspices. I mention this simply to show that 
 think our friends on the other side should be at this late day exceedingly 
 virtuous on this subject of loyal claims. I have not made the examination. 
 Others profess to have made that examination, and they say not only 
 
 551 
 
552 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 
 
 claim, but claims amounting to 100,000,000, of like character, have been paid 
 by the Republican party during the last ten years. I do not know whether 
 they have or not ; I am not a man to delve in this kind of records ; but cer 
 tainly we do know that a very large number have been paid, amounting 
 to very large sums of money. So if I should follow precedents in this case, 
 the precedents set by gentlemen on the other side, I should feel it my duty 
 to vote for this bill. 
 
 I am willing to concede, too, that this gentleman, now asking relief at the 
 hands of the Senate, is not in the character of a great many others. He is most 
 evidently an honest man from all the evidence I have. I know him but 
 slightly personally ; but I have a great many letters from a great many per 
 sons in relation to him, and I am satisfied from all the evidence that he is 
 not only an honest man, but that he is incapable of preferring a claim before 
 this body, or any body, that he does not believe to be just and right. I be 
 lieve all that the senator from Kentucky has said on that subject is correct. 
 So I do not vote against this claim because I have any suspicion that the 
 gentleman who prefers it is any other than an honest, correct man, and that 
 he sincerely believes his claim ought to be paid. 
 
 But, Mr. President, I vote against this bill because, in my judgment, it is 
 what we call par excellence a war claim, and I am against the payment of all 
 war claims, whether they be loyal or disloyal, unless it be perhaps some few 
 exceptions in favor of religious, educational, and charitable institutions ; and 
 there are very few even of that character that I will accept. I vote against 
 their payment upon principle. I have considered this question very care 
 fully, and for a long time, and to-day is the first occasion I have expressed 
 publicly my views upon the subject, because I did not desire to express them 
 until after careful consideration of the "question. 
 
 Now, why do I vote against this claim ? It is, ^s I have said, emphati 
 cally a war claim ; that is, it is a claim for compensation by reason of losses 
 incurred during the war and by act of war. My first reason for not voting 
 for it is that we cannot pay all of this kind of claims. They would bankrupt 
 the government. It is impossible that the government should be expected 
 to pay all these claims, and claims standing on as good footing as this in 
 every respect. If we cannot pay them all, to undertake to pay some is 
 unjust to the rest ; it is an unjust discrimination ; and why should it be 
 made? 
 
 On this subject of loyalty it is a curious spectacle to witness in the Senate 
 of the United States my excellent friends on the other side who are anxious 
 to prove that this gentleman was disloyal, and therefore vote against this 
 claim, and some gentlemen on this side seem exceedingly anxious to prove 
 that he was loyal and therefore will vote for his claim. I shall not trouble 
 myself to consider that question. The question of loyalty is one that must 
 yet receive its definition in this country. It has never yet received it. The 
 word loyal" as used by gentlemen on the other side, and the word 
 loyalty " at all, in my judgment, is not a word applicable in a popular gov 
 ernment, do dislike, I confess, to hear it. What do you mean by 
 loyal "? Do you mean by " loyal " a man who was devoted to the Union 
 of the States under the Constitution ? If you thus define it, there are thou 
 sands, many thousands in the South who are and ever have been loyal in the 
 highest sense. It was an easy matter for gentlemen living in Maine and 
 New York and Massachusetts during the terrible ordeal through which we 
 passed to proclaim their devotion to the Union a very easy matter. Every- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, ANJ) WRITINGS. 553 
 
 body concurred with them. It would have required some courage for in\ 
 friend here (Mr. Allison), in Iowa, to have said that he was not for the 
 Union. And where it was such an easy matter to have professed unbounded 
 devotion to the Union, I do not think that such profession has much merit in 
 it. But further down, where the sun was warmer and the feelings were more 
 heated, it required courage, when the test was made, for a man to say that he 
 was devoted to the Union. That man is entitled to some credit, and I do 
 know that there are thousands and tens of thousands who under the most try 
 ing ordeal to which human courage was ever subjected, stood up and pro 
 claimed their fidelity to the Union to the last moment. Yes, sir, there were 
 thousands of men throughout the Southern States who were fearlessly de 
 fending the preservation of the Union, and resisting the current that was 
 against them, when hundreds and thousands who for years have been loudly 
 blatant in declaring their devotion to the Union where it was safe to do so, 
 would not have dared to open their mouths on that line. Yet these gentle 
 men up here are par excellence loyal, and those gentlemen down there, who 
 fought against secession until it became an accomplished fact and submitted 
 to disunion as they would submit to the death of a father, from necessity 
 only, and then in sorrow and sadness of heart, are denounced as disloyal be 
 cause they did what they could only do in their conscience or fact, go with 
 their own people when they were determined to go and did go these men 
 are now held up as disloyal ; and senators in this body are exerting their 
 wits and exhausting their patience and industry to find some little circum 
 stance that ma} taint somebody with disloyalty for the purpose of defeat 
 ing his rights ! As I say, this question of loyalty has yet to receive a 
 definition. It has not yet received a proper definition, and cannot be 
 properly defined until passion shall subside, and sound reason be fully re 
 stored. 
 
 I know thousands of men who were ready to give everything to prevent 
 the act of secession, who were devoted in their hearts and lives to the pres 
 ervation of the Union of these States ; who felt conscientiously bound 
 under the teachings of their lifetime and under the circumstances that sur 
 rounded them, compelled as they were necessarily, compelled conscientiously, 
 not by duress, compelled by honest convictions as the result of a policy 
 which they did not approve, to go as they did go ; and, sir, I know that 
 they were just as devoted to the Union as gentlemen who in a different 
 climate and on more convenient occasions could safely proclaim their loyalty 
 and who are now denouncing them as disloyal. It is all wrong, Mr. Presi 
 dent. 
 
 This gentleman, I dare say, was a Union man. I know thousand! 
 Union men in the South who were never guilty of an act of infidelity to 
 Confederacy and who yet never saw the hour nor the moment that^thcy 
 would not have terminated the war on the basis of honest reunion, 
 were ready at all times to do it, and their sentiments were not concealed, 
 yet they went with their section. Shall we say that this is disloyalty, and 
 that they only were loyal who desired that one section should 
 conqueror of another section of a common country ? Is that what you mean 
 by loyalty ? If you mean by loyalty devotion to the Union, desire to preserve 
 the tmon, desire even that the result of the conflict on terms honorable 
 both should be the preservation of the Union if that is the meaning o 
 loyalty, there are thousands and millions in the South who were loyal an 
 always were loyal. But if you mean by loyalty a desire that one 
 
554 SENATOR . //. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 of a common country should become the conqueror of another section, it 
 will be a fatality for this country if anybody is loyal. I am not ashamed 
 to stand up here and say that I believed the greatest possible calamity that 
 could happen to this country was for one section to become the conqueror 
 of another section of a common country ; and yet the sun has never shone 
 for an hour when in my heart of hearts the highest political ambition I ever 
 had was not to see the American Union under the Constitution preserved, 
 perpetuated, and obeyed forever. And yet, sir, there never was an hour 
 when I would not have laid down my life and my all rather than have seen 
 one section of a common country become the conqueror of another section 
 of that same common country, and I believe that the wise men of this coun 
 try will yet wake up to the fact that the greatest misfortune that has ever 
 befallen us among our many misfortunes is the fact that a successful party 
 to a sectional war obtained immediate and unchecked control of the whole 
 government over both sections. 
 
 So this talk about loyalty and disloyalty has no weight whatever with 
 me in this case. I vote against this bill from higher and different considera 
 tions altogether. I say that if the evidences of loyalty in this case are to be 
 accepted as satisfactory, and if that definition of loyalty which I believe is 
 the only proper one is to obtain, then there are thousands of men who have 
 been wronged, reduced to poverty, utter poverty, in the South, who, " in 
 times that tried men s souls," gave higher evidence of devotion to the Union 
 than has been given by equal thousands who are so ready to denounce 
 them as rebels. It is very well for gentlemen who have never been put 
 to the test, it is very well for gentlemen who have never had their courage 
 tried, very well for gentlemen who have never been where it required 
 courage to defend the right as they believed it, very well for gentlemen 
 who could get up in the North and say they were for the Union and receive 
 the undivided plaudits of every listener, very well for gentlemen of that 
 sort to talk about their devotion to the Union and their loyalty, but I tell 
 them their devotion and loyalty has never been tested. 
 
 Sir, I have seen men since I have been in the American Congress who 
 have been, on all occasions, parading their devotion to the Union and using 
 every occasion to denounce Southern men as disloyal, who, in my heart of 
 hearts I believe, if they had lived in the South, would have rivaled William 
 L. Yancey in their devotion to secession. They have the same tempera 
 ment, the same disposition, the same character of mind, and they would go 
 on whichever side was popular, whether in the North or in the South, 
 perhaps honestly so. The gentleman to whom I have alluded was honest 
 in his convictions. A gentleman of naturally extreme temperament and 
 extreme ways of thinking will take an extreme position in one climate or the 
 other. The people of this country ought to wake up to the conviction that 
 the late war was an honest war ; it was a war based upon honest differences. 
 The people of the South had been taught to believe in what was called the 
 sovereignty of the States, but the first people who talked about secession 
 were the people of New England. The North believed one way, the South 
 believed the other. The North was opposed to slavery, the South was in 
 favor of it ; but yet the South did not bring the slaves to this country. It 
 was an honest difference of opinion on the powers of government and the 
 rights of property, and each man who was faithful to his own side ought 
 to command the respect of every man on each side and on both sides. I 
 like courage that is exhibited in defense of honest convictions, whether 
 
BIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 555 
 
 those convictions be right or wrong. I do not like that courage that is 
 loudest when it is safest. Human courage, under all circumstances, is a thing 
 for human admiration. We are told in classic verse that the very gods 
 look upon it with favor, and I admit that those gallant men of the North, 
 Democrats and Republicans alike, who met and sle\\ r the Hotspur of seces 
 sion in the day of his vaunted power and strength were the right royal heirs 
 of a truly regal heroism. But these men who, thirteen years after this Hot 
 spur has been dead, are forever exhibiting their Falstaffian courage by stick 
 ing their tongue-swords in the thighs of this dead Hotspur for no purpose 
 but to claim undeserved rewards and honors from a deluded people, are not 
 entitled to the respect of either gods or men. I do not say that anybody is 
 doing it here, but this perpetual talk about loyalty and disloyalty, this per 
 petual talk about rebels is all wrong. It does not come from a magnani 
 mous spirit. Magnanimity in victory is a higher virtue than courage in bat 
 tle. It is of the very essence of Divinity itself. And why cannot the 
 American people, North and South, wake up to realize the fact that four 
 million, or eight million, if you choose to call them so, of people in the 
 South honestly differed on questions of political duty and allegiance with a 
 larger number, twenty millions or more, in the North, and unfortunately 
 went to war on the subject? The war is over ; the Union is restored ; it is 
 time that we should leave the passions of the war where I propose to leave 
 its losses behind. 
 
 But, Mr. President, I have been betrayed into saying a great deal that I 
 did not intend to say. I merely intended to give my reasons briefly why I 
 cannot vote for this or any other like bill. I will proceed to give another 
 reason. To pay some of these bills and not all of them, is not only unjust 
 in fact but unjust in its effects. Those who are not paid and are equally de 
 serving have to be taxed in order to compensate those who are paid. Now, 
 there are tens of thousands of people in the South who lost everything in 
 the war, who were devoted to the Union as far as sentiment could make 
 them devoted, and who were faithless to the Union only in obedience to 
 circumstances they could not control and a power they could not resist. 
 They lost everything. Are you to tax them in order to pay my friend from 
 Kentucky ? Why, sir, throughout the South there are thousands upon thou 
 sands of soldiers who went to the war and who lost everything- -lost their 
 arms, lost their legs, lost their health ; many of them lost their lives. They 
 can never get anything for their losses ; they will never ask anything for 
 their losses. Nobody in this hall on either side of it would pretend to pay 
 one of those men or their widows and orphans for their losses. The manned 
 Southern soldier will never come here and ask for a pension ; his widow and 
 orphans will never ask for a pension. They accept their losses as the 
 
 v . . . . , i^ J^ I "4 \j I I 1 14 11 \ VA T * V A*-*. --* *~ ^y , 
 
 not that am I to tax them for the purpose of paying these claima 
 come here and say they must be paid because they are loyal, and when my 
 loyal friends on the other side will not believe they were loyal at 
 is not right. 
 
 The fact of the business is that the war which we have had in many re 
 spects cannot be judged by the rules which have been established 
 nary wars. It was a peculiar war, a war of a sectional character, 
 war between citizens of the same country, unfortunately divided by sectional 
 
556 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 lines. You cannot repair the losses of the war. You could not do it if you 
 were to undertake to do it, and, in my judgment, the sooner our people in 
 the South are taught not to be looking here to government for the repara 
 tion of their losses, the sooner they are taught that the only means by which 
 they can repair their losses is to go to work like honest men and do it by 
 frugality and industry and time, the better it will be for them, the better it 
 will be for the country. The tens of thousands throughout the South who 
 are best entitled to pay, viewed from any standpoint, who are the most de 
 serving, who made the greatest sacrifices, who are in the most need, can 
 never get one dollar of compensation, and will never ask one dollar of com 
 pensation ; and I protest against taxing them to pay a few others who have 
 the ability to come here and worry Congress into granting them compensa 
 tion. Let the losses of the war go, and if people want to avoid losses by 
 wars in future let them be taught to avoid having wars at all. This is the 
 best way. 
 
 I think, sir, all parties ought to take this position. It is a little painful 
 to me to see gentlemen of one party seeking to make political capital out of 
 cases of this kind, and the other side protesting that it is not right. Why 
 not agree to take one common position, that these war losses cannot be 
 paid ? The government is not able to pay them ; the government ought 
 not to pay them, in view of their peculiar character and the circumstances 
 of the war, and the sooner the people are taught that, the better, and let 
 these constant irritations about the payment of war losses cease. As I said, 
 I might make a few exceptions in favor of religious, educational, or chari 
 table institutions, but I should make very few of that sort. Where the 
 property destroyed was of such a character as to be of great public im 
 portance and great public benefit, not only to one section of the country, 
 but to all sections of the country, I should think it would be legitimate and 
 proper as a public benefit to pay that kind of loss. There are, I think, per 
 haps a few cases of that kind, but put them altogether, so far as my knowl 
 edge extends, they will not exceed half a million of dollars. 
 
 Mr. President, perhaps I ought not to take the time of the Senate, but I 
 will give my idea of the character of these war claims, loyal and disloyal, by 
 an illustration from real incidents. I will give you, first, the character of a 
 claim that will not be paid, and it is a type of many millions. Early in the 
 month of September, 1865, it became necessary for me, in the discharge of a 
 professional engagement, to travel one hundred miles in the immediate track 
 of Sherman s march through Georgia. One day, about two o clock in the 
 afternoon, I became exceedingly hungry. I said to the youth who was driv 
 ing the horse : " You must stop at the first favorable opportunity and let me 
 get something to eat." I shall never forget the expression of the young 
 man. "Ah !" says he, "mister, I don t reckon you will find anything you 
 will consider fit to eat in this part of the country ; Sherman has been along 
 here." " Well," I said, " but the people in this "part of ti:e country live on 
 something, do they not?" "Oh, yes, but I don t hardly know how it is 
 they live ; they seem to live, though." " Well," I said, "I can live one day 
 on what they live on constantly, I am pretty sure, and therefore we will 
 stop at the most favorable chance apparent." It was not long before we 
 came to a very good-looking frame dwelling, two stories high, a dwelling of 
 a character very well known in the South, containing six rooms, well built, 
 and indicating in former times a country family well-to-do in the world. 
 The fencing was all gone. The chimneys were standing on the outside, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 557 
 
 showing that the outhouses had been burned, but there stood the main 
 dwelling ; and I said to the young man : "Stop here, and I will see if I can 
 get something to eat," and I went in. I was met at the door by a very 
 excellent looking lady, modest, but evidently refined and educated, as slfe 
 turned out to be a country lady of great hospitality, but with evidence of 
 poverty all around her, and she looked prematurely old. She said to me 
 when I made known my purpose of stopping, " Why, my dear sir, I would 
 be glad to give you anything if I could, but I have nothing that you will 
 have I suppose, nothing that I feel inclined to offer you." "Anything that 
 you have," I said, " will suit me, because I am exceedingly hungry." She- 
 said, " I can prepare for you nothing but some potatoes and some eggs, but I 
 have nothing in which to cook the potatoes except the embers ; we are in the 
 habit of roasting them in the ashes. I have nothing in which to cook the 
 eggs except the ashes or a broken skillet, I have not a whole piece of furni 
 ture or a whole kitchen implement on the premises ; everything is broken." 
 She handed me a seat. Said she : " I have handed you the best seat I have, 
 and the back of that is broken as you see." "Why is all this?" "Why," 
 she said, " Sherman s army passed along here and did all this." Well, I told 
 her that I would take the potatoes and eggs, and she put them in the ashes ac 
 cordingly, and while they were roasting I said to her, " Will you please 
 give me an account; of your experience and trials when Sherman s army 
 passed along here ? : She said she would. I cannot give it all to the Sen 
 ate, but certainly it was one of the most interesting narratives I ever listened 
 to in my life. 
 
 The lady was one who had married about eight years before the war be 
 gan. She was well raised and graduated at a female college in Georgia. 
 She and her husband settled at that place and built that house ; they had 
 about one thousand acres of land, thirty slaves, and all needed personality, 
 and^were entirely out of debt and perfectly happy. They had had three 
 children born to them, the oldest at the time of my visit being only twelve 
 years old. 
 
 It turned out that her husband went into the Confederate army and lost 
 his life in one of the battles in Virginia. His remains were brought home 
 and buried in sight of where we were sitting. About a year after her hus 
 band was killed in Virginia in the Confederate army, Sherman s army passed 
 through Georgia, and all her slaves except one, her cook, called Aunt Millie, 
 left. ^This Aunt Millie was raised with this lady, and had nursed her in her 
 infancy, and was given to her by her father ; and she said she would never 
 leave her under any circumstances, and she remained with her. But to make 
 a long story short, everything they had was taken. All the stock, all 
 provisions were taken away. Everything that could not be carried away 
 was killed or broken or burned, except one cow, two banks of potatoes, and 
 one small crib of corn. The cow was saved by Aunt Millie claiming 
 her own, which she did for the purpose of saving it. The corn-crib was 
 saved in this way ; the lady sat in her house with her three children and 
 everything being burned ; seeing the torch about to be applied to 
 corn-crib she summoned courage and went out with her babe in her arms 
 and her two little children by her side and said to the officer who seemed 
 have charge of the sport : "Sir, have you a family at home ? he oi 
 
 said he had a wife and two children. " What would you think said 
 " if a Southern armv should pass through your country and take 
 mouthful of bread your wife and children had? The officer was a man. 
 
558 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 He lifted his hat most gallantly and then said to his squad, "Don t fire that 
 crib," and he said to the squad in the garden, " Don t disturb further these 
 potatoes," and that is the way the lady saved the crib of corn and banks of 
 potatoes. In the mean time the squad had gone into the house, pulled down 
 all the pictures, defaced the walls, broke all the furniture, broke everything 
 she had in the shape of kitchen utensils, and carried off all her silverware 
 and cutlery. The last she saw they were pulling the covering from the 
 grave of her husband, and supposing they were going to take his body off, 
 she fainted away. But Aunt Millie stopped them by telling them " for 
 God s sake not to make war on the dead," and they left. This is a literal 
 fact. That woman had raised a patch of one acre of potatoes and one small 
 field of corn, working with her own hands and aided by this good woman 
 Aunt Millie and her three little children, and they had lived on that scant 
 allowance from the time Sherman s army passed by until I met her. 
 
 Now, that woman will never come here to have her losses repaired ; she 
 will never come here with a claim before Congress and ask for compensation. 
 And now I will give you another claim. A few weeks after I took my seat 
 as a member of the other House in the Forty-fourth Congress I received a 
 card one day by a messenger, who said that a lady desired to see me in the 
 Speaker s reception room. I went in. She was exceedingly well dressed. 
 She had velvet and diamonds and laces all over her, and the first speech she 
 made to me was to express the great gratification of all Georgians that I had 
 been elected to Congress, " for now," she said, " all Georgians will get their 
 rights." She soon made known the animus of that speech, for in the next 
 sentence she said she had a claim before Congress which she desired me to 
 support, and she knew I would support it because she was a Georgia lady, 
 born and raised in Georgia, and she knew I would support her claim. 
 "Well, who are you? If you were born and raised in Georgia and had 
 losses in Georgia, why are you here in the condition I see you ? " Oh," 
 she said, "when Sherman s army passed through Georgia they destroyed my 
 property, but," she added, " I married one of the Federal officers and came 
 North." 
 
 Mr. Hoar. She took her revenge in that way. 
 
 Mr. If ill.- -Yes, sir. She married a Federal officer. The first woman I 
 mentioned lost her husband in the Confederate armv, and therefore is dis- 
 
 * 
 
 loyal. The second woman married an officer in the Union Army, and there 
 fore is loyal ! Well, her statement was true, because she produced a very 
 complimentary and flattering letter from General Sherman. Evidently the 
 letter was genuine and not dictated by a woman. But I will saj r in justice 
 to General Sherman that I am satisfied he gave that letter more on account 
 of the woman s husband, who was a Federal officer, than on account of her 
 claim. I assume and believe he did. 
 
 But I asked this lady, " What is your claim for ? v " Why," she said, 
 for personal property destroyed by Sherman s army." "How much is 
 your claim for? "Eight hundred thousand dollars," she said, whereupon 
 I became bewildered. Eight hundred thousand dollars of personal property 
 of one person destroyed by the war ! Yes, she said, it was well proven ; 
 proven by the very officers and men who destroyed it, who set fire to it, and 
 she named quite a number of Republicans in the House who she said had 
 promised to vote for her bill ; but they had told her it was very important 
 for her to get a Democrat, and best of all a Southern Democrat, to introduce 
 it, Therefore she cain.e to. me as Democrat aM a Southern Pem.QQra.ti 
 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 559 
 
 from her own State her dear Georgia to introduce her bill. She said the 
 Republicans assured her that if she would get a little re-enforcement from 
 the South and from the Democratic party her bill would certainly become a 
 law. I said to the lady, " It will be very difficult to make me believe that 
 the whole county ever at one time had eight hundred thousand dollars 
 worth of personal property." But she said, " It is all proven, it is all right, 
 and the Republicans are ready to vote for it." I do not say they were ; I 
 can only tell you what the woman said, and as she is loyal you ought to 
 accept her as a good witness. 
 
 Seeing that her entreaties could do no good, she finally said to me that I 
 had to vote for her bill ; that she had a great many friends among the 
 newspaper men, and she sometimes wrote for the newspapers herself ; and, 
 looking at me with all the air of command and of one having authority, she 
 said, " Mr. Hill, if you don t vote for my bill you will never go to the Senate." 
 Thereupon I made the lady a bow, gave her a flat refusal to have any 
 thing to do with her or her bill, and left. 
 
 Those are specimens of the character of what you call Southern claims. 
 This first claim will never come here ; the second and cases like it will 
 always be here ; and I saw this same claim of $800,000 for the woman who 
 became loyal by marriage and for whom Republicans were ready to vote- 
 I saw the same claim paraded through the Northern press in the campaign 
 of 1876 as evidence that if the Southern Democrats ever did get here in 
 power and the Democratic party had the majority, they would take every 
 thing there was in the treasury. Now, should I vote to tax that woman 
 who fed me on the eggs and potatoes to pay this woman in velvet, laces, and 
 diamonds ? But this claim, says my friend from Kentucky, is not Mitchell s 
 claim. What is Mitchell s claim, to come to the honest truth of it ? I have 
 not an unkind feeling for Mr. Mitchell ; I admit he is a good man ; but 
 does not everybody in the Senate know that it is a speculative claim ? Is it 
 not a mere speculative claim ? The woman I spoke of in Georgia lost her 
 living, the livins: of herself and her little children, and she does not come 
 
 ^^ 
 
 here to ask you for a dollar. Here is a gentleman, a good gentleman, who 
 went, by permission of the military authorities, into the South during the 
 war and bought a large amount of cotton, by which he hoped to realize a 
 fortune, as you all know. He took the chances of the war in his specula 
 tion, and the chances were against him ? Shall we tax that woman who 
 fed me on the eggs and potatoes and tax the little land that she and her 
 children are working for the purpose of paying these speculative losses of 
 Mr. Mitchell ? Would it be right ? Would it be just? I will not do it. 
 
 All over the South there are hundreds and thousands of people, limping, 
 weak, poor, impoverished by the war, laboring as best they can for a bare 
 sustenance, asking Congress for nothing, not looking to the government for 
 compensation for their losses, and here and there is some man who has lost 
 something, who has lost some property, or failed to make what he hoped for 
 in some speculative venture, coming here and asking Congress to pay his 
 losses and that we shall tax these poor people to pay his losses. I for one 
 shall not do it. I am against these bills, therefore, upon principle, 
 not need any constitutional amendment to make me vote against them. 
 There will be a great many hard cases, I concede. War is nothing but an 
 ordeal of hard cases. I do not know of anything produced by war except 
 hard cases. You cannot repair all those hard cases. Mr. Mitchel 
 hard case, but his case is not harder than thousands of others who lost like. 
 
560 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 property or other property, and who were just as loyal as he was. You 
 cannot repair these losses. Let it go forth, therefore, that w T e take the 
 position distinctly and emphatically that this talk of paying Southern war 
 claims must end. Teach it to our people and teach it to all the people, and 
 let all this political excitement on the subject end. 
 
 Mr. President, I am the humblest man in the Democratic party. That 
 party, after eighteen years of absence, I trust and believe, is about to return, 
 full-fledged, to power. I think it will have possession of every department 
 of this government. It certainly will have it if we convince the people 
 North and South that we deserve to have it ; for evidently the people are 
 well satisfied that the Republican party does not deserve to be continued in 
 power, and the only question with the people is whether the Democratic 
 party does deserve to be intrusted with power. If I had control of the 
 party as I have not, and shall never have, if my voice were worth anything, 
 there are four things I would have the Democratic party to proclaim to the 
 world in most convincing terms and adhere to with unflinching fidelity. I 
 would have the party to say : 
 
 1. We will not pay war losses, loyal or disloyal, unless we make a few 
 exceptions of religious, educational, and charitable institutions, and very few 
 of these. 
 
 2. We will vote no more of the public money and no more of the public 
 credit and no more of the public lands to build up or enrich mammoth 
 monopolies in the shape of railroad corporations. 
 
 3. We will in good faith pay every dollar of the public debt, principal 
 and interest, in good money of the standard value. 
 
 4. We will restore the Constitution to the country and honesty and 
 economy to its administration, confining the general government to its lim 
 ited, delegated sovereign powers to promote the general welfare, and leav 
 ing the States unmolested in the exercise of their reserved sovereign powers 
 to promote the local welfare of the people. 
 
 Do these four things, and, in my judgment, the child is not born who 
 will witness the termination of Democratic administration in this country, and 
 the tongue has not been gifted with language that can express the pros 
 perity which will follow to all our people in every section of our country. 
 
SPEECH DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED 
 
 STATES, JUNE 11, 1879. 
 
 THE UNION UNDER THE CONSTITUTION KNOWS NO SECTION, BUT DOES KNOW 
 
 ALL THE STATES. 
 
 "Thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbor." 
 
 This speech was made in reply to an attack made by Senator Blaine upon Senator 
 Hill s course in the Secession Convention and as Confederate State Senator. While 
 vindicating himself, the speech goes beyond the merely personal feature involved, and 
 i- replete with beautiful sentiments and patriotic appeals for sectional harmony between 
 North and South. The speech contains a masterly argument, proving that the character 
 of our government was not changed by the results of the war. 
 
 The Senate having resumed the consideration of the bill (S. No. 621) 
 authorizing the employment of the militia and the land and naval forces of 
 the United States in certain cases, and for other purposes, Mr. Hill, of 
 Georgia, said : 
 
 Mr. President : I trespass upon the kind indulgence of the Senate a sec 
 ond time in this discussion with great reluctance. I would not trouble the 
 Senate at all but for the fact that during my absence from the Senate and 
 from the city, the senator from Maine (Mr. Blaine) saw proper to make 
 some allusions to myself that I think it is due to the Senate and to myself 
 that I should notice. 
 
 I desire to say, first of all, however, and in advance, that no senator I 
 trust will do me the injustice for one moment to imagine that I will make 
 in this Senate a personal criticism of a senator. Respect for the Senate will 
 restrain me from a retort in kind upon the senator from Maine. Strangers 
 have kindly furnished me with many documents and records for what they 
 supposed was my purpose on this occasion. I only wish to say that I have 
 given all such records to the waste-basket. 
 
 I trust as long as I have the honor of a seat on this floor I shall not for 
 get that this is the Senate of the United States*; that it is neither a bear 
 garden, nor a fish market, nor a circus show for the amusement of the 
 galleries. I shall therefore confine myself to matters entirely pertinent, 
 which have in this discussion and on one previous occasion been brought to 
 the attention of the people of the United States from the same quarter in 
 regard to myself. 
 
 On the 19th of May, the senator from Maine addressed the Senate at 
 length. I will read the portion of his remarks to which I shall 
 duty to call the attention of the Senate. He said : 
 
 Nor do I desire to misrepresent the honorable senator from Georgia- 
 Very significant, indeed 
 
 who I regret is not in his seat. But the honorable senator from Georgia the other day 
 made a speech that was somewhat remarkable. Among <>th<T thing he depi 
 overwhelming grief he had at the secession of the Southern States ; and when he *J 
 Hlled upon by the independent voters of the County of Troup to represent 
 Secession Convention he wrote this letter to them, as he says : 
 
 561 
 
562 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 I will consent to the dissolution of the Union as I would consent to the death of my 
 father, never from choice, only from necessity, and then in sorrow and sadness of 
 heart." 
 
 Well, he was elected on that platform, and he went to the convention, and the con 
 vention, as we all know, passed the ordinance of secession. And in the evening of Janu 
 ary 19, 1861, he writes to a friend a letter which he quotes himself : 
 
 Dear Sir : The deed is done. Georgia this day left the Union. Cannon have been 
 firing and bells tolling. At this moment people are filling the streets shouting vocifer 
 ously. A large torchlight procession is moving from house to house and calling out 
 speakers. The resolutions declaratory passed on yesterday, and similar scenes were en 
 acted last night. The crowd called loudly for me, but my room was dark, my heart was 
 sad, and my tongue was silent. Whoever may be in fault is not now the question. 
 Whether by the North or by the South, or by both, the fact remains : our Union has 
 fallen. The most favored sons of freedom have written a page in history which despots 
 will read to listening subjects for centuries to come to prove that the people are not 
 capable of self-government. How can I think thus and feel otherwise than badly ? " 
 
 These are very just sentiments ; and now I want to read the wonderful declaration of 
 the ordinance of Georgia which the senator from Georgia would consent to have enacted 
 as he would consent to the death of his father, and that so pierced his heart with sadness 
 when it was accomplished. I want to read it, and my friend from Connecticut will ob 
 serve its language, as he boasted the other day that Connecticut was a free and inde 
 pendent State." 
 
 Mr. Eaton. I did not boast. I said that was the oath that Connecticut voters had to 
 take. 
 
 Mr. Elaine. Here is the "ordinance to dissolve the union between the State of 
 Georgia and other States united with her under a compact of government entitled the 
 Constitution of the United States." This is the original journal of the Georgia conven 
 tion. It is a rare book. The literature of that section from some cause is very hard to 
 procure. 
 
 We, the people of the State of Georgia, in convention assembled, do declare and ordain, 
 and it is hereby declared and ordained, 
 
 That the ordinance adopted by the people of the State of Georgia in convention on 
 the 2d day of January, in the year of our Lord 1788, whereby the Constitution of the 
 United States of America was assented to, ratified, and adopted ; and also all acts and 
 parts of acts by the General Assembly of this State, ratifying and adopting amendments 
 of the said Constitution, are hereby repealed, rescinded, and abrogated. 
 
 " We do further declare and ordain, That the union now subsisting between the State 
 of Georgia and other States, under the name of the United States of America/ is hereby 
 dissolved, and that the State of Georgia is in the full possession and exercise of all those 
 rights of sovereignty which belong and appertain to &free and independent State." 
 
 That was the ordinance which the senator from Georgia said to the people of Troup 
 he would consent to as he would to the death of his father, and the ordinance which the 
 evening after it was passed so filled his heart with sadness that he put out the lights in 
 his room and would not make a speech to a crowd outside serenading him. I have read 
 the yeas and nays on that, and what is my unbounded surprise to find that the senator 
 from Georgia himself voted for the ordinance. Here he is, " Hill of Troup." I believe 
 I am right in saying that he is the man. There were two or three Hills, all voting for it, 
 but "Hill of Troup " voted for it, and he cannot say in defense of that vote that he did it 
 because there was one of those tempestuous and tumultuous rushes of public opinion 
 which bear everything before it and w y hich no man could resist. We know what that is. 
 It sometimes assumes such positive and portentous force as to have mob-like violence. 
 That was not so in this convention. On the call of the yeas and nays there were 208 in 
 favor of the ordinance of secession and 89 against it, and in the 89 were Alexander H. 
 Stephens and Herschel V. Johnson, who had that very year run for Vice-President on 
 the Douglass ticket. The senator from Georgia (Mr. Hill) who would consent to it just 
 as he would to the death of his father, made up his mind that if two hundred and eight 
 men wanted to murder the old man he would join with them. (Great laughter and ap 
 plause.) Rather than be in a minority, he would join the murderous crowd (laughter) 
 and be a parricide. 
 
 Now, I have read that whole extract from the speech of the senator from 
 Maine, including the great laughter and tlie applause. Mr. President, I shall 
 never dp the unparliamentary thing of attacking the motives of senators on 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 563 
 
 this floor. But I have this to say, that if the senator from Maine intended 
 by the manner in which he has presented these facts to represent that in the 
 convention of Georgia on the test question as to whether Georgia should or 
 should not secede I voted for secession, he stated that which the documents 
 which he professed to have in his hand taught him was not true. If he said 
 that in giving the vote in this particular form at the time and manner in 
 which it was given there was any intention on my part to express an ap 
 proval of secession, he said that which the record he held in his hand most 
 abundantly showed was not correct. 
 
 If the honorable senator simply intended and desired to get off some 
 smart things for the amusement of the galleries, and found it necessary to 
 fix up his facts in a manner to suit his purpose rather than the truth of the 
 case, I should judge from the loud applause and laughter that he had some 
 success. 
 
 It cannot be a very material question to this Senate or to this country 
 whether I have on any particular question been consistent or inconsistent, for 
 whether I have been consistent or inconsistent cannot illustrate any point in 
 discussion, and I shall never allude to any record of a senator unless it 
 throws light upon some question involved in discussion. Even if I had been 
 inconsistent, it is remarkable that the people whom I represented in the con 
 vention never discovered that inconsistency, for from that day to this there 
 lias not been an hour when I have not enjoyed the undivided absolute confi 
 dence of the people of that county. So it is impossible that there should 
 have been an inconsistency in their estimation, certainly not an inconsistency 
 which would involve an abandonment of the pledges given them in the 
 canvass. 
 
 But, sir, as the senator has seen proper to introduce this question, I 
 deem it proper to give the facts, and I premise the facts with one statement 
 which is historical in its character, and which, perhaps, everybody ought to 
 know ; and that is, that not only in Georgia but in the Southern States gen 
 erally during the contest over the question as to whether the States should 
 or should not secede, while there was great division on the main question, 
 and while there was earnest, and sometimes even bitter debate between the 
 advocates and opponents of secession, it was universally conceded that if the 
 State should determine to secede, when that declared will should be ascer 
 tained, it was the duty of all her citizens to support her act ; and two reasons 
 were given for that. The first was that to oppose the will of the State, after 
 that will had been officially ascertained and declared, could have but one 
 result in our own midst, and that was a civil war in the State, which we 
 determined, at all hazards, to avoid ; for whether, as some said, the States 
 seceded by virtue of a Constitutional right, or whether, as others contended, 
 secession could be nothing more than a revolutionary right and a revolu 
 tionary act, still when the State took the act, declared her solemn will in 
 solemn convention, it mattered not upon what principle the act was put, there 
 was but one result, and that was for her own citizens to sustain the State ; 
 otherwise we should have had civil war at our doors. 
 
 Then, again, there was another reason. We believed that if the Northern 
 people should see that after the will of the State was declared there was 
 unanimity in its support among all her people, it would have a happy moral 
 effect to avert the catastrophe of a sectional war, for it was generally charged 
 through the country that the secession movement was simply a factious 
 movement. \Vhether that were true or false, if the Northern pe 
 
564 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 should wake up to the fact that the whole people of the South sustained 
 it after it was adopted, we hoped it would have a happy effect to bring 
 the people everywhere to their senses and would result in averting a war ; 
 and those of us who sedulously and earnestly opposed secession firmly believed 
 that if war could only be averted for a few months, the whole movement 
 of secession would fail. I state as a fact known to myself that those of us 
 who were prominent in opposing the movement in the Gulf and South 
 Atlantic States were in constant communication with the leaders of what 
 were known as the Southern Border States ; and at that very moment we 
 were expecting that a movement would be made for a peace conference, by 
 which we hoped that all differences between the sections would be adjusted 
 and the bitter ordeal of a sectional war would thereby be averted. 
 
 In this state of things and with these feelings the Georgia convention 
 met at Milledgeville on the 16th of January, 1861. I have the journal of 
 that convention in my hand. There were nearly three hundred delegates, 
 two hundred and ninety-seven at least voting ; the largest vote, I believe, 
 polled in that convention. Two days were consumed in organizing the con 
 vention, agreeing upon the rules of proceeding, etc. On the third day of the 
 convention, to wit, on the 18th of January, the real question came up, and a 
 programme was distinctly agreed upon by all parties ; for while the parties 
 were in earnest, yet I must say I never met more honorable adversaries. 
 Nothing was concealed, nothing was attempted that was unfair, no advantage 
 was sought to be taken. It was agreed that Judge Kisbet should bring 
 forward the test resolution in favor of secession and Ex-Governor Herschel 
 V. Johnson should offer for that the substitute agreed upon by the oppo 
 nents of the resolution for secession ; and we put that substitute in the 
 strongest form possible, by simply providing that the question whether the 
 State should secede or not should be postponed until after an effort should 
 be made to secure a convention of the Southern States for the purpose of 
 acting and consulting together upon the subject, we believing that by the 
 time that the convention could assemble the peace conference of the States 
 generally, which was called on that very day by the State of Virginia, should 
 also assemble, and thus the evil might be averted. So the two parties then 
 before the convention were what was known as the party of immediate 
 Secessionists, unconditional and absolute, and the party in favor of post 
 poning decisive action until there could be a co-operation and a consultation 
 on the part of the different States involved. Therefore, on the 18th of 
 January, 1861 I now read from the journal : 
 
 The doors were then closed, when Mr. Nisbet offered the following resolutions, which 
 were taken up and read : 
 
 " Resolved, That in the opinion of this convention, it is the right and duty[of Georgia to 
 secede from the present Union, and to co-operate with such of the other States as have or 
 shall do the same, for the purpose of forming a Southern Confederacy upon the basis of 
 the Constitution of the United States. 
 
 "Resolved, That a committee of be appointed by the Chair to report an ordinance 
 
 to assert the right and fulfill the obligation of the State of Georgia to secede from the 
 Union." 
 
 He then moved to take up the first resolution. 
 
 Whereupon Mr. Johnson, of Jefferson, offered the following preamble and ordinance 
 as a substitute for Mr. Nisbet s, and moved the reference of both to a committee of \ 
 twenty-one. 
 
 The substitute thus offered by Governor Johnson was the one to which I 
 have alluded, on which the opponents of immediate secession had all agreed 
 as in our opinion the strongest ground upon which we could stand with hope 
 
LIFE, SPKECtiKS, AND WRITINGS, 565 
 
 of success. It is long and I will not trouble the Senate to read it, but it is 
 precisely of the character I have stated. 
 
 Now the issue was distinctly joined. Here was the resolution of Jud 
 Nisbet declaring it the right and duty of the State of Georgia to secede 
 from the Jnion. Here was the substitute offered by Governor Johnson 
 postponing that act, and proposing to call a convention of the Southern 
 States for the purpose of consulting on the subject. Upon that issue thus 
 joined the debate sprang up, and the whole question was decided The verv 
 journal which the senator from Maine had in his hand informed him if he 
 read it, that : 
 
 After an elaborate discussion, in which Messrs. Nisbet, Johnson of Jefferson Cobb 
 Stephens of Taliaferro, Toornbs, Means, Reese, Hill of Troup, and Bartow participated 
 a call was made for the " previous question," which, being sustained under the rulino- of 
 the Chair, cut off the motion to commit and a vote on the substitute, and brought^the 
 convention to a direct vote on the first of the original resolutions of Mr. Nisbet Where 
 upon the yeas and nays were demanded ; which, being called, resulted as follows (the 
 president voting in the affirmative) yeas 166, nays 130. 
 
 This journal informed the senator that this resolution, offered by Mr. 
 Nisbet, declaring it the right and duty of the State to secede was the resolu 
 tion upon which the discussion was had. It was to test the sense of the con 
 vention, and upon that resolution the whole test was had and the actual test 
 was made, and I had the honor of closing the debate in opposition to that 
 resolution. While, doubtless, all who opposed that resolution made abler 
 speeches than I could have made, yet I presume there was no member of that 
 convention, and no person who heard it, who would not concede that there 
 was certainly no speech more earnest in opposition. That vote was taken, 
 and my vote was recorded in the negative against the adoption of the reso 
 lution. But that resolution was adopted. 
 
 Mr. Nisbet moved to fill the blank in the second resolution. 
 
 Which was, as I have read to you, a resolution appointing a committee 
 to bring in an ordinance to carry out the resolution declaratory, to which I 
 have referred. That was all, and that was the only purpose of the ordinance. 
 It was simply, as all lawyers understand, a mere pro forma entering of the 
 judgment after the verdict had been rendered ; and as evidence of that this 
 record shows that Judge Nisbet moved to fill the blank in thesecond resolu 
 tion with the number seventeen, instructed not requested, not authorized- 
 but instructed to bring in an ordinance to assert and fulfill the obligation of 
 the resolution. On that committee there were seventeen gentlemen, nine of 
 whom had voted for Mr. Nisbet s resolution, eight of whom, myself among 
 them, had voted against it ; and as the journal shows that the ordinance 
 thus referred to a committee of seventeen, eight of whom had voted against 
 secession, was unanimouly reported. There was no dissent whatever. Why ? 
 It simply reported that that ordinance was a proper form of judgment to 
 carry out what the body declared it was its duty to do. At this point, when 
 this ordinance was reported, a discussion, very slight in its character, arose ; an 
 interchange of views rather between those of us who opposed secession, as to 
 whether the time had come to cease resistance. There was a general con 
 currence of views that it had, and some thought it best to express that con 
 currence by simply voting for the ordinance ; others thought it would be 
 better perhaps to vote against the ordinance and afterward sign it. Every 
 senator will see that whether a man voted for it or signed it could make no 
 difference, because neither the voting for it nor the signing it was a test 
 
566 SENATOR B. R HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 question. That question had been settled, after earnest and elaborate d 
 by positive resolution. 
 
 I was unwilling myself, however, to yield until another effort was made, 
 as the journal shows. I was dissatisfied, because I thought it was not 
 exactly fair that the previous question should have been called upon the 
 adoption of Mr. Nisbet s resolution after the discussion was had, when the 
 only effect of calling it was to cut off a direct vote upon the substitute 
 offered by Governor Johnson. I was exceedingly anxious to get a direct, 
 square vote upon that substitute, and therefore I insisted on it, as the jour 
 nal shows. That ordinance was reported on the 19th of January. 
 
 Mr. Nisbet, from the committee appointed to report an ordinance to assert the right 
 and fulfill the obligation of the State of Georgia to secede from the Union, reported the 
 following ordinance : 
 
 
 
 The report was taken up, and, on motion of Mr. Toombs, the ordinance was twice 
 read. 
 
 Mr. Hill, of Troup, moved that the preamble and resolutions offered by Mr. Johnson, 
 of Jefferson, on yesterday, as a substitute for the resolutions adopted by* the convention 
 raising the committee to report an ordinance to assert the right and fulfill the obligation 
 of the State of Georgia to secede from the Union, be received as a substitute for the same. 
 
 That is, I moved that the substitute offered by Governor Johnson to Mr. 
 Nisbet s resolution, and a vote upon which had been cut off by the call of 
 the previous question, be now made a substitute for the ordinance, and upon 
 that the yeas and nays were called, and I need not look at the journal, for I 
 am perfectly familiar with it. The yeas were 133 in favor of my motion to 
 164 against. That was the strongest vote we ever obtained in the conven 
 tion against secession. On the first vote the resolution was adopted by 36 
 majority, the yeas being 166 and the nays 130 ; on my motion of a substi 
 tute for the ordinance the yeas were 133 and the nays 164, being 31 
 majority. 
 
 Now, every man here sees and every man in the State itself saw what is 
 true, that the convention by a most solemn resolution declared that it was 
 the duty of the State to secede ; a committee had been appointed to report 
 an ordinance to carry out that resolution ; that ordinance had been reported 
 unanimously ; a substitute for that ordinance had been voted down ; so the 
 matter was closed. The only question then was when would you signify 
 your intention to abide the action of the State, whether it received your 
 approval or disapproval. It fell to my lot to make the last speech against 
 the resolution declaring it the duty of the State to secede. It fell to my 
 lot to make the last motion to postpone the execution of that resolution, 
 making the very last motion in the convention ; and when nothing else 
 could be done, it was agreed among ourselves that every man should vote 
 as he pleased ; some voted for the ordinance, one-third simply saying, " The 
 matter is closed ; it is impossible to reconsider ; the convention has refused 
 to accept anything in the way of a substitute ; has refused to postpone the 
 matter." One-third of us, therefore, voted for the ordinance as the proper 
 form to carry out the resolution. The other two-thirds voted against it, 
 but all signed it. I see the journal does not state that any did not sign it 
 at all. I have a recollection, I may be mistaken in that, that some three or 
 four gentlemen did refuse to sign, but I am not sure that I am correct in 
 that. Certainly, all but three or four signed the ordinance because it was 
 nothing in the world but a method of testing our readiness to abide the will 
 of our State, thus solemnly expressed. That was all there was in it. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WAITINGS. 567 
 
 Mr. President, these are the facts. If the senator from Maine had stated 
 all these facts just as they occurred, and had he chosen to express his opin 
 ion that my vote was inconsistent with my views upon the subject of seces 
 sion, I should have cared nothing for it. As to whether I was or was not 
 consistent, the opinion of the senator from Maine is a matter of utter indif 
 ference to me. That was a question which I had to answer to my constitu 
 ents, with which my constituents were entirely satisfied, and have been 
 satisfied to this day. But, sir, the senator from Maine, for some purpose of 
 his own, chose to suppress facts which did exist ; he chose to suggest facts 
 which did not exist ; and upon this double misrepresentation of the facts lie 
 chose to employ his wit and his smartness ; and all when lie knew I was 
 seven hundred miles away. I make that simple statement, and leave the 
 senator to the judgment of honest men and honorable debaters without 
 comment. 
 
 There is one other statement made by the senator which I will notice, 
 which I almost feel like apologizing to the Senate for noticing, and my only 
 object in noticing it is that it furnishes a very fair specimen of that gentle 
 man s style of representing his adversary in debate : 
 
 The honorable senator from Georgia made the astonishing assurance that this Union 
 had been saved by the Northern Democrats ; they were the men that did it. It was the 
 Northern Democrats. Why, in Connecticut it was not William A. Buckingham or 
 Joseph R. Hawley that helped save the Union. The honorable senator from Connecticut 
 did it. It was not in New York William H. Seward that did anything for the Union ; 
 it was Governor Seymour. Out in Ohio it was not Salmon P. Chase that helped along 
 the Union cause, but it was Clement L. Vallandigham. 
 
 Mr. President, will any man who loves accuracy or has respect for 
 accuracy take the remarks I made on the occasion alluded to, and see if 
 those remarks justify that senator in saying that I intimated that the 
 Republicans did not* help save the Union and that Mr. Seward, of New 
 York, did nothing to save the Union ; and if I made no such statement, 
 what is to be accomplished by such a representation ? Is it to improve 
 the dignity, elevate the character of the Senate, or is it to enlighten the 
 people ? Now just see what I did say on that subject. The senator refers 
 to one paragraph only. Let me read two others, though it is not necessary, 
 I am sure, to the audience who heard the remarks. 
 
 Here is what I said in that same speech : 
 
 All good Union men at the North, by reason of the condition of things, being com 
 pelled to go into the Federal Army as others in the South of a like character who had no 
 sympathy with secession were compelled to go into secession, it was by the aid of the 
 democracy of the North, of the conservative men of the North who did not agree to 
 absolute nationalism, who did not agree to the doctrine of consolidation, who did not 
 agree to the absolute theory of a national government in the Federal head it was by the 
 "id of these Democrats and conservative men that the Federal armies were enabled to 
 triumph and crush out secession. A united North overpowered a divided South. 
 
 Is not that a fair statement, and is that a fair representation to the coun 
 try of my position on that subject which the senator from Maine made. 
 But, again, hear what I further said in a few sentences preceding what 
 senator from Maine read : 
 
 Now, we have tried sectionalism and we have abandoned it, and therefore we cannot 
 consistentlv affiliate with the Republican party. We are for national parties now. 
 come back to the grand old party of the North that never went off 
 never went after the Baals of consolidation. If there are any men on this earth for w 
 I have a higher regard than others, they are the Democrats of the !North. 
 
568 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 of us at the South who were for the Union went through a trying ordeal, and none can 
 ever know how trying it was except those who passed through it ; but it seems to me the 
 Northern Democrats who were so maligned and abused by the Republicans went through 
 a greater, for when the crisis came they that had no sympathy with the objects or pur 
 poses of the Republican party shouldered their arms and marched side by side with the 
 Republicans of the North to put down their real friends in the South, and they did it. 
 And yet, notwithstanding their fidelity to the Union, notwithstanding so many hundreds 
 of thousands of Democrats periled their all in the war, you abuse, you malign them, you 
 give them no credit for it. And why do we affiliate with them? Because when we 
 grounded our arms they met us as brethern and not as enemies. 
 
 How did I represent, and how is any senator who has any regard for 
 accuracy in debate justified in stating that I represented, that the Demo 
 crats alone saved the Union and that the Republicans did nothing even to 
 help in that work ? Where is anything to justify such an interpretation ? 
 Sir, is it not true ? A stranger from any other country coming into these 
 halls would never suspect that it was true if he listened only to that side. 
 He would conclude that every Democrat in the North refused to co-operate 
 in the war and perhaps were what the gentleman is pleased to term rebel. 
 He would conclude in listening to the views of gentlemen on that side of the 
 Chamber that nobody went to battle^but Republicans. 
 
 Sir, take the muster-rolls of your armies at Antietam, at Gettysburg, and 
 Appomattox, everywhere take the muster-rolls of the Federal armies and strike 
 from them the Democrats who were there, and will any sane man say that 
 the war against secession would have been successful ? Does any man believe 
 it ? Then, why is it that when I represent on this floor that without the aid 
 of Northern Democrats the war against secession never would have been 
 successful, and that therefore all the credit of putting down what you call 
 the rebellion is not due to the Republican party ; why is it that gentlemen 
 on that side take offense? Nay, more ; is it fair, senators without mean 
 ing to be offensive is it honorable for you to abuse and malign and detract 
 from the merits of the Northern democracy when you know that without 
 their co-operation the war on the part of the Federal Government would 
 have been an utter failure ? Give all credit. There were many Repub 
 licans, hundreds of thousands of them, that acted bravely and nobly. But 
 in the Confederate army it was a common report and believed that the best 
 fighters, certainly as good fighters as any in the Federal Army, were the 
 Democrats. And yet gentlemen ridicule them ! 
 
 Mr. President, I have another duty to perform which I take some plea 
 sure in performing, and yet feel some pain in performing, for it is always 
 painful to have to refer to myself. I do not know why it is, but there seems 
 to be a persistent effort on the part of the Republican party of the North, 
 encouraged, I am sorry to say, by some senators here, to present me to the 
 Northern people as a cruel, brutal man, bloodthirsty, willing to kill every 
 body, and that I had made an especial record of that sort during the war. 
 Soon after my first appearance in Congress, the senator from Maine deemed 
 it proper to make a bitter assault upon the character of the people of the 
 South in relation to the prisoners held by them during the war. Familiar 
 with the facts as I was, and knowing that the representations made by the 
 senator from Maine were utterly untrue, I deemed it my duty to reply and 
 state the facts from the records and official letters of the Federal Govern 
 ment itself. In the midst of that discussion the senator from Maine inter 
 rupted me interrupted me with a question that had no relevancy whatever 
 to the subject under discussion, and I will now detain the Senate by reading 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 
 
 what then occurred, because I wish to get everything upon this subject fairly 
 and fully before the Senate. I read from the Congressional Record of Janu 
 ary 11, 1876: 
 
 Mr. Elaine. I believe the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Hill) was a member of the 
 Confederate Senate. I find in a historical book of some authenticity of character that in 
 the Confederate Congress Senator Hill, of Georgia, introduced the following resolution, 
 relating to prisoners. 
 
 Mr. Hill. You are putting me on trial now, are you ? Go ahead. 
 
 Mr. Elaine. This is the resolution : 
 
 " That every person pretending to be a soldier or officer of the United States who shall 
 be captured on the soil of the Confederate States after the 1st day of January, 1863, shall 
 be presumed to have entered the territory of the Confederate States with the intent to in 
 cite insurrection and abet murder ; and, unless satisfactory proof be adduced to the con 
 trary before the military court before which the trial shall be had, shall suffer death. This 
 section shall continue in force until the proclamation issued by Abraham Lincoln, dated 
 at Washington on the 22d day of September, 1862, shall be rescinded, and the policy 
 therein announced shall be abandoned, and no longer." 
 
 I take pleasure in reading this for one reason. I have made it a rule all 
 my life to state, when I speak, what I believe to be exactly the truth. 
 Even though one may appear sometimes at a little disadvantage by stating 
 the truth, it is the best rule, after all, to adhere under all circumstances 
 exactly to the truth. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I will say to the gentleman from Maine very frankly that I have not the 
 slightest recollection of ever hearing that resolution before. 
 
 Mr. Elaine. The gentleman does not deny, however, that he was the author of it. 
 
 Think of a man asking another if he denied that he was the author of a 
 
 fj 
 
 resolution which he had frankly said he had no recollection of ever having 
 heard of before ! 
 
 Mr. Hill. I do not know. My own impression is that I was not the author ; but I do 
 not pretend to recollect the circumstances. If the gentleman can give me the circum 
 stances under which the resolution was introduced, they might recall the matter to my 
 mind. 
 
 Mr. Elaine. Allow me to read further : 
 
 "October 1, 1862. The judiciary committee of the Confederate Congress made a 
 report and offered a set of resolutions upon the subject of President Lincoln s proclama 
 tion, from which the following are extracts : 
 
 " 2. Every white person who shall act as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer 
 commanding negroes or mulattoes against the Confederate States, or who shall arm, 
 organize, train, or prepare negroes or mulattoes for military service, or aid them in any 
 military enterprise against the Confederate States, shall, if captured, suffer death. 
 
 "3. Every commissioned or non-commissioned officer of the enemy who shall incite 
 slaves to rebellion, or pretend to give them freedom under the aforementioned act of Con 
 gress and proclamation, by abducting or causing them to be abducted or inducing them 
 to abscond, shall, if captured, suffer "death." 
 
 Thereupon Senator Hill, of Georgia, is recorded as having offered the resolution I have 
 read. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I was chairman of the judiciary committee of the Senate. 
 
 Mr. Elaine. And this resolution came directly from that committee ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. It is very probable, that like the chairman of the committee on the rules at 
 the last session, I may have consented to the report. 
 
 Mr. Blaine.The gentleman then admits that he did make that report ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I really do not remember it. I think it very likely. 
 
 A Member (to Mr. Elaine). What is the book ? 
 
 gentlem 
 resolution. 
 
 Mr. Hill I say to the gentleman frankly that I really do not remember. 
 
570 SENATOR B. iff. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Mr. Elaine. The gentleman does not say he was not the author. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I do not. I will say this : I think I was not the author. Possibly I reported 
 the resolution. It refers in terms to " pretended," not real soldiers. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. I thought that inasmuch as the gentleman s line of argument was to show 
 the character of the Confederate policy, this might aid him a little in calling up the facts 
 pertinent thereto. 
 
 Mr. Hill. With all due deference to the gentleman, I reply he did not think any such 
 thing. He thought he would divert me from the purpose of my argument and break its 
 force by 
 
 Mr. Blaine. Oh, no. 
 
 Mr. Hill. He thought he would get up a discussion about certain measures presented 
 in the Confederate Congress having no relation to the subject now under discussion, but 
 which grew out of the peculiar relation of the Southern States to a population then in ser 
 vitude a population which the Confederate Government feared might be incited to insur 
 rection and measures were doubtless proposed which the Confederate Government may 
 have thought it proper to take to protect helpless women and children in the South from 
 insurrection. But I shall not allow myself to be diverted by the gentleman to go either into 
 the history of slavery or of domestic insurrection, or, as a friend near me suggests, " John 
 Brown s raid." I know this, that if I or any gentleman on the committee was the author 
 of that resolution, which I think more than probable, our purpose was not to do injustice 
 to any man, woman, or child North or South, but to adopt what we deemed stringent 
 measures, within the laws of war, to protect our wives and children from servile insurrec 
 tion and slaughter while our brave sons were in the front. That is all, sir. 
 
 I called at the library some time after this discussion occurred for the 
 purpose of getting the book to which the senator from Maine, then the gentle 
 man from Maine, referred. It was not in the library ; had not been, I sup 
 pose, returned by the gentleman ; at least it was not in ; so the librarian told 
 me. I let the question, therefore, pass from my mind, being indifferent about 
 these personal matters and really having no recollection whatever of the res 
 olution referred to. Some time later I went to the library again, indeed but 
 a short time since, and found the book to which the gentleman alluded, and 
 from which he quoted ; and I find that the gentleman from Maine quoted cor 
 rectly what appears in this book, except that he left out one remark which, I 
 think, he ought to have stated, but which, I frankly confess, if he had stated 
 might not have refreshed % my mind, as it did not when I saw this book. The 
 gentleman left out the following remark of the author, following immediately 
 upon what he quoted : 
 
 The Confederate Congress finally left the subject to President Davis. A general ex 
 change of prisoners under the recognized rules of war was soon after effected and the 
 war progressed without the black flag of the democracy of the South, save at Fort Pillow i 
 and a few other places. 
 
 If that portion had been read it possibly, though I doubt it, might have 
 showed me that the subjects to which the resolution or the pretended res 
 olution referred, related to retaliatory measures that were proposed in the 
 Confederate Congress on a certain contingency ; but I must confess that 
 after reading this book I was unable even to suppose what the truth was ; 
 my recollection was still an utter blank. But I read in this book other facts 
 which very thoroughly convinced me that a more untruthful and unreliable 
 book was never written. In my opinion it would be impossible for human 
 ignorance and human malice combined to get up a more inveterate calumny 
 against any people than this book has contrived to get up against the South 
 ern people. It is utterly untrue. 
 
 But, sir, I have been more fortunate, and almost by accident. I hav( 
 found in " Appleton s Annual Cyclopaedia," for 1862, quite a full reference 
 to this whole subject, and the reference at least is ample to bring the whol< 
 subject to my recollection, and it will be seen now why I was utterly unabl< 
 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 571 
 
 to recollect the facts when quoted by the senator from Maine and when re 
 peated in this book by R. Guy McClellan. The facts as quoted and the facts 
 as repeated are utterly untrue, and form a miserable perversion that ought to 
 destroy the reputation of any one who voluntarily made such a statement. 
 Of course I presume that the senator from Maine, in that transaction, relied 
 solely upon the book from which he read, but he seemed to be rather anxious 
 to give it the character of a book of good reputation and authenticity. 
 
 Now, sir, I want the attention of the Senate a moment. It appears from 
 the facts as they are given in Appleton s Cyclopedia, under the head of 
 "Confederate Congress," of " Prisoners of War," and "Public Documents," 
 wherein the entire correspondence is given, that the following state of facts 
 vxisted. which immediately brought up not the resolution but certain 
 proposed action by the Senate of the Confederate States. Everybody will re 
 member that soon after the beginning of the war one of the most serious differ 
 ences between the belligerents was as to whether the Federal Government 
 would recognize the Confederate Government as a belligerent. There was 
 
 ^j ^j 
 
 much feeling upon that subject. The Federal authorities refused for a long 
 time to do so. You remember the capture of our privateersmen, some 
 eighty-five or one hundred in number, who were imprisoned and condemned 
 to be treated as traitors. Their execution was prevented, because in the 
 mean time the Confederate Government had also made captures and selected 
 hostages to be executed in case those privateersmen were executed. Quite a 
 correspondence grew up upon that. Prisoners were captured on both sides 
 during the spring of 1862, sometimes more on one side, sometimes more on 
 the other, and quite a correspondence was had during that whole year for the 
 purpose of getting up a cartel for the exchange of prisoners. There was only 
 partial success. In the mean time a bitter state of feeling was growing up 
 on both sides. Any gentleman can see what that feeling was by reading 
 the preamble to the act reported by the majority of the judiciary committee 
 at the time alluded to. 
 
 It was charged that persons under the guise of Federal soldiers were en 
 deavoring to incite insurrection in the Southern States, were capturing un 
 armed citizens ; that men were insulting women, were burning houses, and 
 committing a great many acts of that sort at a time when the Federal 
 Government refused to recognize the Confederate Government as a belliger 
 ent power. There were also some notable instances of alleged cruelty and 
 brutality at various places. 
 
 In the midst of this correspondence, and before the question had been set 
 tied, Mr. Lincoln issued his proclamation, in September, 1862, announcing the 
 
 I \o I f" 
 
 and to murder the women and children and old men while thevoiuiLr 
 were absent in the army. It created a great deal of feeling, 
 cannot appreciate the feeling it did create. The Confederate i mel 
 
 in August, 1862. It is proper for me to state that I did not believe 
 Lincoln had any such purpose in issuing his emancipation proclamation, and 
 I so openly and publicly avowed. I did not believe that Mr. Lincoln desire< 
 to incite insurrection among the slaves of the South or desired that 1 
 treatment should be visited upon the unarmed citizens of the 
 States, and I believed further that if he did so intend it would prove an 
 brutwnfulmen, and would fail. I believed, on the contrary, Mr. Line 
 
5*72 8KNATOR R H. ttTLL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 purpose in issuing that proclamation was political and for a Northern purpose. 
 That was my opinion. 
 
 In this condition of things the matter was brought by a resolution of a 
 senator from Louisiana, Mr. Semmes, before the Confederate Senate, and 
 that resolution offered by Mr. Semmes was referred to the judiciary com 
 mittee. The resolution simply instructed the committee to inquire as to 
 what retaliatory and retributive legislation was necessary or proper in view 
 of the condition of things which I have laid before the Senate. When that 
 committee met, what will this Senate believe, what will it think when I in 
 form them that the fact is here stated, and it is true, that in the midst of 
 all that excitement, natural, honest excitement, in the midst of that alarm 
 among our people, I, who have been held up as the bloody man on that 
 occasion, was the only man who utterly opposed passing any retaliatory 
 legislation on the subject. 
 
 Finding, however, as I stated, a general purpose, or belief, or opinion, 
 among the senators and on the judiciary committee, that some retaliatory 
 legislation ought to be enacted, I prepared a bill from which I will read to 
 the Senate that portion which has not been read. The judiciary committee, 
 all but two of them, agreed to a bill which is here quoted in full. That 
 bill was not intended, as the authors of it declared, to make it criminal fora 
 man to be a soldier in the Federal Army, but I thought it might bear that 
 construction. Therefore I refused to join in reporting it, but agreed to it if 
 that construction could be made explicit. I would not agree to make it a 
 crime for any man to belong to the Federal Army, or to assume that he was 
 a criminal because he belonged to the Federal Army. It is just to that 
 committee to say that they disclaimed and denied that that was the proper 
 interpretation of their bill. I thought it would be subject to that construc 
 tion, and therefore I declined to agree to it. Another senator offered 
 another resolution, not a bill. He proposed a resolution very violent in 
 character, in which he declared that the rules of civilized warfare had been 
 repudiated by the Federal Government and should be repudiated by the 
 Confederate Government. I will sav in defense of that man he is dead 
 
 *./ 
 
 and gone that he sincerely believed that policy would bring the war to a 
 speedy termination. It only shows how men can be misjudged. 
 
 I could not agree to any of these propositions, and refused to join in re 
 porting any of them, but I drafted a bill which would steer clear of the 
 difficulty which I had insisted might attach to the bill of the majority of 
 the committee, and reported it, not for adoption but for consideration, if 
 any legislation should be adopted at all. Now, I want to read the first sec 
 tion of that bill. The gentleman from Maine asked me if I had introduced 
 a resolution, and what he quoted as the resolution is the second section of 
 this act, and it is quoted in this book by McClellan as a resolution, an in 
 dependent resolution offered by me. When I come to see the whole facts 
 I find that what they call a resolution was the second section of a bill pro 
 posed by me. The writer left out the first section, which thoroughly ex 
 plained the second, and shows precisely what I meant. I want to read that 
 first section now to the Senate : 
 
 That if any person singly, or in organized bodies, shall, under pretense of waging 
 war, kill or maim, or in any wise injure the person of any unarmed citizen of the Con 
 federate States, or shall destroy, or seize, or damage the property, or invade the house or 
 domicile, or insult the family of such unarmed citizen ; or shall persuade or force any 
 slave to abandon his owner, or shall, by word or act, counsel or incite to servile insurrec 
 tion within the limits of the Confederate States, all such persons, if captured by the 
 
MX LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 573 
 
 forces of the Confederate States, shall be treated as criminals, and not as prisoners ol 
 war, and shall be tried by a military court, and, on conviction, suffer death. 
 
 I do not believe there is a senator on that side who would disagree to 
 that section. I especially want to read to the Senate the language I used in 
 presenting that bill to the Confederate Senate. Here it is, fortunately, re- 
 ported in this work : 
 
 Mr. Hill, of Georgia. I must be. allowed to say for myself 
 
 Now, senators, mark you, this is after the other bill by the committee 
 had been reported. This is after Mr. Phelan, of Mississippi, had reported 
 his substitute. I came last and said : 
 
 I must be allowed to say for myself that I regard the proclamation of Mr. Lincoln as 
 a mere brutamfulmen, and so intended by its author. It is to serve a temporary purpose 
 at the North. I fear we are dignifying it beyond its importance. As the Senate has 
 concluded to notice it, I am in favor of the simplest and most legal action. We must 
 confine our action icithin the line of right under the laws of nations. In my opinion we 
 have the right to declare certain acts as crimes, being in conflict with civilized war, and 
 the actors as criminals ; and a criminal, though a soldier, is not entitled to be considered 
 a prisoner of war. While, therefore, I approve the general idea to treat persons guilty of 
 certain acts as criminals, contained in the bill reported by the senator from Louisiana (Mr. 
 Semmes), and agreed to that report as being the one most favored by the majority of the 
 committee, I also, in accordance with the understanding of the committee, propose the 
 following bill, and ask that it be printed for the consideration of the Senate. 
 
 And, sir, what are the facts ? In the excited condition of the country 
 then, I stood up in that Senate and I refused to agree to any legislation ex 
 cept that which simply made wrongs committed upon an unarmed citizen crim 
 inal acts. Why, sir, I know the honorable senator from Illinois (Mr. Logan), 
 and I believe every honorable man on that side of the Chamber would say 
 that it was right to provide by law for the punishment of those who should 
 make war upon unarmed citizens, old men, women, and children in their 
 homes. That was all I proposed to do, and I did not even propose to do 
 that. I advised the Confederate Senate to take no action at all to pass no 
 bill on the subject of retaliation. I knew the dangers to which it would lead. 
 I knew the sufferings that might result. I thought passion was already too 
 high. I thought the motives of Mr. Lincoln in issuing that proclamation 
 were misconceived. I said first, " I propose no action." Secondly, " If you 
 will act, I insist that you make nothing criminal but acts of wrong upon un 
 armed citizens, whether committed by anybody, soldiers or otherwise ; but 
 I advised in conclusion that it would be best to pass the matter over ; that 
 \ve were dignifying it unnecessarily. I did not believe the insurrections 
 would take place that were apprehended. And, sir, I have the pleasure of 
 saying to this Senate, as the record here shows, the Confederate Senate 
 adopted my suggestion and passed none of these measures. 
 
 Sir, let my part in this transaction pass. I am an unimportant individ 
 ual in this country ; but I challenge the gentleman to take the annab 
 war and point me to a single instance in the history of any country where 
 under circumstances half so threatening the authorities were hall 
 siderate and moderate. The whole Confederacy has been held up to the 
 country as proposing and passing these laws to punish Federal soldiers wr 
 death because they were Federal soldiers. I have been placarded to the 
 whole North, with the New York Tribune ir the lead, as a man especially 
 brutal, proposing in the Confederate Senate as an independent measure, 
 voluntarily offered by myself, a resolution to treat Federal soldiers as cnmi- 
 n.als simply because they were Federal soldiers. And now the 
 
574 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 conclusively show there was not only no truth in the charge, but that the 
 very contrary of the charge is the truth. 
 
 Mr. Logan. If the senator will allow me, inasmuch as he referred to me, 
 I merely wish to ask him one question. As I understood the reading of the 
 first section of that bill, it provided that individuals, singly or organized 
 bodies, should be punished if they interfered with the private property of 
 citizens unarmed. I do not ask the question with a view of entering into 
 this discussion, but I ask if that would not apply to a foraging party that 
 might be sent out for the purpose of obtaining fodder, corn, wheat, pork, or 
 anything of that kind for the use of the army? I ask whether it would not 
 apply to that class of men where they took this property from private citi 
 zens unarmed ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I thank the senator for asking me the question. I see his 
 motive is good, and on this question I want no misunderstanding. 
 
 Mr. Logan. It struck me at the time that it would, and I suggested it 
 for the purpose of ascertaining. 
 
 Mr. Hill. It would not. If you will notice the language of the 
 whole bill you will find, and even my language in introducing it shows, 
 that it is confined not to real soldiers but simply to those who, acting un 
 der pretense, might go on marauding excursions under the protection of 
 Federal uniforms. It did not apply to lawful soldiers in any capacity. 
 Although the question of the senator from Illinois is a very proper one and 
 a very natural one, the senator will see that I was utterly opposed to any 
 legislation that was not strictly within the line of right and the law of 
 nations. I call attention to the language of the act again : 
 
 That if any person singly, or in organized bodies, shall, under pretense of waging war. 
 
 It simply struck at what we believed would be organized bands of men 
 taking advantage of Mr. Lincoln s proclamation to go into the Southern 
 States under pretense of waging war for the purpose really of plunder upon 
 the unarmed citizens. This was intended to meet that case ; but for fear of 
 the opposite construction, believing, as I say, that Mr. Lincoln s proclama 
 tion had no such purpose and could have no such eifect, I insisted that 
 nothing should be done, not even that that bill should be passed, and it was 
 not passed. It never did become a law. I myself was opposed to it. I 
 simply proposed it as an alternative proposition to avoid what I thought 
 might be the difficulties of other propositions submitted. 
 
 Now, gentlemen on the other side, we differ in politics, and we give each 
 other manly blows in consequence of our differences of political opinion, but 
 I submit to every fair-minded man on that side of the Chamber, is there 
 anything brutal in my conduct there ? Is it not everything to the contrary ? 
 Sir, whether the Republican press at the North shall correct the misrepre 
 sentations which they have so industriously circulated upon this subject, and 
 which they have made this resolution or pretended resolution the excuse for 
 circulating, is a matter which I shall leave to their own sense of honor and 
 truth. 
 
 I am notified in the debate which occurred in 1876 of a fact which I had 
 heard before. A distinguished gentleman of the Republican party had 
 taken the pains to send South and gather up all my records, and they say 
 they found them quite voluminous. Really I have never preserved any my 
 self ; I have never made a habit of preserving my own speeches and letters. 
 I am told that there is much in that record inconsistent with what I have 
 said upon this floor. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 575 
 
 Mr. President, I claim no superiority of intellect over others; none 
 whatever. In view of the troubles which have cursed our country durimr 
 the past twenty years, it seems to me every man who pretends to have been 
 a statesman during that trying period ought to feel humbled that the states 
 manship of this country was wholly insufficient to avert such a cruel and 
 wicked war ; it ought, I say, to humble in the dust every man in the coun 
 try. I feel humbled in view of my utter inability to accomplish the <*ood I 
 so much desired ; I certainly feel nothing like boasting. But he who here 
 or elsewhere assails the sincerity of my convictions, the candor of my utter 
 ances, the honesty of my action, and the kindness of my nature, my devotion 
 to the Union of the States under the Constitution, or my fidelity to any and 
 every trust, is simply " a liar, and the truth is not in him." 
 
 Upon two subjects I stand here and throw, not only to the other side 
 but to the world, a proud and confident defiance. Search all my letters, 
 public and private, rake through the earth, you cannot find in one of them 
 one line, one word, one syllable to justify the charge that anywhere before 
 the war, during the war, or since the war I ever spoke in the slightest 
 degree disrespectfully of the union of these States under the Constitution 
 of my country. There have been times, I confess, when I have almost de 
 spaired of its preservation, and there may be found words sometimes of 
 despondency. You will find much against secession, you will find much 
 against the Republican party, you will find much against the war, and you 
 will find burning words against Reconstruction. All that is true ; but 
 against the Union of these States, partly national and partly Federal, 
 against this confederate nation as explained by Madison and expounded by 
 Webster, I have had no feeling but one of perpetual adoration from the 
 time I understood it to this hour ; and upon that subject I defy criticism 
 and challenge malice. I know it has been frequently said that I have been 
 inconsistent. That is untrue. 
 
 Sir, I have had to submit to many things I did not approve. I did not 
 approve secession, but when the will of my State was declared I submitted 
 to it. I did not approve of the war of subjugation, but when subjugation 
 was accomplished I submitted to it. I did not approve of Reconstruction. 
 I believe to-day it has inflicted a deeper wound upon the vitals of our Con 
 stitutional system than both secession and the war combined, and I did 
 ivsist it with all the power and zeal, and even invective, I could command ; 
 but when Reconstruction was accomplished I submitted to it. But I rejoice 
 that one grand fact on which I always kept my mind remains unchanged. 
 I did fear that the nation could not survive the war. I did fear that in 
 some form the liberties of the people would be subverted and destroyed. I 
 did fear that the character of our government (and I explained it the other 
 day) would be utterly changed. But, sir, the fact to which I allude with 
 so much pride and satisfaction is that we have passed through secession, 
 through the war, and even through the carpet-bag infamies of the South, 
 and the character of our government still remains essentially the same ; it 
 has never been changed. The Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth 
 Amendments, which give certain additional rights to a portion of the people 
 <>t the country, have not changed in any degree the relations between the 
 States and the Union, nor in any manner the character of our Confederate, 
 Federal, and National Government, mixed and composite, as Mr. Madison 
 siys it is ; and I rejoice that it has been preserved. I look back through 
 that lonir niiHit of danger and threatening and feel that every man in this 
 
 *^ C3 5 *>r^ 
 
576 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 country ought to rejoice that we have passed through that angry storm of 
 passion and hatred, as I trust we are through, with our Constitution still 
 undestroyed ; and it ought to be the pride and ambition of every public man 
 every party to see to it that it shall be re-established and re-enthroned in 
 the hearts of the people. 
 
 But, sir, I come to the other subject upon which I want to throw out a 
 defiance. I have passed through the war. I have seen scenes of suffering, 
 and many of them. I have seen occasions when many might be tempted to 
 be cruel and unkind ; but I defy any human being, I care not what his 
 position is, to put his finger on a single word or act of mine that was ever 
 cruel to a human being. It is impossible to do so, and tell the truth. I am 
 a man of positive convictions ; I denounce wrong, and have done it unspar 
 ingly ; but cruelty, unkindness, is no part of my nature, and was never com 
 mitted by me. 
 
 It is not for me, Mr. President, to parade to this country and to this 
 Senate my acts of kindness, and I shall not do it. They were not committed 
 for that purpose. But there is one incident in my life which, as it reflects 
 credit upon others perhaps more than upon myself, and was somewhat of a 
 public character, and as living witnesses are abundant to prove it, I will 
 take occasion to state to the Senate briefly. During the month of April, 
 1865, the Federal army under General Wilson passed from Alabama into 
 Georgia, just previously to the surrender of General Johnston and General 
 Lee. The main army under General Wilson entered Georgia at Columbus. 
 There a detachment of Federal soldiers, four thousand I understood, under 
 Colonel La Grange, entered the State of- Georgia at West Point, which 
 is in the county in which I resided, and sixteen miles from the county seat, 
 my residence. Hearing of the approach of that army, of course I left 
 hastily. Standing in the ashes of Atlanta, seventy miles away, I received 
 two messages simultaneously. One was that my own house was burning ; 
 the other was that General Lee had surrendered. Imagine my surprise 
 when on returning to my home a few days after I found that my house had 
 not only not been burned, but that my family had not been in the slightest 
 degree disturbed, and that a Federal soldier had not put his foot on my 
 premises, the most conspicuous place in the town. Every other citizen per 
 haps had been visited, and some public houses had been burned, warehouses, 
 etc. This was a mystery, and a very great mystery, and to none more a 
 mystery than to myself. I expected, of course, that I should suffer above 
 any other citizen of the town. I suffered not at all, and all others suffered 
 more or less, and some very severely. It was a mystery to the town ; it 
 was the general talk how was it. 
 
 * No man doubted my fidelity to the Confederacy, because at that very 
 ] t moment, and for two months before, I had been the only public man in 
 the Confederacy on the stump trying to rally the people against uncondi 
 tional surrender. Of course the event was of sufficient consequence to in 
 duce me to make an effort to explain the mystery. I was told on inquiry 
 that at the battle of West Point, for there was a considerable little battle 
 fought there, a young Federal officer was severely wounded who was a 
 favorite with Colonel La Grange in command, and while not dangerously 
 wounded he was so painfully wounded that he could not go on with the 
 Federal forces. I fortunately had a niece living in the town of West Poinl, 
 whose husband was a physician and surgeon. Knowing, as was afterward 
 reported, that the act would be altogether agreeable to me, he went and 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 577 
 
 offered his services to take that young wounded Federal officer to his home 
 and care for him. I suppose that had something to do with it. 
 
 Then my slaves, who were faithful and devoted to the last hour, claimed 
 that they had gone to the Federal headquarters, for the Federal troops 
 camped two nights and a day in the town, and interposed for the protection of 
 my family. That I supposed also had something to do with it. After all 
 the armies had surrendered, in the month of May, a detachment of Federal 
 soldiers, under somebody s order I understand here at Washington, per 
 haps the Secretary of War, came to La Grange, and at two o clock in the 
 morning arrested me and took me off to Atlanta. While waiting there for 
 transportation to Fort La Fayette, a gentleman came to see me who said he 
 came directly from Colonel La Grange, who was then in the city of Macon, 
 and received the following facts from his own lips in explanation of my 
 exemption from pillage on that occasion. Colonel La Grange stated that 
 during the summer or fall of 1864, while the armies of General Johnson and 
 General Sherman were north of Atlanta, in the northern part of Georgia, a 
 number of ladies, Northern ladies by birth, who had been residing in the 
 South and who had passed safely through General Johnson s line under 
 passports from the Confederate Government, on their return North were 
 captured in General Sherman s line and carried to his headquarters under 
 suspicion of being spies. They were of course properly required to give an 
 account of themselves. It turned out that these ladies happened to be some 
 among many who had written to me frequently, and on this occasion espe 
 cially, to Richmond, asking my advice as to whether under the circumstances 
 of privation and suffering in the Southern States I would advise them to 
 leave the people who they said had been so kind to them, though Northern 
 ladies, and return to their friends in the North, who had abundance, and, if 
 I would give that advice, to give them the proper means of getting through 
 the lines. I sent them everything they needed and advised them to go. 
 
 I never heard from them any more. I sent them passports and every 
 thing else necessary to take them to their friends in the North. When 
 these ladies were required, at General Sherman s headquarters, to give an 
 account of themselves they were naturally quite exuberant and extravagant 
 in their account of my own treatment of them. Colonel La Grange was at 
 that time in General Sherman s headquarters, I believe I am not sure a 
 member of his staff. The senator from Illinois will know better ; but at 
 least he was there. He became acquainted with these ladies, and heard the 
 story of this kindness, and much in relation to myself that I will not venture 
 to relate. As he approached the town of La Grange, the place of my 
 residence, these facts detailed to him by these ladies came to his recollec 
 tion, and he informed this gentleman that when he reached wi 
 miles of my residence he stopped his whole command. He gave them first 
 information that at the next place a Confederate senator resided, and 
 would perhaps think that they had a right to raid upon him ; but he i 
 an order forbidding, under severe penalties, any soldier from putting h 
 foot upon my premises under any pretext, and it was strictly obeyed, 
 was the solution of the mystery. 
 
 Mr. President, we are told that when God created the heavens and 
 earth on the third day, he said, " Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb 
 yielding seed and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed 
 m itself, upon the earth ; and it was so." From that day to this 
 been so. Yet all these seeds must be sown in their season and in a chmat. 
 
578 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 adapted to their nature, else they will perish. But, sir, there is seed which 
 will bear fruit in all seasons and in every clime under the heavens. Plant 
 it in the cold where the snows never melt, or in the heat where the frosts 
 never come ; scatter it on the naked rocks or in the most fertile soil ; drop 
 it in the water or on the land, and everywhere, every seed will germinate 
 and grow and reward the sower. It is tilled by a hand that never tires ; it 
 is watched by an eye that never sleeps ; it is trained by a power that tem 
 pers all the elements to its healthiest maturity. That seed, sir, is kindness, 
 and I have garnered its fruits when and where they were least expected. 
 Will leaders of a great party, will men who aspire to hold in their hands 
 the destinies of millions living and of many more millions yet to live, never 
 learn that abuse and slander and calumny and misrepresentation are not the 
 means which wise or good men employ to give peace to a country or pros 
 perity to a people or stability to a government ? Will the people themselves 
 at the North never learn that brawling treason and traitors at men for 
 honest differences of opinion is not argument and proves nothing except 
 that the brawlers are neither statesmen nor patriots ? 
 
 Mr. President, in looking over this record of 1862, I find a debate which 
 occurred in the Confederate Senate, that I had forgotten, between a sen 
 ator from Texas, Mr. Wigfall, who is doubtless known to members on this 
 floor, and myself. It is a singular and a curious discussion in some respects. 
 The question had arisen what was the relation of a citizen of one of the 
 Confederate States who adhered to the Union after secession to the Confed 
 erate States themselves. The senator from Texas, Mr. Wigfall, as was the 
 natural corollary of his view of politics, held that the relation was that 
 of a traitor. I denied it, and took the position that the relation was that of 
 an alien enemy, and upon that point the discussion was had. It would be 
 interesting perhaps to those who listened to my argument a month ago to 
 hear this, but I shall not read it all. In discussing that question I made use 
 of these words : 
 
 I ask this : Do you hold Andrew Johnson, who abandoned the State of Tennessee 
 and never came under obligation to the Confederate Government, to be a traitor ? Caii 
 he be a traitor ? I am discussing the general proposition. I say that, as regards every 
 man who held allegiance to the United States originally, while he had a right to adhere 
 to that allegiance, there was no power on earth could break his allegiance against his 
 consent. This proposition I assert, and when a gentleman denies it he need not talk 
 about State rights and individual rights. He erects the government into a despotism, 
 whether it goes by the name of monarchy, aristocracy, or democracy. If you can lay 
 hold of a citizen and tear him loose against his will from his acknowledged allegiance, 
 you exercise the greatest power a tyrant is capable of exercising. I say again, that no 
 power can rightly force a man to break his allegiance. The very violation of allegiance 
 implies a consent of the will. 
 
 The senator says that there are no citizens of the Confederate States. But the Consti 
 tution says there are. " The electors in each State shall be citizens of the Confederate 
 States." The gentleman says it does not mean that. I should suspect any theory that 
 drove me to destroy or change the language of the Constitution itself. Here it is plainly 
 written; and because I abide by it the gentleman calls me a " nationalist. " God save 
 the mark. 
 
 Mr. Wigfall. I hope he will. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I have always understood that the fundamental principle of State rights 
 is, that the power shall be found in the grant, and that it is to be defined by the words 
 used, and that construction " was the old theory of the nationalists. 
 
 . .... 
 
 I grant that no person can be a citizen of the Confederate States "who is not a citizen 
 of some one of the States, but it does not follow that a citizen of a State is necessarily a 
 citizen of the Confederate States. Gentlemen may indorse sublimated theories that de- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 579 
 
 fine our Constitution after the manner of the interpreters of the will in Dean Swift s 
 " Tale of a Tub." They wanted to construe it, not according to what it said, but ac 
 cording to the measure of their own wishes. The text did not suit them, so they took 
 sentences ; but sentences would not give the meaning, so they took words ; they could 
 not find the right consecutive words, so they took syllables, and, finding they would not 
 do, they selected letters, and putting them together they made a will to suit their taste. 
 Gentlemen upon the same principle may destroy the Constitution, and make it mean 
 what they please, in order to accomplish their purposes. But I am this much of a State 
 rights man : I deny the Confederate Government has any power not granted ; and I say 
 you must look to the language of the grant to find the extent of the power, and that 
 which necessarily results from the grant the power to carry out the grant must be in 
 the grant. 
 
 .. 
 
 There is no necessity for the introduction of these theories to bring about a conflict be 
 tween the State government and the Confederate Government. My idea I do not know 
 whether it is a national one or not ; certainly it does not depend upon a change of words 
 in the Constitution, upon refined arguments and well-spun theories for its justifica 
 tionis this : the States were originally sovereign, independent States they are original 
 and sovereign yet and as such they had a right to exercise absolute and sovereign 
 power. They have by their own free w 7 ill and consent delegated these sovereign powers 
 to a common government. And they made it a government, not simply an agency, for 
 they call it a government in the compact, and they have said all citizens of the respect 
 ive States shall be citizens of the Confederate States. They have established laws re 
 quiring these citizens to obey that which the States have agreed they shall obey the 
 common compact. 
 
 To the extent of the powers delegated, the Confederate Government exercises the 
 sovereign pow y er. I grant that it did not have original national sovereignty, nor do I care 
 whether it has or not. It has the power to declare war, the power to make money, to 
 collect duties, and these powers are sovereign powers ; they are expressly delegated to the 
 Confederate Government. Violence done to the government by a citizen is treason, be 
 cause it is a violation of the citizen s allegiance. 
 
 * 
 
 If we, upon the part of the government, will exercise powers plainly delegated to us, 
 and exercise none that are not delegated, there will never be any conflict between the 
 States and the Confederate Government. If the States will exercise their reserved pow 
 ers properly, and the Confederate Government exercises its delegated powers properly, 
 there will never be any difficulty. 
 
 the last. Not against the Federal Congress, for there you had a majority. Not against 
 
 Mr. Buchanan par excellence the man chosen by the South. What was the difflcu 
 
 Mr. President ? The Northern States, sir, passed their personal-liberty bil 
 
 the acts of Congress. The State governments would not render up fug 
 
 they were not criminals because they stole slaves, which were not property : 
 
 State judges took it upon themselves in their State courts to set aside the act 
 
 gress for carrying out the fugitive slave law. These were the enormities that 
 
 South to her condition of determined secession. I know that through my sect 
 
 country these facts had more influence upon the popular mind 
 
 when Mr. Lincoln was elected it was thought he was seeking not tocontim 
 
 government, but pervert the government and to accomplish, through Pedc 
 
 what the Northern States had already sought to do. That perfected 
 
 For uttering those sentiments in that Senate I was denounced as a consoli- 
 dationist, as a nationalist, by one of the most ultra representatives of what 
 I call the other extreme theory, that is, Senator AVigfall, of Texas, and 
 reply to him, I said : 
 
 I am not national in one sense ; I am not federal in another, I am sure. I regard the 
 reserved rights of the States as much as any other man, and wil 
 
580 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 upon them. The powers I am sworn to exercise I will exercise with strict reverence for 
 the purposes of the grant. I think if we would all go to work in the exercise of delegated 
 powers, and act instead of theorizing, we would accomplish more satisfactory results for 
 the people. 
 
 Mr. Wigfall.I propose to answer the gentleman with the simple prefatory remarks, 
 that I am as much astonished at his recollection of the facts as his avowal of principles. 
 For a senator to rise in this Confederate Congress, within a few brief months after the 
 nation has been dissolved, and declare the Federal government of the United States 
 never trespassed upon our rights 
 
 Mr. Hill. I never said that. 
 
 Mr. Wigfall. If you did not, you said something bearing a wonderful resemblance 
 to it. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I said the trespasses of the Federal government were not the evils alleged 
 by the people in seceding ; it was not the trespasses of the government that influenced the 
 people to secede. I said it was the trespasses of the Northern States in their faithlessness 
 to the common compact. 
 
 
 
 Mr. Wigfall. Well, I ask if they had any complaint against the judiciary ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. None. 
 
 Mr. Wigfall. I need not ask him about the legislative branch, for he says we had no 
 cause of complaint here. " Surely not," he says, " for you had a majority there." His 
 language is plain and unmistakable. Why, sir, in that Congress the black Republicans 
 had an overwhelming majority in the House against us, and a tie vote in the Senate, with 
 a black Republican casting vote. 
 
 Mr. Hill. It. was not from any act of the Supreme Court or of Congress or of the 
 Federal Executive we seceded. I do not say they always did right. I was utterly op 
 posed to the administration of Mr. Buchanan. 
 
 Mr. Wigfall. He forgets Congress passed a law abolishing slavery in the District of 
 Columbia, declaring no slave should be sold there. 
 
 Mr. JKS.When did it pass ? 
 
 Mr. Wigfall. In 1850. 
 
 Mr. Hill. And the people expressly said they would not secede on account of it. 
 
 It is precisely the same theory of government that I gave to this Senate 
 one month ago, and for giving that theory then, for standing then upon the 
 doctrine of Madison and Webster, I was denounced by a Secessionist as a 
 nationalist, and for uttering that same doctrine here I am denounced by the 
 consolidationists of the other side of this Chamber as a Secessionist. It is the 
 highest proof that the position is a correct one. These two extremes are 
 alike the enemies to the true theory of this government. My life has been 
 a peculiar one. For many years its whole purpose was to arrest secession, 
 because I thought it unwise and suicidal. 
 
 Now, the only purpose of my connection with politics is to arrest what I 
 believe before my God the more dangerous enemy to the true character of 
 this Union than the secession party ever was the consolidation party of this 
 country. They are more dangerous because they are more powerful ; they 
 are more dangerous because they are more insidious ; they are more danger 
 ous because they are seeking to accomplish the destruction of the States, 
 without which there can be no Union, under color of extraordinary and ex 
 clusive devotion to the Union. Sir, I do not say that every member of the 
 Republican party intends that. So it was that the great mass of the seces 
 sion party did not intend the consequences of their action ; but I do affirm 
 to-da}^ that the doctrine, the policy, and the whole tendency of the Repub 
 lican party of this country at this d*ay, and for years past, has been in a direct 
 line to the destruction of the States, and through the destruction of the 
 States to the subversion of the liberties of this country. It will result so, 
 as the inevitable result of your policy. The people are under every obliga 
 tion every man at the North, whether Democrat or Republican, who is 
 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 581 
 
 sincere in desiring to preserve this Union as our fathers made it, is under 
 obligation to rally to the support of those who oppose the further triumph 
 and success of the Republican party. 
 
 We hear it frequently said that the mission of the Republican party has 
 not yet been completed. In one sense that is true. If I construe the doc 
 trines of that party, its policy and its tendency, correctly, the mission of that 
 party will not be accomplished until the States of this Union are utterly 
 destroyed, the liberties of this country are utterly subverted, and a rigid, 
 hopeless despotism shall settle down from one end of this country to the 
 other. That is my sincere conviction. 
 
 Why, sir, since I made a speech in this hall, I am not going to refer to 
 anything personal, as I see the senator is not in his seat, but since I made a 
 speech on this subject a month ago here, a distinguished gentleman of the 
 Republican party followed, and what remarkable language did he use ? I 
 want to call attention to it. Speaking of my own remarks, he said : 
 
 Now, what is the exact case as he states it ? State rights and nationality were the 
 causes of the war, and the real antagonists; slavery was a mere incident. Secession was 
 the instrument employed by " State rights " in the contest. 
 
 I never had such an idea since I was born. 
 
 What was the result of the war ? " Secession was crushed out, utterly crushed out." 
 He is particularly anxious for the " country to understand that." But what has become 
 of "State rights," the guilty principal that employed this "secession folly," as he 
 calls it ? 
 
 "What has become of State rights, the guilty principal?* 
 
 Again he says : 
 
 After all, then, the war only destroyed the incident (slavery), and the instrument 
 (secession), but the guilty cause of all our woes, the Samson of " State rights," still lives 
 in all his vigor, and is ready to employ any other incidents or instruments that may hap 
 pen to answer his purpose in the next conflict with nationality. 
 
 Here is a senator, standing on this floor, the ambassador of a State 
 specially commissioned to protect the rights of his State, speaking of State 
 rights as the guilty criminal and as the guilty author of all our woe! Will 
 not such utterances alarm the country? Nothing is more common in these 
 halls than to hear remarks made depreciating, deriding, ridiculing the doc 
 trine of State sovereignty, and declaring it synonymous with secession. Sir, 
 in connection with, and side by side, let me read the language of one of the 
 best men New England ever produced ; it comes in, I think, with exceeding 
 appropriateness. Here is what Oliver Ellsworth, of Connecticut, said di 
 rectly on this point : 
 
 Under a national government he should participate in the national security as 
 remarked by Mr. King ; but that was all. What he wanted was domestic happiness. 
 national government could not descend to the local objects on which this depended. 
 could only embrace objects of a general nature. He turned his eyes, therefore, i 
 preservation of his rights to the State governments. From these alone he conic 
 greatest happiness he expected in this life. His happiness depends on their exis 
 much as a new-born infant on its mother for nourishment. 
 
 State sovereignty, State authority, State rights, to which this great 
 patriot looked for support as a new-born infant looks to its mother, 
 denounced in this hall, by a distinguished Republican, as a guilty criminal, 
 the author of all our woe. 
 
 Mr. Hoar. Mr. President- 
 
 The Presiding Officer. Does the senator from Georgia yield 
 senator from Massachusetts ? 
 
582 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Mr. Hill. If it is necessary ; if I am misstating a fact. 
 
 Mr. Hoar. I desire to say, as the senator from Minnesota (Mr. Windom), 
 to whom the senator from Georgia referred, is not in his seat, that the sena 
 tor from Minnesota did not speak of the true rights of the States in the 
 passage to which he refers, but spoke merely of a false doctrine of State 
 rights which speaks of senators as ambassadors of States. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Mr. President, I shall be sorry for the senator from 
 Minnesota if he accepts that as a true explanation that is all and in be 
 half of the senator from Minnesota who is not here, as I have happened to 
 refer to him, I will say that the speech shows that he had no such explana 
 tion. He said just what I have read and I shall be exceedingly careful not 
 to misquote him in the slightest degree. The speech is published in full. 
 
 Mr. Hoar. Mr. President 
 
 Mr. Hill. I do not wish to give way any further. 
 
 The Presiding Officer. The senator from Georgia declines to yield. 
 
 Mr. Hoar. Very well. 
 
 Mr. Hill. The senator from Minnesota was replying to the argument I 
 had made, and I certainly had not defined State rights other than as Mr. Madi 
 son and Mr. Webster had defined it. Therefore the explanation offered will 
 not do. I will go on. 
 
 Now, sir, in relation to this great man Ellsworth, see what Mr. Webster 
 said about him, and I quote it for two reasons : first, because of the charac 
 ter it gives Mr. Ellsworth ; and, second, because of the indorsement by Mr. 
 Webster of the doctrine of Mr. Ellsworth. Mr. Webster said in his cele 
 brated speech in reply to Calhoun : 
 
 And I think I cannot do better than to leave this part of the subject by reading the 
 remarks made upon it in the convention of Connecticut, by Mr. Ellsworth, a gentleman, 
 sir, who has left behind him, on the records of the government of his country, proofs of 
 the clearest intelligence and of the deepest sagacity, as well as the utmost purity and in 
 tegrity of character. " This Constitution," says he, "defines the extent of the powers 
 of the general government. If the general Legislature should at any time overleap 
 their limits, the judicial department is a constitutional check. If the United States go 
 beyond their powers, if they make a law which the Constitution does not authorize, it is 
 void ; and the judiciary power, the national judges, who, to secure their impartiality, are 
 to be made independent, will declare it to be void. On the other hand, if the States go 
 beyond their limits, if they make a law which is a usurpation upon the general govern 
 ment, the law is void ; and upright, independent judges will declare it to be so." 
 
 That language is indorsed by Mr. Webster. That shows that he in 
 dorsed the doctrine of State rights and State sovereignty just as contended 
 for by me, which is not secession, but that State right which recognizes the 
 States as sovereign in the exercise of all their reserved powers and the 
 general government sovereign in the exercise of all its delegated powers. 
 But, sir, I want to read another sentence from Mr. Webster : 
 
 The people, sir, in every State live under two governments. They owe obedience to 
 both. These governments, though distinct, are not adverse. Each has its separate 
 sphere and its peculiar powers and duties. It is not a contest between two sovereigns 
 for the same power, like the wars of the rival houses in England ; nor is it a dispute 
 between a government de facto and a government de jure. It is the case of a division of 
 powers between two governments, made by the people, to whom both are responsible. 
 Neither can dispense 
 
 Mark this 
 
 Neither can dispense with the duty which individuals owe to the other ; neither can 
 call itself master of the other ; the people are masters of both. 
 
ffTS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 583 
 
 Mr. President, I wish that one short sentence in that language of Mr. 
 Webster could be riveted in the mind of every man in America. What is 
 it? It is that neither of these governments is the master of the other. 
 The Secessionists made the mistake of insisting that the State governments 
 were masters of the Federal government. The Republican consolidation- 
 ists make the mistake of insisting that this general government is the 
 master of the States and the State governments. It is not true. In the 
 brief, terse, correct, Constitutional language of that greatest of Constitu 
 tional lawyers this country every produced, neither is the master of the 
 other. The people of this country live under two governments. They are 
 not adverse ; they are not enemies ; they are not strangers. They are co- 
 laborers in one system in their respective spheres to accomplish the one 
 grand purpose of the preservation of the rights and liberties of the people. 
 
 Sir, senators talk about Mr. Webster differing with himself. He never 
 differed with himself. No better State-rights doctrine from a correct stand 
 point was ever uttered than was tittered by Mr. Webster in his second 
 speech on Foot s resolution and in this very reply to Mr. Calhoun. What 
 is it ? It is that the States are sovereign in their reserved rights, absolutely 
 sovereign in the exercise of their reserved rights, and that this government 
 has no power over a State in the exercise of her reserved rights, and that 
 on the other hand the same people who made the constitutions of the States 
 made the Constitution of the Federal government and clothed it with 
 specific powers, and within its specific powers the Federal government is 
 also supreme, and of course within the delegated powers it is alone supreme, 
 just as the States in their reserved powers are alone supreme. 
 
 Sir, I will read one more extract from Mr. Webster, and then I will 
 close. In a great speech which Mr. Webster made at Buffalo, in New 
 York, in 1851, he used this language : 
 
 Now, gentlemen, I wish I had ten thousand voices. I wish I could draw around me 
 the whole people of the United States, and I wish I could make them all hear what I 
 now declare on my conscience as my solemn belief, before the Power who sits on high, 
 and who will judge you and me hereafter, that if this Texan controversy had not been 
 settled by Congress in the manner it was, by the so-called adjustment measures, civil war 
 would have ensued ; blood, American blood, would have been shed ; and who can tel 
 what would have been the consequences. Gentlemen, in an honorable war, if a foreign 
 foe invade us. if our rights are threatened, if it be necessary to defend them by arms, J 
 am not afraid of blood. And if I am too old myself, I hope there are those connected 
 with me by ties of relationship who are young, and willing to defend their country to 
 the last drop of their blood. But I cannot express the horror I feel at 
 blood in a controversy between one of these States and the Government of the 
 States, because I see in it a total and entire disruption of all those ties that make us a 
 great and happy people. 
 
 Sir, those were the grand words, not of a sectionalist, but of a patriot ; 
 a man whose intellect towered up to the heavens, whose patriotism covered 
 the continent, and every part of the continent. Sir, in the days of AN eb- 
 ster, the great assault on the Constitution of the country was 
 secession and nullification ; there was no assault made on it from the othe 
 direction. Therefore it is that Mr. Webster s grand utterances are left c 
 record against secession and nullification. But if Mr. Webster were livin 
 to-day and saw the dangers that threaten the very Constitution and 
 which he loved, the very Constitutional system of government which 1 
 well understood ; if he were living to-day and could hear these voice* 
 consolidation deriding the doctrine of State rights and i 
 
534 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 he would thrill this continent with an eloquence such as never characterized 
 him in the days in which he lived, because the danger now, his great mind 
 would see, is infinitely greater than the danger was then ; because, as I have 
 said, it comes from a more dangerous and a more insidious power. Would 
 that Massachusetts would give to the country another Webster ! 
 
 Sir, I cannot hope even to imitate his greatness ; but I should like to 
 follow such a grand man, even if it must be afar off ; and I wish like him 
 to have ten thousand voices to-day ; I wish I could command his eloquence 
 for one hour ; I wish I could speak as he only spoke. I wish every man in 
 America could hear the words which I believe he would utter in much more 
 forcible power when I now declare this Union was not the cause of our 
 war ; this Union never shed fraternal blood ; this Union never burned the 
 houses and cities and devastated the soil of its own citizens. No, no. All 
 that was the work of a diabolical sectionalism. I would beg the American 
 people to-day, come back from these wanderings, these sectional wander 
 ings, whether in the direction of secession or in the direction of consolida 
 tion and despotism ; come back to the Constitution as our fathers made it, 
 as Madison explained it, as Webster expounded it, as it now stands unaltered 
 in character by the three new amendments that have been adopted ; 
 come back to it as a Union of States ; come back to it as partly a national 
 and partly a Federal government, such as no other people ever enjoyed, and 
 such as no wise people will ever abandon. I earnestly beg the people of 
 the North, if they would preserve this inestimable heritage and transmit its 
 blessings to their posterity, to disband this sectional Republican party. No 
 sectional party ever was or ever can be a Union party. It is mere, sheer, 
 naked hypocrisy to pretend so. No man and no party can be true to the 
 whole Union who is false to a part of it ; no man and no party can be a 
 proper administrator of this common government who hates any one sec 
 tion of this country. 
 
 I would ring it in the ears of patriots, I would ring it in the ears of 
 statesmen, I would ring it in the ears of all the people North and South, 
 East and West if we would save further strife and further woe, if we 
 would preserve finally the liberties of this country, we must disband all 
 sectional parties and get back to that Union under the Constitution which 
 knows no section, but does know all the States. Without States there may 
 be empire, and there will be despotism, but there can be no Constitutional 
 union ; while without union there may be license, and there will be anarchy, 
 but there can be no liberty or security. 
 
 
REMARKS IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES MARCH 
 
 24, 1879. 
 
 THE UNTRUTHFUL CHARGE OF A REVOLUTIONARY PURPOSE ON THE 
 
 DEMOCRATIC PARTY. 
 
 The Senate having under consideration the motion of the senator from 
 Pennsylvania (Mr. Wallace), to proceed to the election of officers of the Sen 
 ate, Mr. Hill said : 
 
 Mr. President: There is an issue of fact raised here between the sen 
 ators who have addressed the Senate, and a very material issue of fact, one 
 affecting not only the character of the Democratic party very materially, but 
 affecting somewhat the character of American institutions, in my judgment, 
 and it is very important that the real truth should be settled upon this 
 question. The senator from Connecticut has read from what purports to be 
 some sort of a circular, I do not know what, issued by the secretary of this 
 body in May, 1878, in which it is stated that the whole Democratic party, 
 or what he is pleased to call the opposition party, "announce their intention 
 to ^attempt the revolutionary expulsion of the President from his office." 
 The word "revolutionary" is used. The senator from Connecticut has 
 denounced those words as false and asserted it in no measured terms. The 
 senator from Maine comes to the vindication of the circular and charges 
 that there was a revolutionary purpose, revolutionary not only on the part 
 of the Democratic party or a large portion of them, but, to sustain his gen 
 eral charge, he is satisfied that the Potter resolution had that purpose in 
 view. Now, sir, I say that the senator from Maine is as incorrect in his 
 statement as was the circular of the secretary of this body when it was writ 
 ten, and I say that the senator cannot produce a single fact from any au 
 thorized portion of the Democratic party to justify his assertion. What lie 
 may quote from individual expressions I do not know ; what he may quote 
 from violent newspapers I cannot tell ; but I affirm here and now, in this 
 presence, that he is not justified in saying that any portion of the Demo 
 cratic party ever intended, under any contingency, a revolutionary movement 
 for the expulsion of the President, "and he cannot produce the proceedings 
 of a single convention, or the utterance of a single reputable leader of the 
 Democratic party, in Congress or out of it, to justify his most remarkable 
 and hazardous assertion. 
 
 Now, sir, I think I have a right to know something of the small divisions 
 that existed in the Democratic party on that subject, and I will state them 
 very briefly. WhenHhe electoral commission bill was passed, it contained 
 this provision, to which I wish to call the attention of the Senate: 
 
 SEC. 6. That nothing in this act shall be held to impair or affect any right now exist 
 ing under the Constitution and laws, to question, by proceeding m the judicial courts ol 
 the United States, the right or title of the person who shall be declared elected, or who 
 shall claim to be President or Vice-President of the United States, if any such right 
 exists. 
 
 585 
 
586 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 That, I say, is a provision of the act of Congress which established the 
 electoral commission. I need not remind the Senate and the country that 
 the provision was inserted because of the belief of some that if the elec 
 toral commission should do what was apprehended they would do, refuse to 
 look into the issue as to who was elected President on the merits ; should 
 refuse to investigate the broad charges as to Louisiana and Florida, and the 
 result of that commission should be the declaration of either gentleman as 
 President of the United States without looking into the testimony, without 
 meeting any issue on the real merits because of the jurisdiction of that tri 
 bunal, because of the Constitutional form in which that issue was raised, 
 the door should not be closed to a proper judicial investigation which would 
 bring out all the facts and a final decision by the judicial tribunals of the 
 country. 
 
 That there was ground for this belief that the courts of the country 
 would have jurisdiction to investigate this question is manifest from the 
 fact that learned gentlemen and distinguished statesmen on both sides of 
 the Chamber, and on both sides of the other Chamber, including some of 
 the most distinguished men of both parties, incorporated a provision in the 
 electoral act itself reserving all right to reopen the question and have it 
 investigated before the judicial tribunals of the country. 
 
 Now, sir, here is the truth. Some of the ablest lawyers in the United 
 States believed that by proper proceeding the Supreme Court could get juris 
 diction fairly, judicially, to investigate and determine this question. It was 
 upon that conviction, I remember distinctly, that the Legislature of Mary 
 land passed a memorial to Congress and instructed its attorney general to 
 bring it here, and it was presented in the House of Representatives, demand 
 ing that proceedings of this character should be inaugurated, and there 
 were quite a number of gentlemen, and I will say they were not all Demo 
 crats, for I happen to know that some of the most distinguished Republican 
 lawyers of the United States held that it would be perfectly competent in a 
 proper proceeding for the Supreme Court of the United States to reopen, 
 investigate, and determine the question upon its merits, for, mark you, it had 
 not been determined on its merits by the electoral commission. 
 
 Every gentleman with whom I am acquainted, every prominent Demo 
 crat in the United States who desired to investigate this question at all, 
 desired to do so through the courts and under the encouragement and 
 authority given by the electoral commission act* itself. Was that revolu 
 tionary ? Did that show a revolutionary purpose" ? Whether that proceed 
 ing before the courts should be inaugurated or not would depend upon the 
 evidence, the legitimate evidence that might be ascertained in the case. 
 Therefore it was that all sections of the Democratic party were perfectly 
 willing to inaugurate an investigation by the House of Representatives to 
 ascertain the real facts ; and there were Democrats in this country, and I 
 say there were Republicans in this country, who, if the facts should develop 
 an illegal title and it should be held that the Supreme Court had jurisdiction 
 to review and investigate that title, were in favor of the movement. Was 
 that revolutionary ? Will any gentleman say that a purpose to test the 
 question before the courts, when the right so to test it had been held out to 
 them in the very act organizing the electoral commission will any gentle 
 man rise in his place and say that was revolutionary? 
 
 Not only was that a provision in the act, but the distinguished gentle 
 man who occupies the chair at this moment (Mr. Edmunds), one of the best 
 
iris LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 687 
 
 lawyers in the Republican party, accompanied that bill with a report to 
 Congress, and in that report he said : 
 
 Fourth. It is provided that the act shall not affect, either way, the question of right of 
 resort to the judicial courts of the United States by the persons concerned as claimants to 
 the offices in question. 
 
 So I say here by the report of the distinguished gentleman, himself one 
 of the leaders of the Republican party, made by him, a report agreed to by 
 the leading Democrats and leading Republicans alike, the right to test the 
 question of the validity of the Presidential election before the courts was 
 held out to the country as a reason why the method of settlement provided 
 by the electoral commission act should be adopted. 
 
 I confess, so far as I am concerned, that I am one of those gentlemen 
 who believed that the courts had no jurisdiction. I confess I was not de 
 ceived by that report, nor deceived by that section of the electoral commis 
 sion bill. My own judgment was that under the Constitution of the coun 
 try the determination as to who was President of the United States by the 
 election of 1876 was vested in the two Houses of Congress, and that when 
 those two Houses pronounced their judgment, by whatever methods they 
 reached that judgment, that judgment was final and conclusive. That was 
 my own opinion ; but abler lawyers than I am, both Republicans and Demo 
 crats, held to a contrary opinion, and this contrary opinion was encouraged, 
 I repeat, both by the report made by the able lawyer appointed to draft the 
 electoral commission bill and by a provision in the electoral commission bill 
 itself. Therefore, from the very time that the two Houses of Congress 
 settled this memorable controversy w r ith the aid of the electoral commission, 
 and declared Mr. Hayes elected President of the United States, a large por 
 tion of very estimable gentlemen in this country, North and South, men 
 of high character as lawyers, desired to have the question investigated be 
 fore the courts of the country. As to what should be the form of proceed 
 ing was a difficult question. " In my own judgment as a lawyer there was 
 no form of proceeding because I did not think it was a case that could be 
 made. 
 
 That was my own judgment, but others differed with me, and that was 
 the only controversy in the Democratic party. A large portion of the party 
 we re opposed even to taking this proceeding before the courts. A small 
 portion desired to take, the course Maryland desired to take. Twenty-one 
 Democrats who voted on the Potter resolution or on the resolution following 
 the report on this memorial from Maryland twenty-one, I believe, voted 
 against the Maryland report, but perhaps it was fourteen. Some say it was 
 fourteen ; I do not remember the precise number ; at least fourteen thought 
 the case ought to be opened. A great number thought the courts could 
 not be opened, and the only proper plan was to let the matter die. 
 as making an issue was corcerned, so far as any attempt to affect the 
 dential title was concerned, the large majority of the Democratic party 
 Congress and out of it was opposed to making any movement whatever 
 disturb the Presidential title. A strong minority of eloquent gentlemen, 
 able lawyers, aided and abetted by distinguished members of the Republics 
 party, did desire to inaugurate a movement before the courts for the purpc 
 of testing the validity of that title. And yet we are told that this was 
 revolutionary. Here was a revolutionary purpose, and the secretary of 
 Senate of the United States issued this circular denouncing this as revolu- 
 
588 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 tionaiy, and it is one of the most remarkable facts of this most remarkable his 
 tory touching this whole Presidential imbroglio of 1876, that, notwithstanding 
 the" report made by the electoral commission committee, and notwithstand 
 ing section 6 in the electoral commission act, just as soon as the decision 
 was rendered declaring Mr. Hayes President, and the intimation was given 
 out in any way by anybody that there was a purpose by any person to in 
 augurate a movement before the courts to test the validity of his title, the 
 Republicans, with remarkable unanimity, raised the cry, " You are going to 
 revolutionize this country ! Another revolution ! 
 
 They had refused to look into the facts in the electoral commission ; 
 they had pronounced that ever-memorable decision which declares that not 
 only individuals but the Congress of the United States were bound to be 
 lieve as true what everybody knew was a perjury ; were bound to accept as 
 genuine what everybody knew was a forgery, were bound to declare and 
 carry out as Constitutional and right what everybody knew was an un 
 mitigated fraud : and just as soon as that decision was procured by a refusal 
 to look into the facts, and some gentlemen desired that the facts should be 
 looked into and investigated by a judicial tribunal in a judicial manner and 
 by a judicial proceeding, the gentlemen on the other side raised the cry of 
 " revolution." Is it revolution to go before the courts ? Why, sir, suppose 
 these proceedings had been inaugurated either in the name of a defeated 
 candidate or in the name of a disappointed State, a sovereign State, who was 
 a party to that wrong, a party damaged by that wrong suppose these pro 
 ceedings had been inaugurated by the State of Maryland or in any other 
 way, if the courts had not jurisdiction to pass upon it the courts would have 
 decided so. And the court that it was desired to go before was not a 
 Democratic court ; the court proposed to test the question before was the 
 Supreme Court of the United States, a court which has upon it seven Repub 
 lican judges and only two Democrats ; and because some Democrats in this 
 country believed that the courts did have jurisdiction to test this question, 
 and that the question ought to be brought before them so that it might be 
 tested, and because they were encouraged so to believe by the very section 6 
 of the electoral commission bill, and by the report of the committee which 
 reported that bill, and notwithstanding the fact that they were willing to 
 select a Republican court before which to test the question, yet in the face 
 of all these facts the air has been absolutely full with the miserable partisan 
 cry that the Democratic party were going into revolution. And at this late 
 day a distinguished senator from Ne\v England gets up and reiterates be 
 fore this body that the Democratic party, or a large proportion of it, intended 
 a revolutionary purpose. Certainly lie can point to no record, he has 
 pointed to none. It would seem that one party had been so accustomed to 
 disregard proper judicial proceedings that they regard any party proposing 
 a judicial investigation as guilty of a revolutionary purpose. 
 
 That is the point I make. I say that that circular issued by the 
 secretary was false, utterly false. I say that the Democratic party had not 
 announced, as that circular says, any revolutionary purpose of the expulsion 
 of the President. I say that no man can produce a proceeding of the Demo 
 cratic party in convention, in Legislature, or in the Cotigress of the United 
 States to justify the charge that they intended revolution. The truth is, to 
 tell the candid fact, I always believed that the gentleman raised the cry of 
 revolution largely to prevent the investigation, because they feared the con 
 sequences if one should be inaugurated. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WHITINGS. 589 
 
 Now, the senator says if there is no danger in the air, why has the House 
 of Representatives deemed it necessary to pass a resolution disclaiming any 
 revolutionary purpose ? Why did the distinguished gentleman from New 
 York, who introduced the resolution of inquiry in order to ascertain what 
 the facts were which had never before been ascertained, announce in his 
 very resolution that there was no revolutionary purpose and that every 
 charge of that sort was false? It was because of the cry raised by 
 gentlemen on the other side ; because of the cry raised by the Republican 
 party. 
 
 The senator from Maine says the circular issued by the secretary had not 
 then appeared. Well, I will guarantee now that if you will take the trouble 
 you may look back at those times and you will find scarcely a Republican 
 paper in the United States, you will find scarcely a Republican politician in 
 the United States, I am sure you will not find a Republican office-holder in 
 the United States who was not imblushingly crying "revolution," "revolu 
 tion," against the Democratic party all over the country ; and the cry of 
 "revolution " was having its effect ; it was deceiving a great many people ; 
 and therefore it was that the Democratic party in the House felt it neces 
 sary, or proper at least, to put on record the solemn official denial of this 
 foul slander upon their purposes. 
 
 Mr. President, I did not rise to discuss this question or any other. This 
 is a very elaborate debate to have grown out of the simple proposition to 
 elect a few officers of the Senate. As I am on my feet, I wish to say one 
 word in reply to what the senator from New York said. That senator al 
 luded to the fact that when he came here in July, 1861, a large number of 
 these seats were vacant. That is a fact we all know. We had heard of that 
 before. He alluded to the fact that they are filled now. I am gratified 
 to say that we know that to be true. Mr. President, the saddest day in 
 American history, in my judgment, was the one to which the senator from 
 New York alluded, when the South, actuated by as high and patriotic a pur 
 pose as ever actuated any people since the sun has been pursuing his course, 
 left these halls and attempted to secede from the Union. I grant that. 
 They did not desire war ; and I know they did what they believed was their 
 right. They thought to make no war, they thought to engender no strife ; 
 they sought to end it ; but they were mistaken, and the whole world knows 
 the history that followed. It was a sad day when the Southern States with 
 their gifted representatives left these halls and left the government in the 
 undisputed control of the Republican party ; and every hour and every day 
 from that time to this, as a consequence of that unfortunate act, the country 
 has been rocking in the throes of revolution. 
 
 Sir, I am not here to parcel out the blame on this subject upon this sec 
 tion or that section, this party or that party. It was a grand mistake, a 
 great mistake, and honestly made, unquestionably ; terrible consequences 
 have followed ; consequences which did not disappoint me. But we have 
 passed through that ordeal. We have had a reign of blood. The Republi 
 can party because of that very act has had eighteen years of domination in 
 this country. What are the fruits of that domination ? History will record 
 them ; history has recorded them. I wish to say to the gentleman that as 
 the first fact" to which he alluded, contrary to the intentions of those who 
 acted in it, inaugurated a war, long and sad, the second fact to which he al 
 luded, the returnof the Soutli here with her proper, her fit representatives, ends 
 the revolution which their departure began. If that departure brought war 
 
590 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 upon the country, this return assures the country of peace and prosperity 
 once more. 
 
 The senator may regret, the gentlemen on the other side may regret, the 
 end of this eighteen years lease of power. It is a thing to be regretted 
 very much by those gentlemen. Perhaps they would like to see another se 
 cession if it would give them eighteen years of undisputed possession of this 
 great government. But, gentlemen, in all kindness and candor let me tell 
 you your day is ended and your chances will not return. You did not com 
 plain of the presence of the South here when that presence was by men who 
 had no interest with us. These, with one lingering exception, have all gone, 
 and the places which knew them but yesterday will know them no more for 
 ever. The carpet-bag riot ends with the departure of the Republican party 
 from power. 
 
 Why are we to be constantly reminded of that act ? Why should gen 
 tlemen on all occasions, in season and out of season, arraign the South for 
 what they choose to call rebellion ? Call it rebellion. History will judge 
 that question and we should prefer the judgment of history to the judgment 
 of the gentlemen on the other side ; much prefer it. What is the purpose, 
 unless "out of the fullness of the heart the mouth speaketh"? It is an un 
 pleasant thing to say ; I am sure it is not meant in unkindness ; it will go 
 like a dart to man} - gentlemen in this hearing ; yet I tell them that what 
 the senator from New York says is true these seats are filled, and filled by 
 Southern representative men, and these seats will remain filled by Rep 
 resentative Southern men. That is all. Let the past, then, go. We are 
 opposed to revolutionary purposes ; we are opposed to revolutionary pro 
 ceedings ; we have not made anything by revolution. The Republican party 
 made eighteen years of power by revolution and they are always talking 
 about revolution. 
 
 I hope, Mr. President, that the time has come when these perpetual sec 
 tional allusions will be abandoned. They do not tend to harmony. We are 
 acquainted with the past history of this country quite as well as the gentlemen ; 
 we have been the chief sufferers in that past history. As for their criticism 
 upon our future conduct, we can bear that criticism, because however unkind 
 and un amiable it may be, it shall be our high pleasure to demonstrate in the 
 future that there is not one word of truth in it. When your prophesy that we 
 intend revolution, that we intend anything but the peace and good and pros 
 perity of this whole country, it may be that you desire to find some evidence 
 of the truth of your charges, but it is our purpose to show to the country 
 that we are not only here, but that we are worthy to be here as were our 
 fathers before us who did so much to make this country so great and glorious. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. I will detain the Senate for a moment to say a word in re 
 gard to the original point of difference between myself and the senator from 
 Connecticut. I hold in my hand the decision of the Speaker of the House 
 when the Potter resolution was introduced. A point of order being made 
 that it was not a question of privilege, the Speaker ruled that it was, giving 
 his views in an elaborate decision from which I will read only a few lines : 
 
 A higher privilege than the one here involved and broadly and directly presented as 
 to the rightful occupancy of the chief executive chair of the government , and the connection 
 of high government officials with the frauds alleged, the Chair is unable to conceive. 
 
 This debate began with the assertion of the senator from Connecticut 
 that there had been no design whatever on the part of the Democratic 
 party of opening that question. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 591 
 
 Mr. Eaton. Not so ; I beg pardon ; no revolutionary design. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. Ah, a revolutionary design ! It has got down to a question 
 of words. 
 
 Mr. Eaton. Not so : just take what I say. 
 
 Mr. JPfatfU.- -That is the same point taken by the senator from Georgia 
 (Mr. Hill). You were going to do all you could to put one President out 
 and another candidate in, only you object to its being called revolutionary. 
 The senator from Georgia objects to the late war being called a rebellion 
 though the world looked upon it as a rebellion. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I made no such objection. I told the gentleman he could 
 call it what he pleased. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. I think the Senate understood quite well what the honor 
 able senator meant. I take his words at their meaning, and altogether their 
 
 C7 ^J 
 
 more pointed meaning came from the way they were put. If 3^011 mean 
 merely to make a verbal criticism that you intended by a new law and a 
 new investigation and an extra mode of getting this question before the 
 courts, not in pursuance of laws which existed at the time the electoral com 
 mission acted, and that you intended by that extraordinary course, never 
 dreamed of at the time, to oust the President of the United States, do not 
 be sensitive at all if I call it revolutionary. It was clearly revolutionary, 
 and nothing else. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Does the senator say that proceedings in the courts to test 
 the question were not dreamed of at the time, when that very provision is 
 in the electoral commission act itself and repeated in the report of the 
 committee ? 
 
 Mr. Blaine. I presume they were dreamed of under the laws as they 
 then stood, but otherwise not. 
 
 Mr. Deuces. "If any such right exists." 
 
 Mr. Blaine. " If any such right exists " was inserted in the bill for the 
 electoral commission. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Did anybody ever propose to test the validity of the election 
 of 1876 or the title of Mr. Hayes, under that election, by any subsequent law ? 
 
 Mr. Blaine. What did the Potter committee mean, then ? Why, if 
 you meant to resort only to judicial remedy, did you not go to the courts? 
 You did not do any such thing. You initiated a party proceeding in the 
 political department of the government, and the whole Potter resolution, 
 from its preamble to its concluding word, does not mention the court as the 
 means by which a result was to be reached. 
 
 Mr. Hill Simply because everybody who is a lawyer ought to know 
 that the committee proceeded to get the evidence that could be used in the 
 inauguration of proceeding in the courts. That was to determine it, so far 
 as some portion of the Democratic party was concerned ; but I say the 
 larger portion of the Democratic party never had any such purpose even in 
 the Potter resolution. They simply wanted to get the facts. 
 
 Mr. Blame.- -Then that is a new start. 
 
 Mr. Hill.- -To put the facts on the record of each House, and all the gen 
 tlemen who intended any proceedings to be based upon that committee in 
 tended lawful proceedings before the courts under the laws of the land ; 
 and that is all we say ; that we say was not revolutionary. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. That is a new proceeding, that a judicial remedy was to 
 be sought, and that as the propelling force of the whole movement a parti 
 san committee was to be inaugurated with extraordinary power to send for 
 
592 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 persons and papers in order to work up a case. That is the judicial remedy 
 that the honorable senator from Georgia now presents ! 
 
 Mr. Hill. Does the senator from Maine say that an investigation 
 ordered by either House of Congress to ascertain facts is itself a revolution 
 ary proceeding ? 
 
 Mr. Blaine. I say this, that an investigation ordered by a partisan vote 
 is not the way the law contemplates the initiation of a judicial proceeding. 
 Does the senator think it is ? If a judicial remedy was reserved in the 
 electoral commission bill it was reserved through judicial processes ; it was 
 not reserved through scouring investigations of committees ruled over by 
 partisan votes gathering every possible rumor and every possible falsehood 
 without the slightest regard to any law of evidence or any protection of 
 witnesses. Does the senator say that that was the proceeding the electoral 
 commission act contemplated ? Does he say that as a lawyer ? He is fond 
 of putting himself forward as a lawyer. 
 
 Mr. Hill. The senator from Georgia says no such thing. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. I should like to know what the senator does say. 
 
 Mr. Hill. The senator from Georgia is incapable of saying what the 
 language of the senator from Maine seem to desire him to say ; but the sen 
 ator from Georgia says this : that by the provisions of the electoral com 
 mission act itself the right to proceed in the courts was reserved to either 
 party disappointed by the result of that proceeding. Very well, that was 
 the right. In what method that right should be asserted was another ques 
 tion, but it could not be asserted without evidence. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. Does the honorable senator mean 
 
 Mr. Hill. Let me get through. Now, then, one method of getting the 
 evidence was that suggested by that portion of the Democracy who were in 
 favor of proceeding. I repeat again that was not the purpose of the great 
 majority, but it was designed by some in ordering this investigation, I dare 
 say, as the Maryland memorial shows, as the report on that memorial shows, 
 it was designated by those who believe the courts had jurisdiction to seek to 
 get the evidence. Very well. It was designed by the great majority, how 
 ever, to get the evidence because it was desired to put the facts on record 
 officially. But here is the point I wish to make : the method of getting the 
 evidence is not settled by the law ; any method to ascertain the evidence in 
 a legal way is proper, and there are various ways of ascertaining facts. 
 
 Now, then, the senator having charged that the purpose was revolution 
 ary and now having located the revolutionary purpose on the committee, 
 and the manner of getting the evidence by the Potter committee, I put the 
 question again, but the senator does not answer. Does he say that the ap 
 pointment of a committee by either House of Congress, clothed with legal 
 authority to make legal investigation, is a revolutionary proceeding? 
 
 Mr. Blaine. One moment. I now meet the senator by quoting the de 
 cision of the Speaker of the House, a very competent authority, who states 
 that the resolution offered by Mr. Potter "involved the rightful occupancy 
 of the Presidential chair." The senator will pardon me for asking him the 
 same question. Does the senator hold that evidence obtained by the Potter 
 committee was obtained to be legally used in a judicial proceeding before 
 the Supreme Court of the United States ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. No, the senator from Georgia says no such thing. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. Well, then, what was the motive ? How could the senator 
 then connect I want him here now to tell me how he connects the mission 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 593 
 
 of the Potter committee with any possible proceeding that was reserved in 
 the electoral commission bill to be taken judicially ? The movement being 
 entirely outside of anything that was reserved in the electoral commission 
 bill, it was, in my judgment, grossly and absolutely revolutionary from 
 beginning to end. 
 
 Mr. Hill.Now, Mr. President, I want to make a bargain with the senator 
 from Maine, by the permission of that senator. I have asked him a question 
 twice, which he has not answered. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. I will try to answer 
 
 Mr. Hill. Let me get through. Instead of answering my question, 
 which was a very plain one, the senator refuses to answer it and asks me a 
 question. Now, as my question is first in order, if the senator will make 
 a manly, frank answer to my question I will answer his. My question is 
 this : You are charging a revolutionary purpose upon the Democratic party 
 here. That is the issue. You say that revolutionary purpose was mani 
 fested by the appointment of the Potter committee. Now, I ask the ques 
 tion : Does the senator hold that the appointment of a committee by either 
 House of Congress to make an investigation under their authority is a revo 
 lutionary movement ? If he will answer that question squarely, I will 
 answer his. 
 
 Mr. Blame. I certainly answered it once. I say that the resolution 
 appointing the Potter committee, as construed by the Speaker of the House 
 of Representatives, did aim at a revolutionary process. 
 
 Mr. Hill. You do not answer the question. Do you say that an investi 
 gation by the authority of either House is a revolutionary movement ? 
 
 Mr. Blaine. What does the senator want me to answer ? I certainly 
 say that the investigation as ordered by the House and as construed by the 
 Speaker of the House did aim at a revolutionary process. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Is the appointment of a committee by either House to make 
 an investigation a revolutionary movement ? 
 
 Mr. Blaine. Oh, well, the senator must not be childish, if he will pardon 
 the phrase. 
 
 Mr. Hill. And if so, did the senator from Maine mean revolution when 
 he moved the appointment of the Teller committee ? 
 
 Mr. Blaine. No, he meant to find out those who were trying revolution 
 in the South against peace and law and order. 
 
 Mr. Hill. And we meant to find out the facts in regard to those who 
 stole the Presidency. 
 
SPEECH DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED 
 
 STATES, MAY 10, 1879. 
 
 "Who saves his country, saves himself, saves all things, and all things saved do bless 
 him ! Who lets his country die, lets all things die, dies himself ignobly, and all things 
 dying curse him ! " Notes on the Situation. 
 
 In the opinion of the writer, this is the best speech ever made by Mr. Hill. In its 
 construction of the Constitution and its interpretation of the relative rights of the national 
 government and the States, it will stand with Webster s famous reply to Hayne. It is 
 also a thorough vindication of the solidity of the South, and presents the patriotic and 
 philosophical reasons for the existence of such condition. In writing about this speech, 
 a prominent journalist of the South says 
 
 "Senator Hill s speech is masterly and complete. It vindicates the South from the 
 evil denunciations that come against her from such men as Elaine, Conkling, Edmunds, 
 and Chandler ; it vindicates the objects and laudable purposes of the South ; it vindicates 
 our great Southern sentiment and manhood, which have been too often assailed by our 
 enemies. In painting the dire purposes of those who seek to perpetuate sectional hate, 
 he colors with the dark shades of a Rembrandt and cuts with the incision of a Damas 
 cus blade. The speech is replete with logic and truth, and the stalwarts will exhaust 
 their ranks before they find a foeman worthy of Mr. Hill s steel." 
 
 A prominent Northern writer adds this testimony to the power of the speech : 
 
 " I have heard many speeches, and must say that this of the great rebel, for clear 
 statement, fine language, strong declamation, well-sustained argument, and for research 
 and candor, is the best I have ever heard in the Senate, on the hustings, or on the 
 platform." 
 
 THE UNION AND ITS ENEMIES. 
 
 If he is a traitor who would divide the States, how is he less a traitor who would 
 
 destroy the States ? " 
 
 In the Senate of the United States, May 10, 1879, the legislative, execu 
 tive, and judicial appropriation bill being under consideration, Mr. Hill, 
 said : 
 
 Mr. President: I am very much obliged to my friend, the senator from 
 Kentucky, and the Committee on Appropriations for yielding to me at this 
 time. I would not speak to-day at all but for the fact that I am compelled 
 to leave the city and perhaps, possibly at least, not to return until this bill 
 shall have been disposed of. There are some observations which I desire to 
 submit ; and as this is the only opportunity to do so, I will avail myself of 
 the kindness of the committee, in suspending the reading of this bill, to pro 
 ceed now with what I have to say. 
 
 MOTIVES OF THE OPPOSITION IN THIS DISCUSSION. 
 
 m 
 
 Mr. President, it is known to the Senate and the country that the discus 
 sion of the questions involved in this and the kindred bill began in the last 
 
 594 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 595 
 
 days of the Forty-fifth Congress. The result of the discussion then neces 
 sitated the calling of an extra session of Congress, and since the assembling 
 of this session the discussion has been almost continuous in the two Houses 
 of Congress. I have taken no part in it hitherto, because in my judgment 
 there was nothing in the legislation pending that justified discussion ; noth 
 ing in the substance or form of the legislation which in my judgment could 
 even excuse the elaborate discussion which has been had ; and I suppose if 
 we were to apply the test, nine-tenths of the arguments which have been 
 made and placed upon the record have no application whatever to the imme 
 diate subjects involved in either of the bills. 
 
 I have watched the discussion with very intense, I might say with anx 
 ious interest for the purpose of discovering, if I could, the true reason, the 
 active inspiring motive of this discussion. Why has it been thrust upon 
 the country ? The legislation proposed is simply nothing more nor less than 
 the repeal of a very small portion of legislation which was enacted during and 
 since the war, legislation which had no place upon our statute-book for the 
 first seventy-five years of our history ; and why has such an earnest, such a 
 heated, I had almost said such an ill-tempered discussion been thrust upon 
 the country on the occasion of repealing a few statutes of the kind alluded 
 to? 
 
 I have no desire to do any one injustice I have watched this discussion 
 solely for the purpose of arriving if I could at the real motive which lies at 
 the bottom of it. I am thoroughly satisfied that the motive is very plain 
 and unmistakable. A great party in this country have entered upon a well- 
 considered, or I ought to say ill-considered, but determined purpose of re 
 opening the sectional agitations which have so long divided this country for 
 the purpose of consolidating one section of the country against the other, 
 solely for the benefit of that particular party, and without reference to the 
 good, as I think, of the country. 
 
 Now, sir, what is the result ? The country now beholds the extraordi 
 nary spectacle of an extra session of Congress, of weeks and months of agi 
 tated discussion, the whole purpose of which discussion, at least on one side 
 of this House, seems to be to convince one section of the country that the 
 people of the other are not to be trusted in their fidelity and patriotism. 
 Suppose they succeeded in establishing that proposition ; if it be true they 
 have established a proposition which demonstrates that the government is 
 on the eve of failure ; if it be false, why should they seek to impress upon 
 the country a condition of things affecting the integrity of the Union itself, 
 which is not true ? 
 
 I shall not go through the many arguments and speeches that have been 
 made on this floor which seem to be inspired by nothing on earth but hatred 
 to one section of this country and the people thereof. I cannot afford to do 
 that. Speech after speech has been made which could have no other pur 
 pose, which has no other meaning. Do senators expect to benefit the coun 
 try by such a course of proceeding ? Do they think they promote the good 
 of this country, of any section of it, when they labor so industriously to 
 prove to one portion of the people that another portion is not to be trusted < 
 Are they not citizens of the same government ! 
 
 Now, as an illustration of what I say, pardon me if I select the two most 
 distinguished gentlemen of the Republican party, gentlemen who above all 
 others have distinguished themselves for their ability in the discussion of 
 this question, who I suppose, from their position and character, in every re- 
 
596 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 spect command, perhaps more than any others, the confidence of the party to 
 which they belong. The distinguished senator from New York (Mr. Conkling), 
 in the very effective speech which he made on the 24th of April, reminded us 
 that " one of Rome s famous legends stands in these words : * Let what each 
 man thinks of the Republic be written on his brow, and the senator wrote 
 on the forefront of his speech, delivered on that important occasion, a most 
 remarkable declaration, which he must excuse me for saying illustrates the 
 animus of the speech. He commences in this way : 
 
 During the last fiscal year the amount of national taxes paid into the treasury was 
 $234,831,461.77. Of this sum one hundred and thirty millions and a fraction was 
 collected under tariff laws as duties on imported merchandise, and one hundred and 
 four millions and a fraction as tax on American productions. Of this total of $235,- 
 000,000, in round numbers, twenty- seven States which adhered to the Union during the 
 recent war paid $221,204,268.88. The residue came from eleven States. I will read 
 their names : Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Caro 
 lina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia. These eleven States paid $13,627,- 
 192.89. Of this sum more than six millions and a half came from the tobacco of Vir 
 ginia. Deducting the amount of the tobacco tax in Virginia, the eleven States enumer 
 ated paid $7,125,462.60 of the revenues and supplies of the Republic. 
 
 What does the senator here say, what does he write upon the forefront 
 of his magnificent oration ? It is that all the customs revenues of the coun 
 try are paid by the State at whose port the revenue is collected. If his ar 
 gument be true, New York pays over $90,000,000 of the customs revenue, 
 because the port of New York is a great port for the whole country ; and he 
 credits the twenty-seven States with the payment of all the customs reve 
 nues collected in that port and Boston and other Northern ports. He should 
 credit it to the city of New York. It is all paid at the city of New York. 
 The senator might have enlarged his argument ; he might have selected 
 from the Western States a group of eleven States that pay perhaps less 
 customs revenue than the eleven Southern States. I doubt whether the 
 great State of my friend from Ohio pays much on the senator s method 
 of computation. Certainly, those great interior States that have no ports, 
 according to him, pay no customs revenue. How much would Ohio pay 
 under that rule ? How much w T ould Indiana pay ? How much would 
 Minnesota pay-? The senator might have gone further. If New York is 
 to be credited with all the revenues that are collected upon importations 
 at New York, New York ought also to be credited with all the products 
 that are exported from the port of New York, and the distinguished sena 
 tor by figures could have proven that New York was the largest cotton- 
 growing State in the world ! 
 
 Why should so distinguished a senator, so able a senator, find it necessary 
 to commence his speech with an argument of that kind ? What had it to do 
 with the question ? The question pending in the bill which he discussed was 
 whether it was wise and proper to use the army to keep the peace at the 
 polls, and the senator commences his argument upon that question by giving 
 a statement of the revenues collected for the support of the government, 
 and puts the statement in such a form as to show that all the revenues are 
 paid by twenty-seven States, of which New York pays half. What had it 
 to do with the question ? Nothing. Then, if the senator found it necessary 
 to make such a statement, why did he hazard his reputation in such a manner 
 as to make a statement, the incorrectness of which could not fail to be seen 
 by any one who understood the facts of the case? And then he put it in the 
 strong form of figures, and he had the benefit of the old aphorism that 
 
HTS LIVE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 597 
 
 figures will not lie. The senator s phraseology is very curious, too. I say 
 nothing of his refusal to permit a correction to be incorporated in his 
 speech, which I attempted. He goes on ; he says : 
 
 The laws exacting these few millions from eleven States, and these hundreds of 
 millions from twenty-seven States, originated, as the Constitution requires all bills 
 for raising revenue to originate, in the House of Representatives. 
 
 Where is the law that exacts these few millions from eleven States, 
 these hundreds of millions from twenty-seven States? Is there such a 
 law known ? Is there any revenue law of this country which is not uniform ? 
 Is there any law of this country which could justify that distinguished sena 
 tor in saying that eleven States pay so few millions of revenue and twenty- 
 seven States pay so many hundred millions of revenue, and, to use his 
 emphatic words, that this revenue in this disproportion is exacted by the 
 laws of the country? I do the senator no injustice when I say that the pur 
 pose of the statement is indicated by the application which is made of it : 
 
 This vast revenue is raised and to be raised for three uses. It is supplied in time of 
 severe depression and distress to pay debt inflicted by rebellion- 
 Why was it necessary to say that ? 
 
 to pay pensions to widows, orphans, and cripples made by rebellion : and to maintain the 
 government and enforce the laws preserved at inestimable cost of life and treasure. 
 
 Why should the senator make a statement in figures that is not correct, 
 and speak of the exactions of a law that does not exist in relation to revenue, 
 and then seek to arouse, as doubtless his method of stating facts does arouse, 
 in so many minds at the North, a prejudice against these eleven States that 
 have been so wicked as to make it necessary for such enormous taxes to be 
 collected, and who, under the laws, are required to pay so few of the taxes ? 
 Everybody knows that each section of the country pays according to its 
 consumption of the importations into the United States. It is hardly neces 
 sary to say that the money collected by the government at the port of New 
 York is not paid by the city or people of New York or by the State of New 
 York, but is paid by the people of the country all over the country,, who buy 
 and consume the goods imported. All the point I make on this is to ask the 
 country what could have been the motive of so distinguished a senator for 
 making such a statement which had no relevancy to the subject under dis 
 cussion what could be the purpose except to use his great powers, aided by 
 a singular computation of figures, to impress his section of the country with 
 feelings of antipathy and dislike to the Southern people ? 
 
 But, sir, we had a more remarkable exhibition than that yesterday. I 
 pass for the moment from the honorable senator from New York to the distin 
 guished senator from Vermont (Mr. Edmunds), for if these great men say 
 these things what shall we not expect of the smaller men, the legions of 
 them? The senator from Vermont yesterday, who may, perhaps, be called 
 with fitness the legal adviser of the Republican party, who seems to feel 
 under special obligations on all occasions to interpret the law for that party, 
 with all his distinguished ability, absolutely came into the Senate and had 
 read from the secretary s desk a" large number of clauses of the Constitution 
 on the subject of the powers of the Federal government, and then had all 
 
 titheadmin- 
 r 89 read, the 
 being careful to 
 
598 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 notify the country in whose administration these various acts were passed, 
 beginning with the sacred administration of Washington and then qualified 
 all that with extensive quotations from that great work written by Hamilton 
 and Madison and Jay, known as the Federalist. For what purpose ? Why 
 all that ? Would any man believe it ? For the purpose of taking the 
 position and seeking to enforce upon the country the idea that the little bill 
 prohibiting the use of troops at the polls had the effect to change and 
 modify, if not to repeal, all this legislation to which I have alluded ; that 
 that bill was in conflict with the clauses of the Constitution which he read ; 
 that it changed the legislation of the country from the days of Washington 
 to the days of Grant, when the senator must know, when every legal mind 
 of this country must know, that the bill which was pending before the 
 Senate yesterday did not affect in the slightest degree, or repeal, a single 
 provision of a single statute to which he referred previous to 1865 ; not 
 one ; I affirm it with confidence, not one. When the bill shall become a 
 law (if it shall become a law), the acts of 1789 and of 1792 and of 1795 and 
 of 1807, and all those other acts, will remain perfect and complete, just 
 as they always were before the passage of the act of 1865. They will 
 not be repealed, they will not be changed, they will not be modified in one 
 single particular. 
 
 That is not the worst. I have the senator s speech before me, and 
 it is a labored effort to impress upon the country what the senator would 
 not say in precise language himself, but to impress upon the country the 
 idea that Washington and Jefferson and Jackson, and all the distinguished 
 Presidents of this country and the Congresses of their day, in passing these 
 laws, had the purpose in view of enabling the President to employ the army 
 to preserve the peace at the polls, and that bypassing this bill and declaring 
 now that the army and navy shall not be brought to the polls during the 
 elections, we are coming in conflict with those statutes that come down to us 
 from the days of Washington ; and yet every senator knows that there 
 is not a word of that correct, as I have stated. 
 
 Why, sir, the act of 1795, and the other acts alluded to by the distin 
 guished senator from Vermont were not intended to give the President 
 power to use the army to keep the peace at the polls or to interfere with the 
 elections, and that senator knew that it was impossible that that legislation 
 could have had such a purpose. Why do I say that he knew it ? Because 
 during all those years of our republic there was no law enacted by the 
 Congress of the United States giving to the Federal government control of 
 elections in the States. The president could not send the army and navy to 
 enforce a State law ; and every law during the administration of Washing 
 ton and Jefferson and Madison, and so on down, regulating the time, place 
 and manner of holding elections even for members of Congress was a State 
 law ; and even if the power had been conferred by the Constitution upon 
 Congress to enact laws to regulate these elections, that power had not been 
 exercised. Now, why should a distinguished senator like the senator from 
 Vermont get up in the face of this countiy and make an elaborate argument 
 to prove that the purpose of this legislation is in conflict with the legislation 
 of 1789 and 1792 and 1795 and 1807, when he knew that at the time of the 
 enactment of those laws the Federal government made no pretension to 
 regulate elections, had no law to enforce on the subject of elections, and left 
 the regulation and conduct of elections exclusively to the States ? And if 
 we do by legislation what this bill proposes, that is, direct that from this 
 
BIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 599 
 
 time forward the army and navy shall not be used to interfere with elections, 
 do we not re-enact what was the practice, what was the custom, and what 
 was the law before the war? 
 
 But there is another proposition, and it is all over the argument of the 
 distinguished senator from Vermont, the argument on the assumption that 
 when we take away from the President the power to use the military at 
 elections we take away all power from the President, and he makes an argu 
 ment to prove that we not only take it away practically for elections, but 
 we take it away for all purposes. He gave several instances to prove that 
 a criminal of any character against the laws of the United States has only to 
 make election day a house of refuge, and for that day at least he cannot be 
 disturbed by the army. He assumes, and his whole argument goes upon the 
 assumption, that if the army cannot be used the Federal government is 
 powerless. And the country is to be impressed with the idea that we who 
 favor this bill, we who desire to prevent the use of the army at elections, 
 really intend to destroy the power of the Federal government even to 
 enforce any law that may exist on the statute-book in any matter. 
 
 Mr. President, the speech of the senator from Vermont ought to be 
 studied by every statesman in this Union, for it shadows, as that dis 
 tinguished senator only knows how to shadow, the great distinction that 
 lies at the bottom of all the differences between the two parties that now 
 contend for the mastery in this government. This whole argument goes 
 upon the idea that there is no protection for the citizens of this country save 
 by the milita^ arm. This whole argument of the honorable senator from 
 Vermont is replete with the idea that when you withdraw the army or fail 
 to furnish the military arm for the protection of the citizen, he is without 
 protection ; when you fail to give the President the army and the navy to 
 enforce the laws, the President is without power to enforce the laws. 
 
 Well, sir, if we have arrived at that condition of things, our condition 
 is indeed lamentable. We have been taught from our youth to believe that 
 this was a country of self-government, that the people are able to protect 
 themselves, that freemen did not need a standing army and a navy to pro 
 tect themselves protect themselves from themselves. It has not been 
 customary to teach our people that they must look to the arms of military 
 power through a federal centralism for the protection and preservation of 
 their rights ; and yet I challenge any gentleman to give this speech a criti 
 cal reading, and it goes altogether on the assumption that if military pro 
 tection is withdrawn there is no protection worth having remaining, and the 
 practical result of the senator s argument is to show that by passing this 
 bill, which simply declares that the army and the navy shall not be used at 
 the polls, we repeal all the acts which authorize the enforcement of the laws 
 previously passed and leave the President powerless to enforce the laws, and 
 the citizens without protection. 
 
 I heard a similar argument from that distinguished senator on another 
 memorable occasion. I noticed it then, and I call the attention of the 
 country to it now. I heard it on one of those bills, during the last Congress 
 before us, making appropriations for the army, in which there was a clause 
 prohibiting the army from being used as a posse comitatus to execute the 
 laws. If senators will turn to the short speech made by the distinguished 
 senator on that occasion they will find that he said broadly that if that 
 clause of the appropriation bill became a law, and a mob should be organized 
 in the city of Washington to rob the Treasury, there would be no power to 
 
600 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 protect the Treasury from that mob, impressing the country with the idea 
 that its defense, that its safety, that its protection rests in the arm of the 
 military power. Can it be true ? If a mob should organize in the city of 
 Washington for the purpose of capturing the Treasury and robbing it, is it 
 true that because there is no army here, because the army cannot be used as 
 a posse comitatus, therefore the mob has only to go and take possession of 
 the Treasury ? In a city of one hundred and fifty thousand inhabitants is 
 there no power to protect the Treasury from a mob save through an army ? 
 Sir, that idea is at war with every feature of our government, and certainty 
 at war with all its fundamental principles. Our government rests upon the 
 idea that we are capable of self-government, that the people are patriotic, 
 and the defense and protection of the property and liberties of the country 
 rest in that belief the people and the authority of the courts, which is the 
 same thing, because they come from the body of the people. It rests upon 
 the idea that we do not need a standing army to protect the American 
 people from outrages by the American people as a body. Of course there 
 are exceptions, as in all countries. The people must be protected from mobs, 
 but the people can be protected from mobs without the use of the army. 
 
 What would be the result of this style of argument ? Gentlemen 
 strangely have come out here now and, in opposition to the bill passed yester 
 day, they have taken the distinct position that it is necessary to keep upon 
 your statute-book the right to use the army and navy for the purpose of 
 keeping the peace at the polls. Well, sir, it is idle, it is worse than idle, to 
 give the President of the United States authority to use your army for any 
 purpose and not furnish him an army to use. You say the President must 
 have the right to use the army to control the elections. That is what you 
 say by your opposition to this bill, for that is the only idea that the bill 
 negatives. If it is necessary to have the right to use the army, the right is 
 worthless unless you furnish an army to use. Make the calculation. Let 
 the citizens of this country make the calculation and see what destiny is in 
 wait for them when the proposition is once established that an army must be 
 supplied for the purpose of keeping the peace at the polls. How many 
 troops will it take ? What sized army must you have ? You must have an 
 army in every State, in every county, in every town ; for if one portion of 
 the country is entitled to protection, and that protection can only be 
 extended by the army, every other portion of the country is entitled to 
 protection ; every other portion of the country must have an army ; and 
 America, free America, will present to the world the singular spectacle of 
 standing more in need of an army than any other country on the globe ; 
 and we must have a larger standing army than Germany or Russia. 
 
 Sir, does not every man see in the very idea that the people of this 
 country on that day when they are sovereigns come to exercise the power 
 of a sovereign, that they must have an army to control them, an army to 
 protect them, an army to regulate them, an army to keep the peace among 
 themselves in the exercise of this great power, that even by that very idea 
 they must admit that free self-government is a failure ? It is the last idea 
 that an American ought to admit. Of all ideas possible in this day and age 
 of degeneracy, I should have supposed the very last idea an American states 
 man would have admitted as at all applicable to the condition of things in 
 this country, would be that we needed military interference on the days of 
 elections for the purpose of protecting the people at the polls. 
 
 Whenever the American Congress shall in solemn form tell the world 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 601 
 
 that an army is needed to protect American freemen when American freemen 
 go to the polls, they have admitted that the American popular system of 
 government is at an end. 
 
 I must say that I am loth to believe and I do not believe that the distin 
 guished gentleman who made the argument of this kind on yesterday, and 
 which necessarily leads to this result, any more believes the statement he 
 was making than did the senator from the State of New York believe the 
 statement of figures he made was correct. Neither of them had any pur 
 pose to make an incorrect statement, but both of them were after the great 
 purpose of this whole movement to excite one section of this country 
 against the other and to avail themselves of any occasion for that purpose. 
 I have been watching during the progress of this discussion not only the 
 character of the speeches that have been made, which have convinced my 
 mind thoroughly of the whole purpose of it, but simultaneously the extra 
 ordinary movements that are going on through the country. Take the 
 Republican newspapers of the day, and it seems to me that they are fuller 
 of abuse, misrepresentation, and vituperation of the section of the country 
 from which I have come than thev ever were before. I know, from direct 
 
 */ 
 
 communication to myself, that various gentlemen who have been living for 
 a few years in the South are going through the North, some of them as 
 lecturers, some of them in the garb of ministers of the Gospel, and their 
 whole lectures are simply replete with the most extravagant and false state 
 ments of wrongs and injuries in the South. 
 
 Designing persons are circulating letters and documents among the poor 
 colored people, telling them that in Kansas they can have forty acres and a 
 mule and money free of cost, and the government, the great good govern 
 ment that freed them will take care of them. For what purpose is tins sec 
 ond signal movement among the poor negroes of the South, the effect of 
 which is to dissatisfy them with their condition ? That they may, as many 
 of them have been, be deceived and undertake to emigrate to this heavenly 
 region, the new Canaan of the negro the colored man. Why is that done ? 
 Not for the purpose of benefiting the poor colored man, oh, no ; but for 
 the double purpose of making it an occasion to vituperate the Southern peo 
 ple before the Northern people, charging their own duplicity to be the effect 
 of cruelty and wrong by the very men whose advantage it is to be kind to 
 their laborers and to keep them among them in contentment. There is the 
 political purpose. Thus they get thousands of poor creatures away from 
 home, naked and hungry, and then the appeal comes to the philanthropy of 
 Northern people and the plethora of the Treasury to come and take care of 
 them ; and the agents who circulate the falsehoods and create the dissatisfac 
 tion and produce the mischief come in of course as dispensers of the alms. 
 It is a sad fact that these sectional passions are yet used by statesmen, by 
 politicians, by bad men and by thousands of small men in a hundred shapes 
 and forms; these sectional passions that keep the people of the North and 
 the people of the South distrustful of each other and which are made com 
 merce of by these people for their own selfish ends without any regard to 
 consequences. 
 
 We are to be told that the military arm is essential to the protection of 
 the country, but that under no circumstances can the North trust one-third of 
 the people of this Union. No man can read these remarkable declarat 
 of the leading men of that great party and not feel that the American Rubi 
 con is in sight and Cassar is ready to cross over. 
 
602 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 REPUBLICAN LEADERS COERCING THE PRESIDENT. 
 
 But, sir, I should not have perhaps said one word, notwithstanding my 
 convictions, of the purposes of the discussion here, the style of discussion, 
 the manner of the discussion, its perfect consonance with what is going on 
 outside, notwithstanding the conviction on my part that there is this day a 
 concerted movement in this country permeating the whole Republican party, 
 high and low, for the purpose of consolidating one section in this country 
 against the other, for no purpose but that of dominion, right or wrong I 
 perhaps should have said nothing in view of all this but for the fact that in 
 the present case the immediate legislation and the purpose manifested in 
 opposing that legislation would amount to nothing unless they could control 
 the President of the United States. If the President should oppose the 
 bill passed by the majority of Congress, of course that was an end to the 
 contest here, and distinguished gentlemen who had made such tremendous 
 clamor against the bill would be like Othello their occupation would be 
 gone. I do not wish to do any one injustice, but it cannot be disguised be 
 fore the country that a persistent, earnest, arbitrary, I almost said dictatorial 
 purpose has been manifested by that party to get control of the President 
 and influence him to veto the bill. 
 
 I have never believed it would be done. I do not believe the President 
 will lend himself to the scheme, and I have not believed it. The present 
 Chief Magistrate of this country distinguished his administration in a man 
 ner worthy of his best predecessors when he first took charge of it by sig 
 nalizing the beginning of that administration by the removal of the troops 
 from the polls of the States, and from interference with the States. I can 
 not believe that a President who thus signalized his administration in the 
 beginning would be guilty of the enormous inconsistency of now insisting, 
 against the will of a majority of Congress, that he should have the power 
 to use troops, not only to control the States, but to control all the elections 
 in the country. It would be too manifestly inconsistent. The President 
 has sent in one veto. I confess that it surprised me in one respect, and it 
 did not in another. It showed the power of the gentlemen on the other side, 
 that they had accomplished their end that far ; but the bill which we sent 
 him before, though Constitutional, though usual, contained what is called 
 general legislation attached to an appropriation bill, and in its peculiar 
 phraseology gave the President some pretext for vetoing it, and he did veto 
 it. We desire to remove every reasonable objection. So far from desiring 
 to coerce the President, there has been a general purpose to accommodate 
 this legislation to the President, so as to accomplish the main end in perfect 
 harmony between the executive and the legislative branches of the govern 
 ment. Therefore, much to the consternation of the gentlemen on the other 
 side it seems, we have brought forward the single naked proposition that 
 all laws authorizing the use of the army and navy at the polls shall be re 
 pealed. That makes the issue direct and simple. The country, I think, had 
 a right to expect from the character of the discussion when it opened, espe 
 cially during the Forty-fifth Congress and the early days of the Forty-sixth 
 Congress, that when this proposition was stripped of its connection with the 
 appropriation bills and presented to our friends on the other side in a simple, 
 naked issue as to whether we should use the army and the navy at the polls, 
 they would rise above all their prejudices and purposes and vote for the bill. 
 But to a man in the other House they have opposed it, and to a man in this 
 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 603 
 
 body they have opposed it, and the country waits with anxiety to know how 
 it will be treated by him who now to such a great extent holds, the peace of 
 this country in his hands. 
 
 Sir, I would not say one word of disparagement to that high Chief 
 Magistrate in this critical hour. I feel and feel keenly the heavy responsi 
 bilities that rest upon him. Will he remember now those grand words 
 which he uttered in his inaugural, "He best serves his party who best serves 
 his country ? Will he rise above the clamor, the dictation, and the demands 
 of a struggling party, seeking to regain life by reviving sectional agitation, 
 and serve his country like a patriot ? Will he do that ? If he shall do so 
 he will for the second time at least in his administration show himself 
 worthy of the high position which he holds. If, on the contrary, the Presi 
 dent will do what is so contrary to the record of his own administration, 
 what is so contrary to all the fundamental principles of our free popular 
 government, what is contrary to the correct understanding of his own 
 message, and if he shall insist upon the bald, naked, fearless, terrible propo 
 sition that we shall have upon the statute-books that it shall be right and 
 lawful to use the army on the great day of days for an American election 
 day that he will keep a law upon the statute-book against the will of a 
 majority of both Houses of Congress, and that he will use his veto for such 
 party ends, then the time will have come when the voters of this country 
 will be face to face with a very grave issue, which I doubt not the democ 
 racy will be able to meet with moderation and wisdom. 
 
 WHO MADE AND WHO DEFEATED APPROPRIATIONS THE VETO POWER, ITS 
 
 OBJECT AND ITS ABUSE. 
 
 Mr. President, upon this subject of the veto power I wish to submit a 
 few observations to the Senate, and I take for the basis of my observation a 
 portion of the speech made by the distinguished senator from New York 
 (Mr. Conkling). That senator said : 
 
 It 
 The revenue 
 
 can be devoted to its uses in only one mode. Once in the Treasury, it must remain there 
 useless until appropriated by act of Congress. The Constitution so ordains. To collect 
 it and then defeat or prevent its object or use would be recreant and abominable op 
 pression. 
 
 The Constitution leaves no discretion to Congress whether needful appropriations 
 >lmll be made. Discretion to ascertain and determine amounts needful is committed to 
 Congress, but the appropriation of whatever is needful after the amount has been ascer- 
 t;iined is commanded positively and absolutely. When, for example, the Constitution 
 declares that the President and the judges at stated periods shall receive compensation 
 fixed by law, the duty to make the appropriations is plain and peremptory ; to refuse to 
 make them is disobedience of the Constitution and treasonable. So, when it is declared 
 that Congress shall have power to provide money to pay debts and for the common de 
 fense and for the general welfare, the plain meaning is that Congress shall do these 
 things, and a refusal to do them is revolutionary and subversive of the Constitution. A 
 refusal less flagrant would be impeachable in the case of every officer and department of 
 the government within reach of impeachment. Were the President to refuse to do any 
 act enjoined on him by the Constitution he would be impeachable, and ought to be con 
 victed and removed from office as a convict. 
 
 Mr. President, I have read that clause so strongly and forcibly put by 
 the senator from New York, to say to him, to the Senate, and the country, that 
 I indorse every word of it. I believe the senator has not stated the truth 
 
604 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 too strongly. There is no clause in the Constitution which says in so many 
 words that Congress shall vote appropriations ; but the preservation of the 
 government itself requires that appropriations shall be voted. The taxes 
 are paid into the Treasury for the purposes of supporting the government, 
 and the Congress which wilfully refuses to appropriate money to support 
 the government, in my judgment is guilty of revolutionary conduct which 
 cannot be excused. 
 
 I suppose I have stated that with sufficient strength for the senator from 
 New York. Now, what are the facts ? Mark what I state : that the refusal 
 to vote the appropriations to support the government is unconstitutional, 
 that we are bound by the very terms of our oath to take care of this gov 
 ernment, to support it, to maintain it, and to that end to make the necessary 
 appropriations. What are the facts? Take the Forty-fifth Congress. 
 Every Democrat in the House voted for appropriations ; every Democrat 
 in the Senate voted for appropriations, and every Republican in the House 
 and Senate voted against appropriations. Who violated the Constitution ? 
 Did the Democrats who voted to make the appropriations, violate the Con 
 stitution? Did the Republicans who voted not to make the appropriations, 
 support the Constitution ? The senator says it is a Constitutional duty to 
 make appropriations. I admit it. Why was it that appropriations were 
 not voted by the Forty-fifth Congress to support the army and to carry on 
 the government? It was because every Republican in this body rallied and 
 defeated the bill making appropriations for that purpose. There is the 
 record. Let us get the facts right, and I will attend to the excuses after 
 ward. The unconstitutional act of voting against appropriations was done 
 by the Republican party. The Constitutional duty of voting for appropria 
 tions was performed by every Democrat in both Honses. How, then, can 
 it be charged over the country that the Democratic party is responsible for 
 the failure of the appropriations ? 
 
 Not only was that true in the Forty-fifth Congress, but it is true of the 
 Forty-sixth. This Congress was called together, and every Democrat in 
 both Houses voted for a bill appropriating money to support the army, all 
 that the departments demand and need. Every Republican in both Houses 
 voted against it. If it is unconstitutional to refuse appropriations, who has 
 refused appropriations ? But the senator is right again. If it is a Consti 
 tutional duty on the part of representatives and senators to vote for appro 
 priations, it is equally a Constitutional duty on the part of the Executive to 
 approve the appropriation bill, because under the forms of the Constitution 
 every bill has to go to him for approval or disapproval. The appropria 
 tions cannot be made by a majority of Congress without the concurrence of 
 the President, and, therefore, it is just as unconstitutional for the President 
 to defeat an appropriation as for Congress to do so. 
 
 The President has done it in this case, but they say there are excuses 
 for it. The first question I wish to put to the senator is this : What excuse 
 can justify a man in doing an unconstitutional act ? The senator says it is 
 unconstitutional to vote against appropriations. What excuse can justify a 
 man in voting against an appropriation? AVhat excuse can justify the 
 President therefore in vetoing an appropriation bill ? I think it must be 
 conceded on all hands that no man can be justified in doing an unconstitu 
 tional thing for any reason less than the preservation of the Constitution 
 itself. 
 
 Now, what are the excuses offered in this case ? The excuse is the gen- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 605 
 
 eral legislation that was attached to the appropriation bill. What was the 
 form of that legislation ? First, it is admitted to be usual and Constitu 
 tional. The senator from New York himself admits that. The senator 
 from New York goes further and says that so far as the mere form is con 
 cerned any bill which Congress has the power to pass can be attached to an 
 appropriation bill, and unless the President can find cause on its merits it is 
 difficult to see how the veto of such a bill could be sustained ; and the sena 
 tor is right. The form was usual and Constitutional. So the President can 
 not be justified in vetoing the bill nor can the gentlemen on the other side 
 be justified in voting against the bill because of the form, if the form of the 
 bill is usual and Constitutional. Mark you, they say to vote against the 
 bill is unconstitutional. To refuse an appropriation (and every man by his 
 vote against an appropriation does refuse it) is unconstitutional. Then you 
 cannot plead that you do not like the form for the purpose of justifying the 
 unconstitutional act. 
 
 Then take the substance of the bill. What is it ? It is nothing in the 
 world but to repeal certain legislation. That is Constitutional. The sena 
 tor from New York would admit that Congress has a right to repeal those 
 acts ; that it is Constitutional to repeal the acts we seek to repeal. None 
 of these acts had existence on the statute-book previous to 1862. One was 
 passed in 1862, one in 1865, and one in 1870-71. These are the acts we 
 propose to repeal, and all admit that it is Constitutional for Congress to 
 repeal those laws. So you cannot justify the unconstitutional act of voting 
 against appropriations by pleading that you did not like the form or that 
 you did not like the substance when you are compelled to admit that both 
 the form and substance are Constitutional. 
 
 But another reason was urged. It is said that the Democratic party 
 have been threatening the President. Threatening him with what? 
 Threatening him with coercion. Coercion how ? Why, you say if the 
 President vetoed the bill we said we would not vote supplies. In the first 
 place, I deny the fact that there was any such threat ; but, admit it to be 
 true, what is the character of the threat? It? is a threat that the President 
 can defeat by doing his Constitutional duty of approving the act, because 
 the threat which they allege could only take effect after the President had 
 vetoed the bill. Every Democrat voted for the bill ; the bill went to the 
 President, and the President had the power, therefore, of avoiding any 
 threat of withholding appropriations by simply doing his Constitutional 
 duty. 
 
 Mr. President, view this thing in any manner you please, the question 
 comes down to a single point. Admitting the position taken by the^ senator 
 from New York that it is a Constitutional obligation resting upon Congress 
 to make the appropriations to support the government, and that it is the 
 Constitutional duty of the President therefore to approve appropriation 
 bills, that only the Republican party prevented their passage in the Forty- 
 fifth Congress, and that only the President has prevented the appropriation 
 bill from^becoming a law in the Forty-sixth Congress, and that they have 
 done it upon an excuse as to the form of legislation which they admit to be 
 Constitutional, as to the substance of legislation which they admit to be 
 Constitutional, the threats of the Democratic party, which are not true in 
 fact, are futile in view of the power of the President himself to prevent 
 them from taking effect. 
 
 In view of all these facts we are brought nakedly to the simple proposi- 
 
606 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 tion that the Republican party have refused to do their Constitutional duty 
 of voting for appropriations, and have pleaded in excuse that which is a 
 Constitutional right in Congress to do. Congress has a right to put on 
 riders, as they are called. Congress has a right to put on this general legis 
 lation. You admit that it is Constitutional, and the President is put in the 
 awkward dilemma of vetoing a bill which the Constitution requires should 
 become a law, without which the support of the government cannot go on, 
 and pleading as an excuse for it that he did not think that certain portions 
 of the bill were expedient. 
 
 I admit that if Congress should so far forget its duty as to attach un 
 constitutional legislation to an appropriation bill, then we put the President 
 in the awkward predicament of having to violate the Constitution in any 
 event. If he approves the bill he approves an unconstitutional provision. 
 If he refuses to approve the bill he refuses to perform the Constitutional 
 duty of granting appropriations. Congress cannot be justified in putting 
 the President in that dilemma. I will say that although I might believe 
 legislation attached to an appropriation bill to be perfectly Constitutional, 
 yet if the President would say that he believed it to be unconstitutional I 
 for one would scorn to put him in the dilemma of either failing to do a 
 Constitutional duty or doing an unconstitutional act. I would not require 
 it of him ; but when the legislation of which complaint is made is Constitu 
 tional in form, Constitutional in substance, Constitutional in every respect, 
 then clearly Congress has a right to enact it. I deny to any man the right 
 to do an unconstitutional thing and plead a difference of opinion or a ques 
 tion of expediency as an excuse for doing an unconstitutional thing. The 
 President has no right, the gentlemen on the other side have no right, to 
 refuse appropriations to support the government and say they will refuse , 
 the appropriations because they do not want Congress to do what Congress 
 has a Constitutional right to do. If the veto power shall be used in this 
 way, there is an end of this government. If the President can use the veto 
 power for the purpose of defeating an appropriation necessary to support 
 the government and be justified in doing it because he dislikes a portion of 
 the bill on the score of expediency, then the President can use the power 
 vested in him by the Constitution for the purpose of preserving the govern 
 ment to destroy the government. 
 
 If this is to be the rule you see where it leads. No law, however odious, 
 which the minority in Congress shall desire to retain on the statute-book 
 can be repealed in any form or manner if they and the President concur in 
 that desire. If that were so the people cannot change the law by changing 
 their representatives in Congress. They must also either change the Presi 
 dent or they must make a two-thirds majority in both branches of Con 
 gress. It cannot escape the attention of any intelligent man that the whole 
 purpose is to use the veto power to keep upon the statute-book laws which 
 are intended to be used by the Republican party as elements of force to con 
 trol the future elections of this country to keep themselves in power. 
 
 I will not believe that the President of the United States has given him 
 self to such an extreme extent that he is willing to stop supplies to the 
 government rather than repeal laws which he or his party may deem essen 
 tial to enable them to keep in power. If so, the veto is used for a purpose 
 at war with every sentiment and principle which induced the framers to 
 put it in the Constitution. Everybody knows (and I will not take time to 
 read to the Senate to show it) that this qualified veto power was given to 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 60V 
 
 the executive in a general form, it is true, but for the express purpose of 
 preventing unconstitutional and inconsiderate legislation. You cannot call 
 this legislation, as I have shown, unconstitutional. You cannot show it to 
 be hasty, because the favorite defender of the President, the senator from 
 New York (Mr. Conkling), himself spoke on it three hours. It cannot 
 therefore be said to be inconsiderate ; it cannot be said to be hasty. It 
 was debated for a month in the two Houses. 
 
 So we have arrived at a new point in our history. If the veto power 
 can be used for such a purpose, the country must know it. If this negative 
 upon the will of the majority of the people can be used not to protect the 
 Constitution, not to protect the prerogatives of the other departments of 
 the government, not to protect the country from the consequences of ill- 
 advised legislation, but if this great negative upon the will of the people 
 can be used for the purpose of retaining a party in power, if it can be used 
 for the purpose of keeping control of the army and navy, if it can be used 
 for the purpose of employing an indefinite number of Federal deputy mar 
 shals and supervisors of election if it can be used for those great purposes, 
 we have arrived at a new era in our history, when the veto power, which 
 was expressly conferred to preserve the government, will be used for its 
 destruction. As my friend (Mr. Eaton) reminds me, you cannot say this 
 legislation was hasty, because it was passed last session. It has been passed 
 twice. Perhaps no measure before Congress ever received fuller considera 
 tion. If it was not unconstitutional and was fully considered, will any 
 sensible man come down to the real truth of the argument and tell me what 
 excuse can be rendered for the veto of legislation which the Constitution 
 
 ^j 
 
 requires the President to approve ? 
 
 CONSPIRACY TO DESTROY THE STATES AND REVOLUTIONIZE THE GOVERN 
 MENT. 
 
 Mr. President, I have detained the Senate longer upon this branch of 
 the question than I had any thought of doing. I advance to a more signifi 
 cant proposition ; one which I consider still more important than any that has 
 been discussed. You cannot believe that this great party, led by such in 
 telligent gentlemen, is simply influenced, and influenced alone, by a desire 
 to control an election. There is a greater significance. I will not say the 
 manifest purpose, but I will say the logical tendency of the doctrines which 
 have been advanced, and which are in perfect consonance with the history 
 of the Republican party, Is the destruction of the States as an element in the 
 character of this Union. Take the argument of the senator from New 
 York. Let me read what he said. The senator from New York said : 
 
 In the city of New York all the thugs and shoulder-hitters and repeaters ; all the car 
 riers of slung-shots, dirks, and bludgeons ; all the fraternity of the* bucket-shops, the rat- 
 pits, the hells, and the slums ; all the graduates of the nurseries of modern so-called 
 democracy ; all those who employ and incite them, from King s Bridge to the Battery, 
 are to be told in advance that on the day when the million people around them choose 
 their members of the National Legislature, no matter what God-daring or man-hurting 
 enormities they may commit, no matter what they do, nothing they can do will meet 
 with the slightest resistance from any national soldier or armed man clothed with na 
 tional authority. 
 
 Now, does the senator from New York mean to say (and his argument 
 is utterly worthless unless he does mean to say so) that protection from 
 thugs and shoulder-hitters and the various unnamable bad men that he 
 enumerates is impossible in New York except through the national soldiery, 
 
608 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 except through the arm of the national government? Is that what the 
 honorable senator means? Yet that is what he says. He says that every 
 one of these terrible characters is to be told that he may commit any enor 
 mity he pleases ; he cannot be interfered with by any national soldiery. That 
 is all true ; but does it therefore follow that they can do these great crimes with 
 impunity ? Has New York no power to protect her citizens in the exercise of 
 the right of suffrage ? Is New York so given up to thugs and shoulder-hitters 
 -I cannot remember those other hard names ; but is New York such a hell 
 that New York cannot protect her own people ; and does the ambassador 
 from New York, in his high place, say that to the country ? If New York 
 can protect her people, why does she clamor for the national arm ? Is New 
 York unable to protect her citizens ? Then let New York petition this 
 Congress and say so, and we will help the poor, feeble, emasculated State 
 of New York ! Is New York able to protect her citizens and yet unwilling 
 to protect them ? Then New York does not deserve help ; then New York 
 does not deserve to be a State. One or the other must be true. If she de 
 mands the Federal arm ; if she demands the army and the navy ; if she 
 demands that the soldiery shall protect her people, it must be because she 
 is either unable to protect them or unwilling to protect them. 
 
 Mr. Kernan. She is neither. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Ah, my friend, you are right ; she is neither. She is able 
 and she is willing to protect her citizens in this right. But let the argu 
 ment progress. If the senator is right, and if in New York the national 
 soldier must protect her citizens in the exercise of the right of suffrage, 
 must we not do the same thing in every other right ? If New York cannot 
 protect her people in one right, can she protect them in any other right? 
 If New York must have the national arm to help her protect her people in 
 the exercise of one right, I repeat, must not New York demand the national 
 arm to help her protect her people in all other personal rights, and what is 
 the result ? The argument comes just to this : that the State of New York 
 is unable to protect her people in any of their rights, and therefore it is 
 necessary for New York to have the protection and the help of the national 
 government in the protection of all. If New York cannot protect her peo 
 ple, what State can ? If New York with her five millions people, the 
 largest State in this Union, the wealthiest State in this Union, having the 
 commercial metropolis of this great country, is unable to protect her people 
 from thugs and shoulder-hitters and rat-pitters, what other State is able to 
 protect her people ? Does not every man see the necessary logical result of 
 the honorable senator s argument, that States must be destroyed, that the 
 government must absorb to itself all the power of protecting the citizens of 
 this country, all their rights, and reduce the States to incompetent prov 
 inces ? That is the goal of the Republican party. Every hour of their 
 history has been a direct march to the destruction of the States. 
 
 THE TRUE THEORY AND NATURE OF OUR GOVERNMENTS, NATIONAL AND 
 
 STATE. 
 
 Mr. President, if the Senate will bear with me I wish to give my views 
 upon a question growing out of the subject I am now considering. I want 
 to call the attention of the people of this country to the real danger that j 
 threatens them, for I do not disguise the fact that they are in danger. The 
 senator from New York says they are alarmed because the national gov 
 ernment is threatening not to help them to protect their citizens in the 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 609 
 
 right of suffrage. They have no just cause of alarm in that respect because 
 they can protect their own people ; but there is cause of alarm. There 
 have been two parties in this country from the beginning which have been 
 inimical to the true character of the government under which we live. 
 When the convention met that framed the Constitution there were two an 
 tagonistic ideas in that convention. One class of delegates wanted simply 
 to amend the Articles of Confederation and continue purely a Federal sys 
 tem of government. Another party wanted to destroy the federal features 
 altogether and institute a purely national government. Neither succeeded. 
 I was somewhat impressed, and I confess a little amused, by an argument 
 of the senator from Illinois (Mr. Logan), or rather a statement he made. In 
 the speech which that senator made, he says : 
 
 I assume, sir, that this government is either a nation per se, or it is simply a voluntary 
 aggregation of States with a sovereign autonomy, each entirely competent to exercise its 
 sovereignty by a withdrawal from the federation whenever it desires. 
 
 There is doubtless an idea in those words, but I am not able to catch it. 
 He says, further : 
 
 It cannot have the aspect of both a sovereign nation and a collection of sovereign 
 States. A paradox of insurmountable character is involved in the very idea of such a 
 thing. But, however we may argue upon this matter, the strong arm of the American 
 people, with gun and sword in hand, has settled the principle that the American Union 
 is a nation, sovereign and supreme. 
 
 The senator says : "It cannot have the aspect of both a sovereign nation 
 and a collection of sovereign States. A paradox of insurmountable charac 
 ter is involved in the very idea of such a thing." It is a remarkable fact 
 that just what the honorable senator from Illinois calls an insurmountable 
 paradox is exactly the Constitution of the United States. After listening 
 to the honorable senator s speech for two hours, without meaning anything 
 offensive to him, I must say that I think the Constitution is to him an in 
 surmountable paradox. 
 
 Now, the Constitution has formed just that character of government. 
 It is partly national and it is partly federal. It is both in part and neither 
 altogether. In my opinion the best description of the Constitution ever 
 written by anybody was that written by Mr. Madison in the thirty-ninth 
 number of the federalist, and I watched with a good deal of curiosity the 
 senator from Vermont yesterday when he was collating quotations to prove 
 that Mr. Madison was in favor of a strong central government, to see if he 
 would not read what Mr. Madison had definitely explained to be his idea of 
 this government. Here is what he said, and I call the attention of the Sen 
 ate to it ; it ought to be read from every house-top in this country : 
 
 First. In order to ascertain the real character of the government, it may be considered 
 in relation to the foundation on which it is to be established ; to the sources from which 
 its ordinary powers are to be drawn ; to the operation of those powers ; to the extent of 
 them, and to the authority by which future changes in the government are to be intro 
 duced. 
 
 On examining the first relation it appears, on one hand, that the Constitution is to be 
 founded on the assent and ratification of the people of America, given by deputi 
 elected for the special purpose ; but, on the other, that this assent and ratification i 
 given by the people, not as individuals composing one entire nation, but as composing 
 the distinct and independent States, to which they respectively belong, 
 assent and ratification of the several States, derived from the supreme authority in t 
 State the authority of the people themselves. The act, therefore, establishing the 
 StiUUioi) wjll not be a national but a Federal act. 
 
610 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Mark that. The act establishing the Constitution is not a national but a 
 Federal act. He goes on : 
 
 That it will be a Federal, and not a national act, as these terms are understood by 
 the objectors, the act of the people, as forming so many independent States, not as form 
 ing one aggregate nation, is obvious from this single consideration that it is to result 
 neither from the decision of a majority of the people of the Union nor from that of a 
 majority of the States. It must result from the unanimous assent of the several States 
 that are parties to it, differing no otherwise from their ordinary assent than in its being 
 expressed, not by the legislative authority, but by that of the people themselves. Were 
 the people regarded in this transaction as forming one nation, the will of the majority of 
 the whole people of the United States would bind the minority in the same manner as 
 the majority in each State must bind the minority ; and the will of the majority must be 
 determined either by a comparison of the individual votes, or by considering the will of 
 the majority of the States as evidence of the will of a majority of the people of the United 
 States. Neither of these rules has been adopted. 
 
 I call the attention of gentlemen to that. Neither of these rules has been 
 adopted : 
 
 Each State, in ratifying the Constitution, is considered as a sovereign body, inde 
 pendent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act. In this relation, 
 then, the new Constitution will, if established, be a federal and not a national constitu 
 tion. The next relation is to the sources from which the ordinary powers of govern 
 ment are to be derived. The House of Representatives will derive its powers from the 
 people of America ; and the people will be represented in the same proportion and on 
 the same principle as they are in the Legislature of a particular State. So far the gov 
 ernment is national, not federal. The Senate, on the other hand, will derive its powers 
 from the States, as political and coequal societies, and these will be represented on the 
 principle of equality in the Senate as they are now in the existing Congress. So far the 
 government is federal, not national. The executive power will be derived from a very 
 compound source. The immediate election of the President is to be made by the States 
 in their political characters. The votes allotted to them are in a compound ratio, which 
 considers them partly as distinct and coequal societies, partly as unequal members of the 
 same society. The eventual election again, is to be made by that branch of the Legisla 
 ture which consists of the national representatives ; but in this particular act they are to 
 be thrown into the form of individual delegations from so many and coequal bodies- 
 politic. From this aspect of the government it appears to be of a mixed character, pre 
 senting at least as many federal as national features. 
 
 The difference between a federal and national government, as it relates to the opera 
 tion of the government, is by the adversaries of the plan of the convention supposed to 
 consist in this, that in the former the powers operate on the political bodies composing 
 the confederacy, in their political capacities ; in the latter, on the individual citizens com 
 posing the nation, in their individual capacities. On trying the Constitution by this crite 
 rion, it falls under the national, not the federal character ; though perhaps not so com 
 pletely as has been understood. In several cases, and particularly in the trial of contro 
 versies to which States may be parties, they must be viewed and proceeded against in 
 their collective and political capacities only. But the operation of the government on 
 the people, in their individual capacities, in its ordinary and most essential proceedings, 
 may, on the whole, designate it in this relation a national government. 
 
 But if the government be national with regard to the operation of its powers, it 
 changes its aspect again when we contemplate it in relation to the extent of its powers. 
 The idea of a national government involves in it not only an authority over the individ 
 ual citizens, but an indefinite supremacy over all persons and things, so far as they are 
 objects of lawful government. Among a people consolidated into one nation this su 
 premacy is completely vested in the national Legislature. Among communities united 
 for particular purposes it is vested partly in the general and partly in the municipal 
 legislatures. In the former case, all local authorities are subordinate to the supreme, 
 and may be controlled, directed, or abolished by it at pleasure. In the latter, the local 
 or municipal authorities form distinct and independent portions of the supremacy, no 
 more subject, within their respective spheres, to the general authority than the general 
 authority is subject to them within its own sphere. In this relation, then, the proposed 
 government cannot be deemed a national one, since its jurisdiction extends to certain 
 Objects only m $ leaves^ to the several States, a residuary arid 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 611 
 
 sovereignty over all other objects. It is true that in controversies relating to the bound 
 ary between the two jurisdictions, the tribunal which is ultimately to decide is to be 
 established under the general government, But this does not change the principle of 
 the case. The decision is to be impartially made, according to the rules of the ( oust it u- 
 tion, and all the usual and most effectual precautions are taken to secure this impartial 
 ity. Some such tribunal is clearly essential to prevent an appeal to the sword and a 
 dissolution of the compact ; and that it ought to be established under the general rather 
 than under the local governments, or, to speak more properly, that it could be safely 
 established under the first alone, is a position not likely to be combated 
 
 If we try the Constitution by its last relation to the authority by which amendments 
 
 ajonty 
 
 of every national society, to alter or abolish its established government. Were it wholly 
 federal, on the other hand, the concurrence of each State in the Union would be essential 
 to every alteration that would be binding on all. The mode provided by the plan of the 
 convention is not founded on either of these principles. In requiring more than a ma 
 jority, and particularly in computing the proportion by States, not by citizens, it departs 
 from the national and advances toward the federal character. In rendering the concur 
 rence of less than the whole number of States sufficient, it loses again the federal and 
 partakes of the national character. 
 
 The proposed Constitution, therefore, even when tested by the rules laid down by its 
 antagonists, is, in strictness, neither a national nor a federal Constitution, but a composi 
 tion of both. In its foundation it is federal, not national ; in the sources from which 
 the ordinary powers of the government are drawn it is partly federal and partly na 
 tional ; in the operation of these powers it is national, not federal ; in the extent of them 
 again it is federal, not national ; and finally in the authoritative mode of introducing 
 amendments it is neither wholly federal nor wholly national. 
 
 This establishes the proposition that the government as formed under 
 the Constitution is both national and federal. For instance, in its structure 
 it is federal because made by the States, each State acting through its own 
 people as a separate community. In the powers by which it enacts laws it 
 is both national and federal. The House of Representatives is a national 
 body, because the House of Representatives is composed of members chosen 
 according to population. The Senate is a federal body. Here our govern 
 ment is confederate. In the House, New York is equal to thirty-three 
 Delawares, and there we have a national government. Here New York is 
 equal to one Delaware, because New York and Delaware confederate here 
 as equals. 
 
 I could not help but be amused the other day when I said this was a con 
 federate Senate ; men whose hairs had grown gray thought it was a slip of 
 the tongue ; they knew that much of the Constitution of the country; and the 
 papers all through the country took it up and said it must have been a 
 /j>sus. Sir, I was not thinking of the Confederate States of America. 
 According to Mr. Madison, and as I say the best description of the govern 
 ment that ever was written, he says this Senate is a confederate Senate, be- 
 < uise the States confederate here as equals ; he says the House is national, 
 and I admit it ; and he says, and correctly says, that the executive depart 
 ment of the government combines in itself both the national and the federal 
 features. The executive branch of the government is peculiarly what the 
 senator from Illinois (Mr. Logan) would call "an insurmountable paradox," 
 because in itself it is both federal and national. The electoral college which 
 elects the President is composed of two ambassadors from each State and a 
 number of other members equal to the House of Representatives, 
 ambassadors who represent the State are the confederate ambassadors like 
 the senators upon this floor ; the members who go into the electoral college 
 representing the Districts a.re Rational, So vou s & ^ere in the House of 
 
612 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Representatives, which is national, New York is thirty-three times as great 
 as Delaware ; in the Senate, which is exclusively confederate, New York is 
 equal only to Delaware. In the electoral college New York is about twelve 
 times greater, not thirty-three times, because there, as Mr. Madison says 
 emphatically, the government becomes compound. So that in the structure 
 of the government it is federal, that is in the process by which it was made 
 it is federal ; in the different departments of the government as made we 
 find the national and the federal features commingled, one branch of the 
 Legislature national, the other branch of the Legislature confederate, the 
 executive both national and confederate. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. Does Mr. Madison use the word "confederate" ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. He does, a great many times ; he calls it a confederacy in 
 many places, and he says especially that the Senate is federal. 
 
 Mr. Blaine." Federal ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. What is the difference ? I should like to know the difference. 
 The senator from Maine is a distinguished gentleman, and if he can show 
 the difference between a federal Senate and a confederate Senate he will have 
 done much more than any man has ever done. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. There is a great deal of difference, if the senator will per 
 mit me to say so 
 
 Mr.. Hill. I do not wish to be interrupted. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. I do not want to interrupt the senator. 
 
 Mr. Hill. A friend reminds me, what I intended to mention, that when 
 the election of a President fails before the people and goes to the House of 
 Representatives, that House of Representatives, which in its organization as 
 a legislative body is national, at once becomes confederate because each 
 State has one vote, and New York is no greater than Delaware in the elec 
 tion of President by the House of Representatives. 
 
 Mr. Madison repeats the same doctrine precisely in a great letter which 
 he wrote in 1830, in which he was proving that the Virginia resolutions of 
 1798 and 1799 did not authorize the doctrine of nullification, and proved it 
 correctly. In a letter dated Montpelier, August, 1830, he says : 
 
 In order to understand the true character of the Constitution of the United States, the 
 error, not uncommon, must be avoided of viewing it through the medium, either of a 
 consolidated government or of a confederated government, while it is neither the one nor 
 the other, but a mixture of both. And having in no model the similitudes and analogies 
 applicable to other systems of government it must, more than any other, be its own 
 interpreter according to its text and the facts of the case. 
 
 From these it will be seen that the characteristic peculiarities of the Constitution are : 
 1, the mode of its formation ; 2, the division of the supreme powers of the government 
 between the States in their united capacity and the States in their individual capacities. 
 
 I. It was formed, not by the governments of the component States, as the Federal ; 
 Government for which it was substituted was formed. Nor was it formed by a majority 
 of the people of the United States as a single community in the manner of a consolidated 
 government. It was formed by the States, that is, by the people in each of the States, 
 acting in their highest sovereign capacity, and formed consequently by the same authority 
 which formed the State constitutions. 
 
 While the government is federal in its structure, partly federal and partly 
 national in the enactment of its laws, when it comes to the operation of its 
 laws, it is national. In the extent of its powers it is federal, because, as Mr. 
 Madison justly remarks, you cannot say that a nation is an absolute nation 
 whose powers are limited. Then, because the powers of the Federal govern 
 ment are limited, not inherent, are delegated, it is federal in that respect ; 
 but in the operations of its laws, operating as they do upon the citizen, it 
 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 613 
 
 becomes national. This government, then, in the powers granted to it is 
 absolute it is national. Its laws operate upon the citizen just as the laws 
 of England and France do, and they can be enforced. It must enforce its 
 own laws. 
 
 Two things have struck me as a wonderful marvel. The claim by some, 
 one extreme class of thinkers or theorists in this country, is that the govern 
 ment is altogether federal. How any man can say that the government 
 under the Constitution is altogether federal, in the face of the fact that the 
 very object of forming it was to get rid of a government altogether federal, 
 is to me a mystery and a marvel. On the other hand, how any man can say 
 that the government is absolutely national, adopted by the people of the 
 United States as a unit, as one people, is to me a marvel, since the people of 
 the United States in that character never passed upon a single question. 
 There never was a question submitted to the people of the United States, as 
 one aggregate people. They never voted on any question as one aggregate 
 people. The Constitution was adopted by the people, but it was adopted 
 by the people of each State acting for itself, just as the people of a State 
 adopted their own State constitution. Therefore it is federal in its struc 
 ture ; therefore it is national in its operation ; therefore it is national and 
 federal in its Constitution ; therefore, as the senator from Illinois and a 
 great many like him say, it is an insurmountable paradox. A friend sug 
 gests that in adopting amendments we act by States. 
 
 Mr. Madison advances the same doctrine again. Mr. Madison wrote an 
 admirable letter directed to that great man, Daniel Webster, in March, 1833, 
 complimenting Mr. Webster for his great reply to Mr. Calhoun, when Mr. 
 Calhoun contended that the Federal government was a league, as Mr. 
 Webster understood him, a mere compact, a mere league, an exclusively 
 federal government. This is Mr. Madison s letter : 
 
 MONTPELIER, March 15, 1833. 
 
 My Dear Sir : I return my thanks for the copy of your late very powerful speech in 
 the Senate of the United States. It crushes " nullification," and must hasten an abandon 
 ment of " secession." But this dodges the blow, by confounding the claim to secede at 
 will with the right of seceding from intolerable oppression. The former answers itself, 
 being a violation without cause of a faith solemnly pledged. The latter is another name 
 only for revolution, about which there is no theoretic controversy. Its double aspect, 
 nevertheless, with the countenance received from certain quarters, is giving it a popular 
 .currency here, which may influence the approaching elections both for Congress and for 
 the State Legislature. It has gained some advantage also by mixing itself with the ques 
 tion, whether the Constitution of the United States was formed by the people or by the 
 States, now under a theoretic discussion by animated partisans. 
 
 It is fortunate when disputed theories can be decided by undisputed facts, and here 
 the undisputed fact is, that the Constitution was made by the people, but as embodied 
 into the several States who were parties to it, and therefore made by the States in their 
 highest authoritative capacity. They might, by the same authority and by the same 
 process, have converted the confederacy into a mere league or treaty, or continued it 
 with enlarged or abridged powers ; or have embodied the people of their respective 
 States into one people, nation, or sovereignty ; or, as they did, by a mixed form, make 
 them one people, nation, or sovereignty for certain purposes, and not so for others. 
 
 The Constitution of the United States, being established by a competent authority. 
 
 with specified powers, leaving others to the parties to the Constitution. It makes the 
 
 <n \i*i * t*t* i i i *i , 1 <*.,,,.* 1 t - , .i t 1*. iii>< >iil<> * t tl*ii i*^ it ll^ 
 
 government, like other governments, to operate directly on the people ; places at 
 Command the needful physical means of executing its powers ; and finally proclaims i 
 supremacy, and that of the laws made in pursuance of it, over the constitutions and 
 
614 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 laws of the States ; the powers of the government being exercised, as in other elective 
 and responsible governments, under the control of its constituents, the people and the 
 Legislatures of the States, and subject to the revolutionary rights of the people in 
 extreme cases. 
 
 Such is the Constitution of the United States, de jure and de facto, and the name, 
 whatever it be, that may be given to it can make it nothing more or less than what it is. 
 
 Pardon this hasty effusion, which, whether precisely according or not with your ideas, 
 presents, I am aware, none that will be new to you. 
 
 With great esteem and cordial salutations, 
 Mr. Webster. JAMES MADISON. 
 
 Sir, I want to say here now and I feel it a privilege that I can say it 
 I believe all the angry discussions, all the troubles that have come upon this 
 country have sprung from the failure of the people to comprehend the one 
 great fact, that the goverment under which we live has no model ; it is 
 partly national and partly federal ; an idea which was to the Greeks a stum 
 bling block and to the Romans foolishness, and to the Republican party an 
 insurmountable paradox ; but to the patriots of this country it is the power 
 of liberty unto the salvation of the people. And if the people of this coun 
 try would realize that fact, all these crazy wranglings as to whether we live 
 under a federal or national government would cease ; they would understand 
 that we live under both ; that it is a composite government ; that it was in 
 tended by its framers that the Union shall be faithful in defense of the 
 States, that the States shall be harmonious in support of the Union, and that 
 the Union and the States shall be faithful and harmonious in the support 
 and maintenance of the rights and the liberty of the people. 
 
 Sir, Mr. Webster concurred fully with Mr. Madison in these views. Mr. 
 Webster said in his speech at the whig convention in Richmond : 
 
 I will now say, however, that which I admit to be very presumptuous, because it is 
 said notwithstanding the illustrious authority of one of the greatest of your great men 
 a man better acquainted with the Constitution of the United States than any other 
 man 
 
 That I believe. I believe Mr. Madison understood the Constitution of 
 this country better than any man who ever lived in it. 
 
 A man who saw it in its cradle, who held it in his arms, as one may say, in its infancy ; 
 who presented and recommended it to the American people, and who saw it adopted 
 very much under the force of his own reasoning and the weight of his own reputation ; 
 who lived long enough to see it prosperous, to enjoy its highest honors, and who at last 
 went down to the grave beneath ten thousand blessings, for which, morning and evening, 
 he had thanked God ; I mean James Madison. Yet, even from this great and good man, 
 whom I hold to be chief among the just interpreters of the Constitution, I am constrained, 
 however presumptuous it may be considered, to differ in relation to one of his interpre 
 tations of that instrument. I refer to the opinion expressed by him, that the power of 
 removal from office does exist in the Constitution as an independent power in the hands 
 of the President, without the consent of the Senate. I wish he had taken a different 
 view of it. 
 
 I say here, if there are any two men in this country I have ever studied 
 and loved and honored, they are Madison and Webster. This is the only 
 instance I. have found where Mr. Webster ever differed with Mr. Madison 
 upon any interpretation of the Constitution. Mr. Webster denied that the 
 power of removal was an independent power, and absolute in the hands of 
 the President. Mr. Madison conceded that power. That is the only differ 
 ence I have ever been able to find between the two. 
 
 Mr. Webster again said, speaking of Mr. Madison at a public dinner in 
 New York : 
 
 Having been afterward, for eight years, Secretary of State, and as long President, Mr. 
 
LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 615 
 
 ing and recommending it, by speaking and writing, in assisting at the first organization 
 of the government under it, and in a long administration of its executive powers in 
 these various ways he lias lived near the Constitution, and with the power of inbibiii<r its 
 true spirit and inhaling its very breath from its first pulsation of life. Again, therefore, 
 I ask, If he cannot tell us what the Constitution is and what it means, who can ? He had 
 retired with the respect and regard of the community, and might naturally be supposed 
 not willing to interfere again in matters of political concern. He has, nevertheless, not 
 withholden his opinions on the vital question discussed on that occasion which has caused 
 this meeting. He has stated with an accuracy almost peculiar to himself, and so stated, 
 as, in my opinion, to place almost beyond further controversy the true doctrines of the 
 Constitution. He has stated not notions too loose and irregular to be called even a theory, 
 not ideas struck out by the feeling of present inconvenience or supposed maladminis 
 tration, not suggestions of expediency or evasions of fair and straightforward construc 
 tion, but elementary principles, clear and sound distinctions, and indisputable truths. 
 I am sure, gentlemen, that I speak your sentiments as well as my own when I say that 
 for making public so clearly and distinctly as he has done his own opinions on these 
 vital questions of Constitutional law, Mr. Madison has founded a new and strong claim 
 on the gratitude of a grateful country. You will think with me that at his advanced 
 age and in the enjoyment of general respect and approbation for a long career of public 
 services, it was an act of distinguished patriotism, when he saw notions promulgated and 
 maintained which he deemed unsound and dangerous, not to hesitate to come forward 
 and to place the weight of his own opinion in what he deemed the right scale, come what 
 might. I am sure, gentlemen, it cannot be doubted, the manifestation is clear, that the 
 country feels deeply the force of this new obligation. 
 
 In his letter to Mr. Cooper, Mr. Webster, referring to this question, 
 again used strange but strong language, which looks like a " paradox r in 
 itself. He says, " The States are united, confederated " ; that is, they are 
 both united and confederated. Again Mr. Webster, in his great speech in 
 the case of The United States Bank vs. Primrose, uses as strong language on 
 this subject as a man could ask. He says : 
 
 Suppose that this Constitution had said, in terms, after the language of the court 
 below, "All national sovereignty shall belong to the United States, all municipal sove 
 reignty to the several States." I will say that, however clear, however distinct such a 
 definition may appear to those who use it. the employment of it in the Constitution could 
 only have lead to utter confusion and uncertainty. I am not prepared to say that the 
 States have no national sovereignty. The laws of some of the States, Maryland and Vir 
 ginia, for instance, provide punishment for treason. The power thus exercised is cer 
 tainly not municipal. Virginia has a law of alienage ; that is, a power exercised against 
 a foreign nation. Does not the question necessarily arise, when a power is exercised 
 concerning an alien enemy" enemy to whom ? " The law of escheat, which exists in 
 
 meration declares all the powers that are granted to the United States, and all the rest are 
 reserved to the States. If we pursue to the extreme point the powers granted and the 
 powers reserved, the powers of the general and State governments will be found, it is to 
 be feared, impinging and in conflict. Our hope is that the prudence and patriotism of 
 the States and the wisdom of this government will prevent that catastrophe. For mysel 
 he advice of the court in Deveaux s case I will avoid nice metaphysical 
 
 will pursue the 
 subtilties and all useless theories. 
 
 And that advice I (*ive to the Republican party generally. 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. Would my friend be willing to take the advice, as well 
 as give it ? 
 
 ^Mr. Hill I have always taken it, my friend, in all my political career. 
 This is the first speech I ever made of this character on the subject of seces 
 sion and consolidation. 
 
616 SENATOR R IL HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. This, then, is the first case of sophistry. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Ah ! I do hope, Mr. President, whatever other misfortune may 
 befall me, I shall not imbibe the habit of sophistry by associating with the 
 senator from Vermont in this Chamber. I continue the quotation from 
 Mr. Webster : 
 
 I will keep my feet out of the traps of general definition, I will keep my feet out of 
 all traps, I will keep to things as they are, and go no further to inquire what they might 
 be, if they were not what they are. The States of this Union, as States, are subject to 
 all the voluntary and customary laws of nations. 
 
 No stronger State-rights doctrine than that was ever uttered. And Mr. 
 Webster, in that very great, almost unprecedented speech which he made in 
 reply to Mr. Hayne, the second speech on Foot s resolution, said that " the 
 States are unquestionably sovereign," and that the general government has 
 no power " beyond the actual grant"; but in the exercise of the powers 
 actually granted it is national, and that is right. That has always been my 
 belief. Therefore I have never discussed these abstract theories, as I said 
 to the senator from Vermont. 
 
 Mr. Webster in his argument with Mr. Calhoun was combating the theory 
 that under the Constitution the government was a league ; and when he 
 said it was not a confederacy he of course was combating the theory of a 
 confederacy in the sense of a league. Mr. Webster evidently, in combating 
 that particular theory, may have used language which he would not have 
 used if he had not been combating that theory. Therefore in his speech on 
 that occasion, especially the great speech in reply to Mr. Calhoun, which 
 was an abler argument than his speech in reply to Hayne, he said " this 
 government is not a confederacy, a league, or a compact," and yet often 
 afterward in other places he did speak of it as a confederacy and a Consti 
 tutional compact. What does he mean ? He means just what Mr. Madison 
 says : In some respects the Constitution under which we live has ordained a 
 government which is national, in other respects federal. It is both federal 
 and national, and therein is its glory. One great trouble with book theorists 
 is that they go upon examples. They cannot find any precedent in history 
 of this kind. They find governments, either national or federal, and they 
 say, as the senator from Illinois : " I assume that it is either altogether na 
 tional or altogether federal." That is the substance of what he says. That 
 is directly in the teeth of the truth. It is partly national* and it is partly 
 federal ; it is both ; and it is neither. 
 
 This government was not the result of mere human wisdom. No human 
 mind could have conceived this government, as a mere intellectual effort. 
 What produced this government ? In the first place the framers of the 
 Constitution had the benefit of three hundred years of the struggles of our 
 forefathers for the great principles of liberty, which it is the duty of all 
 governments to preserve and protect. Then they had the experience of a 
 purely federal system under the articles of confederation, which had proved 
 to be an utter failure. Then they had the benefit of a new country, differ 
 ent from any other country, whose needs were different ; and though at that 
 time there were but thirteen States skirting the Atlantic, even they had the 
 prescience to see that this country would extend back from sea to sea and , 
 have fifty States. Therefore, as Mr. Madison says, you cannot determine 
 this Constitution by any model ; you must determine it by itself and by the 
 facts of the case. Sir, this Constitution of government, framed in 1787, is 
 the result of wisdom, the result of experience, the result of condition, the 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 617 
 
 result of necessity, and the result of all the feelings and elements that can 
 stimulate the intellect and prompt the desires of men ; and the result is that 
 the framers, trusting to their own good sense applied to the facts of their 
 condition, and aided by the experience of three hundred years of history, 
 gave to the world a Constitution which was as new in the science of gov 
 ernment as the American continent was new to the geography of the world 
 when Columbus discovered it. When you hear about a man going to Rome 
 or to Greece or to Switzerland or anywhere to tind models by which to un 
 derstand the Constitution of the United States, he is going " in dark places 
 to gather light. 
 
 The Constitution is its own interpreter in the light of the circumstances 
 under which it was made. It is the noblest government, the greatest gov 
 ernment that human wisdom ever devised, and it could not have been 
 framed by human wisdom alone. The human intellect never existed in this 
 world that could from its own evolutions have wrought out such a thing as 
 this Constitution of the United States ; and the trouble has been, that 
 though such men as Madison explained it, though such men as Webster ex 
 pounded it, yet the old theory that divided the convention has continued to 
 divide the country. We had one class of men who insisted that the Con 
 stitution and the government was nothing but a league, nothing but a com 
 pact, nothing but a confederacy. It was made by compact, but it resulted 
 in a government ; a government capable of preserving itself ; a government 
 capable of sustaining itself ; a government capable of making, capable of ex 
 pounding, and capable of enforcing its own laws against all the earth. It 
 is a government such as Roman never dreamed of, such as Grecian never 
 conceived, and such as European intellect never had the power to evolve. 
 When the American people, either for the purpose of dismembering the 
 States or of destroying them, shall destroy this unparalleled government, 
 this government without a model, this government without a prototype, they 
 will have destroyed a government which seems to have been wisely adapted 
 to the peculiar condition of the time and to all their future wants, and they 
 will launch out on a sea of uncertainty, the result of which no man can 
 forecast. 
 
 WHO ARE THE KEAL ENEMIES OF THE REPUBLIC ? 
 
 Sir, I will not trace the history of these two extremes. One was the 
 Secessionist, the other was the Consolidationist. Both are disunion ists. "he 
 man who would destroy the States is as much a disunionist as the man who 
 would divide the States. Ay, I put the query to the American mind to-day- 
 which I trust they will ponder if he is a traitor who would divide the 
 States, how can he be less a traitor who would destroy the States ? 
 
 The doctrine of secession I do not say it for the purpose of exciting 
 sectional acrimony, but for the simple purpose of getting the facts of 
 tory this doctrine of secession originated in New England, and it first de 
 veloped itself in 1790. Those twin curses of the South, secession and 
 slavery, were both transplanted from New England. 
 
 Mr. Hoar. To a more congenial home. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Mr. Jefferson, in his works, gives a very interesting accou 
 of the first threat of secession. It arose on the occasion of a defeat in < 
 gress of a bill to assume the debts of the States incurred during the Revo 
 tion. 
 
 This measure (the assumption of State debts) 
 
618 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Said Mr. Jefferson 
 
 produced the most bitter and angry contest ever known in Congress before or since the 
 union of the States. I arrived in the midst of it ; but a stranger to the ground, a stranger 
 to the actors in it, so long absent as to have lost all familiarity with the subject, and as 
 yet unaware of its object, I took no concern in it. The great and trying question, how 
 ever, was lost in the House of Representatives. So high were the feuds excited on this 
 subject that, on its rejection, business was suspended, Congress met and adjourned 
 from day to day without doing anything, the parties being too much out of temper 
 to do business together. The Eastern members threatened secession and dissolution. 
 Hamilton was in despair. As I was going to the President s one day I met him in the 
 street. He walked with me backward and forward before the President s door for half 
 an hour. He painted pathetically the temper into which the Legislature had been 
 wrought, the disgust of those who were called the creditor States (the Northern), the 
 danger of the secession of their members, and of the separation of the States. He 
 observed that the members of the administration ought to act in concert ; that though this 
 question was not of my department, yet a common duty should make it a common con 
 cern ; that the President was the center in which all administrative questions ultimately 
 rested, and that all of us should rally round him and support, with joint efforts, 
 measures approved by him, and that the question having been lost by a small majority 
 only, that an appeal from me to the judgment and discretion of some of my friends might 
 effect a change in the vote, and the machine of government, now suspended, might be 
 again set in motion. 
 
 The result was that Mr. Jefferson gave a dinner to which Mr. Hamilton 
 invited some friends and Mr. Jefferson invited some. On the same day that 
 this controversy arose about the assumption of State debts there was a con 
 troversy also as to the locality of the capital. The Northern members 
 wanted it fixed on the Susquehanna at Delaware ; the Southern members 
 wanted it fixed on the Potomac at Georgetown. Each proposition was de 
 feated by a small majority. 
 
 Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Hamilton got together and persuaded the good 
 Union men of the East that they would not secede provided some few 
 Southern men would vote to assume the State debts and they would vote to 
 locate the capital on the Potomac. In that way the Union was saved by 
 a bargain of two men on each side, a bargain at a dinner. I state that simply 
 as a fact. 
 
 Several times again secession was threatened. It was threatened accord- * 
 ing to my reading about four times in New England before it was threatened 
 anywhere else ; and it took a very dangerous form in New England. New 
 England opposed the war of 1812, as everybody knows ; and the greatest 
 men of New England assembled in convention at Hartford and adopted the 
 very doctrines which were taken by the Secessionists in the South and incor 
 porated in their ordinance of secession the very same doctrine. This doc 
 trine of secession never acquired a great stronghold in the South until the 
 opposite doctrine took stronghold in the North. The opposite doctrine to 
 secession, that of consolidation, never had as many advocates known and 
 avowed as had the doctrine of secession ; yet there were some. The most 
 absolute expressions of consolidation that I have been enabled to find were by 
 Patrick Henry, of Virginia, and Mr. Lincoln. Patrick Henry was opposed 
 to the adoption of the Federal Constitution because he insisted that it 
 established an absolute consolidated government, which would destroy the 
 States ; and as a States-rights man he opposed the adoption of the Constitu 
 tion. But when it was adopted, he insisted that the fear he had expressed 
 was true, that it was the true theory of the Constitution ; and, therefore, in 
 the great fight over the alien and sedition laws, Patrick Henry approved 
 those laws, and stated in an argument he made that the States bore the same 
 
 
LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. CIS 
 
 relation to the general government that the counties in the States bore to 
 the States. And Mr. Lincoln, I noticed, on his way to the capital after his 
 election, suggested that same idea. 
 
 Those two expressions I have not seen repeated by anybody else ; but 
 they embodied in a few words the most absolute expression of consolidation 
 ana entire nationalism I have ever met anywhere. But this doctrine of consol 
 idation did not do much mischief previously to 1860, though it had its advo 
 cates ; yet, when the collision came, the doctrines then held by those who 
 went to war with secession were as absolutely national in their character and 
 just as inconsistent with the character of our government as was secession 
 itself. 
 
 Here is the truth, Mr. President : The whole war was the result of 
 crimination between two extreme ideas. I deny that the Union, as inter 
 preted by Madison and expounded by Webster, was any party to the late 
 war except as a victim, a threatened victim, and a very dangerously threat 
 ened one. It is true that the war was the result of a collision of ideas and 
 interests between the extreme nationalists and the extreme federalists. 
 They brought about the war ; but the slavery question entering into it sec- 
 tionalized it, and therefore the North became consolidated on one side, and 
 the South, or a portion of the States of the South, consolidated on the other. 
 After the war arose the Union became involved, and therefore it is that 
 those who fought on the side of the Federal government fought for the 
 Union and are entitled to all the benefits that result from that relation, and 
 no man will always give them to them more cheerfully than myself. The 
 war being the result of this collision of extremes, the consolidationists, the 
 centralizationists, the monarchists (for that is what they mean) had the ad 
 vantage in that they had possession of the Union, possession of its power, 
 possession of its army, and possession of its navy an advantage which they 
 acquired by secession folly. The collision coming on in this form, secession 
 was crushed out in the conflict, utterly crushed out. I want the country to 
 understand that. It was utterly crushed out. There is no longer any danger 
 to this country by reason of secession. It has no advocate in the South. It 
 is a heresy which has had its day, wrought its wrongs, and gone to its grave ; 
 for which there is no resurrection, unless it gets that resurrection in the 
 home of its birth, New England. 
 
 But, sir, that other extreme enemy of the Constitution and government 
 and Union, as expounded by Madison and Webster, was not crushed out by 
 the war. It was the cardinal principle of the Republican party. All good 
 Union men at the North, by reason of the condition of things, being com 
 pelled to go in the Federal army, as others in the South of a like character 
 who had no sympathy with secession were compelled to go into secession, it 
 was by the aid of the Democracy of the North, of the conservative men of the 
 North, who did not agree to absolute nationalism, who did not agree to the 
 doctrine of consolidation, who did not agree to the absolute theory of a 
 national government in the Federal headit was by the aid of these 
 Democrats and conservative men that the Federal armies were enabled to 
 triumph and crush out secession. A united North overpowered a divided 
 South. 
 
 But the men who happened to be the party in power, and who are the 
 representatives of this extreme idea of consolidation, took all the credit 
 themselves ; and one of the dangers now arising to this country is from the 
 fact that the party which represents this central, absolutely national idea,- 
 
620 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 this consolidation idea, this monarchizing idea, that party claims the credit 
 of having saved the Union. It gives no credit to its allies whatever. 
 What would you have done without the Democrats in the war ? And yet it 
 was amusing to hear the distinguished senator from New York the other 
 day, in his own way, describing the Democratic party as consisting of a 
 Northern tail and a Southern head. What would you have done without 
 that tail in the war ? If the conservative Union men North and South could 
 have left the war to be fought out by the advocates of secession on the one 
 hand and the advocates of consolidation on the other, there would have been 
 some other party in control of this country for the last eighteen years. 
 
 But, as I say, the respective sections became involved without regard to 
 the individual opinions of their people. This national party, this party of 
 absolutism is not only the party in power by reason of its representation 
 that it saved the Union and taking all the credit of saving the Union, but 
 it claims all the credit of having suppressed the rebellion, and demands 
 that it shall be esteemed as the Secessionists shall be hated. 
 
 THE STATES TO BE CRUSHED OUT. 
 
 These two sources of strength to the Republican party are now endan 
 gering the States. Why, sir, every step of the Republican party is to the 
 destruction of the States. Take the very measures now under consideration. 
 What are they? In 1862, for purposes which every man can explain, a test 
 oath was prescribed for jurors. In 1865 a clause was put in an army bill 
 authorizing the use of troops to keep the peace at the polls. Neither of 
 these statutes was ever known on our statute-book before ; they did not exist 
 in the early days of the Republic ; they never existed until they were en 
 acted during the war. In 1870 and 1871 your election laws were passed. 
 They never existed before. Up to that time all parties had agreed that the 
 States were both able and willing to take care of the elections and protect 
 their citizens. Now I put it to every intelligent man, what stronger indica 
 tion of a desire to grasp power, what stronger indication of a purpose to 
 crush out the States than the attempt to drive intelligence and virtue and 
 property from the jury-box and use the army at the elections, and to place 
 in the Federal government power by supervisors and deputy marshal* to 
 take absolute control of the States in their elections, things that were never 
 done before. 
 
 If either one of the laws which we now propose to repeal had been pro 
 posed for enaction in any administration of this government, from the days 
 of Washington to 1860, it would have ruined the man that made the prop 
 osition. No man could have stood before the indignation of the American 
 people who would have proposed to place upon the statute-book a law 
 keeping intelligence and virtue from the jury-box, a law surrounding the 
 polls with the army and the navy, or a law giving to the Federal govern 
 ment absolute control of the elections and, as my friend from Kentucky 
 (Mr. Beck) suggests, fixing the congressional elections to come off on the 
 same day with Presidential elections and State elections, so as to control 
 all. 
 
 I have given this subject careful consideration. I wish to do no man 
 injustice ; but with a full sense of responsibility to my country I affirm to 
 day that this heated contest we have had here for six weeks has no meaning, 
 has no purpose, and can have no result but the absolute control of the States 
 by force, through the Federal government, to perpetuate the Republican 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 621 
 
 party in power, whether the people will it or not ; and if the President 
 shall use the veto power, conferred upon him for a high conservative pur 
 pose, to aid these party schemes, and the people shall not rise in their 
 indignation and drive from power these men who thus abuse power and 
 disregard their duty, the Union will be destroyed in the destruction of the 
 States. 
 
 THE UNION HAS NOTHING TO FEAR FROM THE SOUTH, AND WHY ? 
 
 But, sir, to accomplish their purpose, almost every speaker of the Re 
 publican side in the Senate and in the other House is persistently seeking to 
 impress the country with the idea that the dangers to the country come from 
 the Confederates in this presence. The senator from New York said : 
 
 Twenty-seven States adhered to the Union in the dark hour. Those States send to 
 Congress two hundred and sixty-nine senators and representatives. Of these two hun 
 dred and sixty-nine senators and representatives, fifty-four, and only fifty-four, were 
 soldiers in the armies of the Union. The eleven States which were disloyal send ninety- 
 three senators and representatives to Congress. Of these, eighty-five were soldiers in the 
 armies of the rebellion, and at least three more held high civil station in the rebellion, 
 making in all eighty-eight out of ninety-three. 
 
 Let me state the same fact, dividing the Houses. There are but four senators here 
 who fought in the Union Army. They all sit here now; and there are but four. Twenty 
 senators sit here who fought in the army of rebellion, and three more senators sit here 
 who held high civil command in the Confederacy. 
 
 In the House, there are fifty Union soldiers from twenty-seven States, and sixty-five 
 Confederate soldiers from eleven States. 
 
 Who, I ask you, senators, tried by this record, is keeping up party divisions on the 
 issues and hatred of the war ? 
 
 The South is solid. Throughout all its borders it has no seat here, save two. in which 
 a Republican sits. The Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Bruce) and the senator from Lou 
 isiana (Mr. Kellogg) are still spared ; and whisper says that an enterprise is afoot to 
 deprive one of these senators of his seat. The South is emphatically solid. Can you 
 wonder if the North soon becomes solid too ? Do you not see that the doings witnessed 
 now in Congress fill the North with alarm and distrust of the patriotism and good faith of 
 men from the South ? Forty-two Democrats have seats on this floor ; forty-three if you 
 add the honorable senator from Illinois (Mr. Davis). He does not belong to the Democra 
 tic party, although I must say, after reading his speech the other day, that a Democrat 
 who asks anything more of him is an insatiate monster. If we count the senator from 
 Illinois there are forty-three Democrats in this Chamber. Twenty-three is a clear ma 
 jority of all, and twenty-three happens to be exactly the number of senators from the 
 South who were leaders in the late rebellion. 
 
 Do you anticipate my object in stating these numbers ? For fear you do not, let me 
 explain. Forty-two senators rule the Senate ; twenty-three senators rule the caucus. A 
 majority rules the Senate ; a caucus rules the majority ; and the twenty-three Southern 
 senators rule the caucus. The same thing, in the same way, governed by the same ele 
 ments, is true in the House. 
 
 This present assault upon the purity and fairness of elections, upon the Constitution, 
 upon the executive department, and upon the rights of the people ; not the rights of 
 king ; not on such rights as we heard the distinguished presiding officer, who I am glad 
 now to discover in his seat, dilate upon of a morning some weeks ago ; not the divine 
 right of kings but the inborn rights of the people the present assault upon them couk 
 never have been inaugurated without the action of the twenty-three Southern senators 
 here and the Southern representatives there [pointing to the House]. 
 
 The people of the North know this and see it. They see the lead and control of 
 Democratic party again, where it was before the war, in the hands of the Booth. 
 
 And he says that alarms the North. Mr. President, I shall meet that 
 question as I endeavor to meet all others, frankly. These charges are all 
 made against the Southern representatives in this House, and the other, upoi 
 the assumption that they are enemies of the government ; that the people 
 they represent are enemies of the government ; and therefore when the 
 
622 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 government passes into their control the government is in danger. Well, 
 sir, if the assumption be true, the conclusion is inevitable. If the Southern 
 people are the enemies of this Union, and if the members of this House and 
 the other, from the Southern States, are the enemies of the Union, we have 
 no right here, we have no business here ; if we are honorable men we will 
 not remain here. 
 
 I grant you that the people of the North ought to have solid arguments 
 on this subject. I grant what the senator from New York intimated, that 
 gush will not do ; simply talking about shaking hands and locking arms 
 does not amount to much. That will do for children and Sunday-school 
 teachers. Statesmen want facts ; statesmen want arguments ; statesmen 
 want reasons why the Southern people are not the enemies of the govern 
 ment, and therefore ought to be friends and can be safely trusted. I pro 
 pose to give some of those reasons. 
 
 The laws that are now proposed to be repealed have been made the 
 occasion for all kinds of intimations, from the leaders of the Republican 
 party, that the South is not worthy to be trusted. How on earth can a 
 proposition to repeal a law, which was unknown to the country for the first 
 seventy -five years of the existence of the government, be an evidence of dis 
 loyalty ? How is it any evidence that we are not to be trusted because we 
 want intelligence and virtue in the jury-box ? How is it an evidence that 
 we are not to be trusted because we want the absence of the army from the 
 polls when the army was never known at the polls in the days of our 
 fathers ? How is it that we are to be declared disloyal because we are in 
 favor of taking away from the Federal government the control of the elec 
 tions through the deputy marshals and the supervisors? United States 
 deputy marshals and supervisors in elections were never known to the 
 history of this country for the first eighty years of its government. 
 
 Are we disloyal because we want what Washington had, what Jefferson 
 had, what Madison had, what Jackson had ? The President in his mes 
 sage says that he invites us back to the good old habits and customs of the 
 country, and he says that the habit of tacking legislation to appropriation 
 bills was unknown in the first forty years of the government and invites us 
 back to those good old days. I mean to accept his invitation. I say to the 
 President, " Come sir, let us go back to the good old days when, for not 
 forty but seventy-five years, troops were not known at the polls ; let us go 
 back to the good old days when, for not forty but for eighty years, super 
 visors and deputy marshals in control of the elections were unknown to the 
 Federal statute book. Now, come, let us go back." Why not? That is 
 what we are trying to do. 
 
 Here let me notice another quotation of the senator from Vermont. I 
 was amused yesterday when he used the argument of Mr. Madison on the 
 subject of electing members of Congress as a true exposition of the clause 
 of the Constitution. I accept it, I believe Mr. Madison was right, and 
 what did Mr. Madison say ? Those words ought to be remembered. Mr. 
 Madison said that the control of elections for members of Congress had to 
 be given either wholly to the national government or wholly to the State 
 governments, or primarily to the State governments and ultimately to the 
 national government. He goes on to explain, and other writers explain 
 the same condition of things in this way, that as long as the States are 
 willing to exercise the power of controlling the elections they ought to be 
 t9 4o it j it is proper ancj right that they sliould ? but the 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 623 
 
 might come when the States might not be willing to elect their representa 
 tives to Congress, and then the power should be in the Federal government 
 to do it as the ultimate authority. 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. I wish my honorable friend would read any passage of 
 Mr. Madison I do not desire to interrupt the course of the senator s re 
 marks but he is quoting Mr. Madison, and I have not been able to read in 
 anything Mr. Madison said any question as to the willingness of a State to 
 ele"ct, as being the test of the exertion of the national authority. 
 
 Mr. If ill. Mr. Madison said if any bad influences should prevail, or 
 something of that kind 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. That is what is the trouble now. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Did he mean the bad influences in New York that the sena 
 tor from New York talked about ? Did he mean thugs, and shoulder-hitters, 
 and rat-pitters ? That is a pretty bad state of things. That is not what Mr. 
 Madison meant ? No, no. If Mr. Madison meant that because there were 
 bad men in a State, therefore that was the ground on which the government 
 should exercise this ultimate power, it would have been exercised from the 
 beginning, because we have had bad men from the beginning. There may 
 be more in New York than anywhere else ; according to their senator it 
 seems there are ; but there- are a good many elsewhere ; there is no doubt 
 about that. Mr. Madison meant just what I have said, because he explained 
 it in another clause where he said that every government ought to have the 
 power of its own preservation; and I grant it that right. Every govern 
 ment ought to have it. Therefore, when the State should fail in the duty it 
 would be proper for the national government to take control of the elec 
 tions. 
 
 Sir, are the States of this Union any less able or less willing to protect 
 their citizens in exercising the right of suffrage now than they were in the 
 days of Washington, than they were in the days of Madison, than they were 
 in the days of Jefferson or Jackson ? Are they not able now ? If they are 
 as willing now, the contingency upon which Mr. Madison placed the exer 
 cise of that ultimate authority has not transpired, and, therefore, according 
 to Mr. Madison, it being a question of Constitutional power, looking upon 
 it in the meaning of the Constitution, the true intent and purpose of it in 
 the light of wisdom and expediency, we ought to leave this question to the 
 States, where it was left until 1870. 
 
 But I want to give the reasons why the South is trustworthy, and I want 
 to call the attention of the country to them. First, the Southern men 
 went to war for what they believed was their self-preservation. They de 
 fended their convictions bravely. They have surrendered ; they have aban 
 doned their convictions ; they have abandoned secession, both as a doctrine 
 and a remedy ; and a people who were brave enough to defend their con 
 victions with their blood are honorable enough to keep their pledges. 
 When the senator from New York points out that eighty-five out of the 
 ninety-three Southern senators and representatives I will not quarrel with 
 the figures went to the battle-field and shed their blood for their convic 
 tions, "he stated a strong reason why they are trustworthy ; when he shows 
 that twenty Southern senators on this floor were willing to defend their con 
 victions with their lives, and only four on that side of the Chamber, he 
 shows a large proportion of Republicans who were very anxious to get up 
 war, and very few who were willing to fight in the war. 
 
 But* sir, there is another reason why the South ought to be trusted, 
 
624 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 say here that the South did not secede from hostility to the Union nor from 
 hostility to the Constitution. That is your assumption. You are always 
 talking about the Southern people as enemies of the Union. Not a word of 
 it is true. As I said, the South was driven into secession by the opposite 
 extreme at the North, who were as inimical to the Constitution as the Se 
 cessionists themselves. That is the truth, and every intelligent man and 
 every honest man admits it. The aggravations of the slavery questions got 
 possession of their respective sections and carried them into war, but do you 
 suppose every Southern man who stood by his section in a sectional war was 
 hostile to the Union ? Not a word of it. 
 
 The Senate will pardon me if I refer to a little personal history in this 
 connection, because I am a representative man ; but before doing it I want 
 to call the attention of the senator from New York to another count of fig 
 ures. He counted up the number of Confederates from the South, as he 
 calls them, in this house and in the other, and he says they have control of 
 legislation, and then he notifies the North that they ought to be alarmed, 
 because the legislation of this Union is under the lead of the same men who 
 were here before the war. Now, I want to say to the senator from New 
 York that I have been making a count too, and, strange as he may think it, 
 while I have not been able to make the count with perfect accuracy, it is 
 more accurate than his on another subject much more. Of the eleven sen 
 ators and representatives from Georgia, in the present House and Senate, 
 nine, certainly eight, were opposed to secession. 
 
 Mr. Conkling. When ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. When it occurred, and up to the time it was an accomplished 
 fact. As for going with our States after secession was an accomplished 
 fact, we shall not apologize to any mortal man. We stood up for our own 
 section ; but up to that dark hour four out of five of the men w^ho repre 
 sent Georgia to-day faced secession and fought it in more dangerous places 
 than did you who now libel them ; and from the best count I have been 
 able to make, out of the ninety-three Southern senators and representatives 
 in this Congress about seventy-five were opposed to secession; four-fifths of 
 the whole number. I do not make this statement for the purpose of saying 
 that those who were in favor of secession are less to be trusted. By no 
 means. They were brave and honest men who fought for their convictions 
 and their section, and they have given their pledge and their word of honor, 
 and the people are willing to trust them. But I refer to this for the pur 
 pose of showing a fact. It shows how sound the people are. The people 
 of the South are not enemies of the Union in that they are willing to be 
 represented by men here who were always true to the Union in the hour of 
 doubt. They do not repudiate the Union sentiment that prevailed before 
 the war nor allow it to be a reason why they should not be their representa 
 tives now. 
 
 But, sir, I want to give a little personal history, because I give it as a 
 representative man and it is directly upon this question. South Carolina 
 seceded, I believe, on the 20th of December, 1860. A convention was called 
 by the people of Georgia to take into consideration the course that Georgia 
 should pursue. That convention was called to meet on the 16th of Janu 
 ary, 1861. The people of the County of Troup, in which I then lived, as- ( 
 sembled en masse and requested me to represent them as a delegate in that 
 convention. They made that nomination on the 25th of December, 1860, 
 and appointed a committee to notify me of that nomination. I accepted, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 625 
 
 and, as was my duty, avowed to them the principle on which I should act 
 as a member of that convention if chosen ; and here is what I said in a let 
 ter then written and published : 
 
 I will consent to the dissolution of the Union as I would consent to the death of my 
 father, never from choice, only from necessity, and then in sorrow and sadness of heart 
 for, after all. the Union Is not the author of our grievance. Bad, extreme men in both 
 sections of the Union abuse and insult each other, and all take revenge by fighting the 
 Union which never harmed or insulted any. Perhaps it has blessed ail above their mer 
 its. For myself, I will never ask from any government more real liberty and true hap 
 piness than I have enjoyed as a citizen of this great American Union. May they who 
 destroy this government in a frolic have wisdom to furnish our children a better. 
 
 And upon these sentiments, written and published at that day, the 
 people of that county sent me as their delegate to that convention without 
 opposition. The convention assembled the 16th of January, 1861. On the 
 18th of January a debate took place on a resolution asserting the right and 
 duty of the State to secede. I had the honor of making the last speech on 
 that occasion against the resolution. The resolution, however, was adopted 
 just at nightfall. A committee was appointed to report an ordinance to 
 carry the resolution into effect. The ordinance of secession, therefore, ac 
 tually passed on the 19th of January, 1861, though the resolution declaring 
 it the duty to secede was passed on the 18th. On the night of the 19th, I 
 wrote a letter to a friend, which was then published, and a copy of it I now 
 have in my hand. That was the night of the day of Georgia s secession. 
 
 MILLEDGEVILLE, January 19, 1861. 
 
 Dear Sir : The deed is done. Georgia this day left the Union. Cannon have been 
 firing and bells ringing. At this moment people are filling the streets shouting vocifer 
 ously. A large torchlight procession is moving from house to house and calling out 
 speakers. The resolution declaratory passed on yesterday, and similar scenes were en 
 acted last night. The crowd called loudly for me, but my room was dark, my heart was 
 sad, and my tongue was silent. Whoever may be in fault is not now the question. 
 Whether by the North or by the South, or by both, the fact remains ; our Union has 
 fallen. The most favored sons of freedom have written a page in history which despots 
 will read to listening subjects for centuries to come to prove that the people are not 
 capable of self-government. How can I think thus and feel otherwise than badly ? 
 
 Do not understand me as intimating a belief that we cannot form a new union on 
 the basis of the old Constitution. We can do it and we will. This point we have se 
 cured as far as Georgia can secure it, and her will on that subject will be the pleasure 
 of her sister seceders. But can we form one with more inspiring hopes of perpetual life 
 than did Washington and his comrades ? Despots will say no ; and therefore if the first 
 Union lived only seventy-five years, how long will this live, and the next, and still the 
 next, until anarchy comes ? It will take an hundred years of successful, peaceful, free 
 government to answer the logic of this argument against Constitutional liberty. 
 
 Sir, in 1868 I had a correspondence with that great man, Horace 
 Greeley. In my judgment he did more to build up the Republican party 
 than any other man in America. He was a great and good man; honest in 
 his convictions and fearless in asserting them. The charge had been made 
 that the South had sought war, that the Southern people were not to be 
 trusted. The correspondence is published in the Tribune of that day. 
 beg the indulgence of the Senate while I read an extract from that corre 
 spondence. The letter is dated New York, October 2, 1868. I will read 
 the extract. Gentlemen can see the letter by looking at the New York 
 Tribune of October 2, 1868. It is to Mr. Greeley : 
 
 Sir, let the deep sincerity of my convictions crave your indulgence for a few addi 
 tional sentences. I am entitled to an audience from your readers, and 
 assistance. I allude to the incident following in no spirit of reproach, but in entire 
 
626 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 kindness, and only to illustrate my point and my motive, I have seen the explanation 
 of the Tribune, and recognize its force viewed from the standpoint of the Tribune, but 
 our people did not then so understand it. On the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska bill, 
 nearly all the old Whig leaders of the South joined the Democracy. This left the Whigs 
 or Americans in a decided minority. It was then I felt it to be my duty to change the 
 purpose of my life and enter politics. 
 
 It was my lot to engage with all my humble powers, from 1855 to 1861, in a vain 
 effort to arrest the tide of secession that was sweeping the South, as I thought, into revo 
 lution. Late in the winter of 1860, more earnest than ever before, I warned our people 
 that war, on the most unequal terms, must follow secession. On one of these occasions 
 a distinguished secession gentleman replied to my war warnings by reading extracts 
 from prominent Northern Republicans, 
 
 I call your attention to that 
 
 and with special emphasis from the columns of the Tribune, to the effect that if the 
 people of the South desired to secede they had a right to do so, and would be allowed to 
 do so in peace. He then alluded to me as one born and raised in the South, and yet was 
 endeavoring to frighten our people from their rights by threats of war, while Northern 
 Free-soilers, who had been esteemed the enemies of the South, were conceding our rights 
 and assuring its peaceful exercise. Now, my good sir, what could I have rejoined ? 
 Here are the very words I did rejoin : 
 
 "I care not what Mr. Greeley and Mr. Wade, or any other Republican, or all Re 
 publicans together, have said or may say to the contrary. More to be relied on than all 
 these, I plant myself on the inflexible laws of human nature, and the unvarying teach 
 ings of human experience, and warn you this day that no government half as great as 
 this Union can be dismembered and in passion except through blood. You had as well 
 expect the fierce lightning to rend the air and wake no thunder in its track as to expect 
 peace to follow the throes of dissolving government. I pass by the puerile taunts at my 
 devotion to the best interests of the people among whom I was born and reared, and 
 trust my vindication to the realities of the future, which I deprecate and would avert, 
 and again tell you that dissolve this Union and war will come. I do not say it ought to 
 come. I cannot tell when, nor how, nor between whom it will come ; but it will come, 
 and it will be to you a most unequal, tierce, vindictive, and desolating war. 
 
 I have reason to know that those words impressed Mr. Greeley. How 
 could a Northern Free-soiler stand up aud charge infidelity to the Union 
 when that Northern Free-soiler, as many of them did, had told the South 
 ern people that it was their real desire that the South should secede and 
 they could do so in peace. But there were men all over the South who 
 stood up in that mad hour and warned their people what would result, that 
 these free-soil teachings must not be listened to. 
 
 UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES SECESSION WAS ACCOMPLISHED. 
 
 Sir, I am reading these things to show the sentiment in the South. The 
 Southern people did not secede from hostility to the Union, nor hostility to 
 the Constitution, nor from any desire to be rid of the system of govern 
 ment under which they had lived. 
 
 The highest evidence is what is given you in the very act of secession, 
 when they pledged themselves to form a new union upon the model of the 
 old. The very night when I was writing that letter and the serenading 
 bands were in the streets I wrote to my friends, " We will be able to effect 
 a new union upon the model of the old," and we did form a Constitution 
 which varied not one whit in principle from the one under which we had 
 
 1 ~l F . F 
 
 lived. 
 
 No,j3ir; the South seceded because there was a war made upon what 
 she believed to be her Constitutional rights by the extreme men of the 
 North. Those extreme men of the North were gaining absolute power in 
 the Federal Government as the machinery by which to destroy Southern 
 property. Then the Northern people said, a large number of the leaders 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 627 
 
 of the Republican party said, that if secession was desired to be accom 
 plished it should be accomplished in peace. Mr. Greeley said that they 
 wanted no Union pinned together by bayonets. Here is the condition in 
 which the South was placed : they believed the Northern extremists would 
 use the machinery of the government to their injury ; the people of the 
 South believed that they would protect their property by formino- a new 
 union in the South precisely upon the basis of the old. They believed they 
 could do it in peace ; and I say here there were thousands upon thousands, 
 yea, hundreds of thousands of the best men of the South who believed that 
 the only way to avoid a war was to secede. They believed the Northern 
 conscience wanted to get rid of the responsibility for slavery ; they be 
 lieved they had a right to protect their slave property, and they thought 
 they would accommodate the Northern conscience by leaving the Union 
 and preserving that property. They believed they could do it in peace and 
 if they had believed that a war would result they never would have se 
 ceded. 
 
 WHO WERE FOB PEACE AND WHO FOR WAR. 
 
 Mr. President, how was it at the North ? How was it with many who 
 are now clamoring in this country that the Southern people will not do to 
 be trusted? I shall never forget an instance. Notwithstanding those sen 
 timents which I have read to the Senate, the convention at Milledgeville 
 selected me as one of the delegates to the Provisional Congress at Mqnt- 
 gomery, which met, I believe, on the 4th of February, 1861. Up to that 
 very hour those of us who believed that the interest of the South was in 
 the Union looked to the North anxiously to avert war. We believed in our 
 hearts that if war could be averted for a few months the Union could be 
 restored on terms honorable to all parties. Virginia had not gone out. 
 Virginia Lad a glorious record in this country. It was the eloquent voice 
 of her Patrick Henry which aroused the colonies to resistance to tyranny. 
 It was her Jefferson who framed the Declaration of Independence. It was 
 her Madison who was the father of the Constitution under which we live. 
 It was her Washington who conducted our armies to victory in the great 
 struggle for liberty. It was Virginia that first made the call for the con 
 vention that framed the Constitution. No man can ever know with what 
 gladness and hope I saw glorious old Virginia issue a request to the States 
 of this Union in that dark hour to meet in conference and see if the peace 
 could not be preserved and the differences adjusted between the sections. 
 
 I am not ashamed to say here, and I said there, a member of the Pro 
 visional Congress of the Confederate States as I was, that my heart was with 
 that proposition, and I prayed God that it might have success. Seven 
 
 every movement giving hope 
 These very men who are now dinning the weary air with charges of infidel 
 upon the Southern people, who are absolutely defiling themselves with 
 calumnies upon everything Southern, went to work to defeat the purpose of 
 Virginia and to defeat the peaceful purposes of that movement, 
 never forget the feelings I had when I read letters from leading citizens in 
 Washington, leading and controlling members of the Republican party, 
 written to the governors of their States asking them not to send delegates 
 to that convention, and preventing its success. Here is one of the letters ; 
 
628 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 WASHINGTON, February 11, 1861. 
 
 My Dear Governor : Governor Bingham and myself telegraphed to you on Saturday 
 at the request of Massachusetts and New York to send delegates to the peace or compro 
 mise congress. They admit that we were right and they were wrong ; that no Republi 
 can State should have sent delegates ; but they are here and cannot get away. Ohio, 
 Indiana, and Rhode Island are caving in, and there is danger of Illinois 
 
 "Caving in "how? Becoming willing to compromise to preserve the 
 peace. He called that " caving in " 
 
 and now they beg us, for God s sake, to come to their rescue and save the Republican 
 party from rupture. I hope you will send stiff-backed men or none. The whole thing 
 was gotten up against my judgment 
 
 That is, the whole conference, the peace conference 
 
 The whole thing was gotten up against my judgment, arid will end in thin smoke. 
 Still I hope, as a matter of courtesy to some of our erring brethren, that you will send 
 the delegates. 
 
 Truly, your friend, 
 
 Z. CHANDLER. 
 His Excellency Austin Blair. 
 
 He adds a postscript : 
 
 P. S. Some of the manufacturing States think that a fight would be awful. Without 
 a little blood-letting this Union will not, in my estimation, be worth a rush. 
 
 Sir, I was standing at the door of my hotel in Montgomery when that 
 letter was put in my hands. I was looking to see the prospects from this 
 peace conference. I do not wish to do anybody injustice. I do not know 
 the gentleman who wrote that letter. It is only one of many, and it showed 
 a purpose on the part of the Republican part} 7 " to defeat all efforts at peace, 
 a peaceful adjustment. I said to a friend standing by me, u This is terrible ; 
 it is sad. If the leading Republicans seek to defeat the purpose of Virginia 
 in this peace convention, it will fail ; but, if war shall come, I predict now 
 that those men who are so anxious to let blood for the Union will never let 
 any of their own blood ; they are anxious to let other people s blood." 
 That is what I said then. I do not know whether it came true or not. Did 
 " Z. Chandler " let any of his blood ? I said more. I said, " I will venture 
 that these men at the North, who are so clamorous to defeat this peace 
 movement, will not only not go into the war, but they will seek easy places 
 and make money during the whole time it lasts." I do not know whether 
 any of them did it or not. I will not say they did. I am merely stating a 
 fact of history. 
 
 Now, the senator from New York tells me that of all the loyal men on 
 his side of the house who were clamoring at the rebels as unworthy of being 
 trusted, men who in the terrible war of secession were battling for the Union, 
 only four of the whole number now on this floor were willing to save the 
 Union by shedding their own blood. Sir, will the people look at these 
 things? You could not have pronounced a higher eulogy upon the Con 
 federates in this Congress than when you showed that eighty-five out of 
 ninety-three were willing to give their blood for what they believed to be 
 right. 
 
 Sir, that peace conference was broken up. I put it to the Northern 
 people, who claim that they were looking to the preservation of the Union, 
 looking to the preservation of their rights, who is most to be trusted, those 
 men at the South who were doing all they could to avert war, or those men 
 a,t the North who were doing all they could to bring it on ? and then refusing 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 629 
 
 to take any part in it ? [ know that the Republican party claim that they 
 alone saved the Union. It is a claim of which history willjud^e, and it will 
 make the claim not good. If there had been no Republican party the Union 
 never would have been endangered. If there had been no Republican party 
 there would have been no secession, no war, no reconstruction, no returning 
 boards, and no electoral commission. It will always be an impeachment of 
 the statesmanship of Americans that they were not wise enough and deliber 
 ate enough to dispose of the question of slavery without shedding each 
 other s blood. If the South had respected as she ought the conscience of the 
 North on this subject, and if the North had respected as she ought the 
 property of the South, and there had been no obstruction from the leaders 
 of the Republican party, there might have been a peaceful settlement of the 
 whole controversy. Then a million of glorious, brave spirits, that are now 
 sleeping in their graves, might be living, and millions more that are widows 
 and orphans might have husbands and fathers, and millions more who are 
 traveling through the country houseless and naked and hungry might have 
 raiment and shelter and plenty. 
 
 THE REPUBLICAN THREAT OF WAR. 
 
 Yet the senator from Maine finds in the passage of the bill that passed 
 yesterday a stronger assertion of the States-right power than has ever taken 
 place before. What a declaration was that ! 
 
 I shall not debate this bill 
 Said the senator from Maine 
 
 It were useless. It has been exhaustively debated. The whole measure is a removal of 
 the Federal Government from its proper domain and the installation of the States into 
 degrees of power that were not dreamed of by Calhoun and were not asserted by Breck- 
 enridge. 
 
 Is it possible a bill which simply says that the army and navy shall not 
 be placed at the polls is a stronger assertion of secession or the doctrine of 
 States rights than was ever made by Calhoun or Breckenridge ? What is 
 the purpose of such language as that but to alarm and awe. A bill which 
 proposes to put the people of this country just where they were for seventy- 
 five years, a bill which proposes to put the people of this country just where 
 they were under Washington, just where they were under Jefferson, just 
 where they were under Adams, just where they were from 1790 to 1865, is a 
 bill to endanger this Union more than the war of secession, according to 
 the interpretation of the senator from Maine ! That is not all. The Sena 
 tor from Maine became perfectly dynamitic : 
 
 Pass this bill. Pass it as the triumph of the reactionary party against the spirit of 
 the Union. Pass it in defiance of all the lessons and all the teachings that have come from 
 a bloody and abortive rebellion. Pass it, and mark it as the high tide of that reaction 
 which, were it to rise higher, could lead only to another and more formidable rebel 
 lion against the legitimate authority of the Union. [Applause on the floor and in the 
 galleries.] 
 
 W ho is talking about war now ? Who was talking about war when 
 Virginia was talking about peace ? Sir, I will not do injustice to the Amer 
 ican character, by collating, as I could do, the number of sentiments that 
 have been uttered upon this floor and in the other house during the last six 
 weeks, intimating that the people of the North would have another war, 
 another war that is to cut deeper than the first and cut beyond the wound. 
 Whom will you have the war with ? A war because we want intelligence, 
 
630 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 virtue, and property represented in the jury-box ! A war because we want 
 to keep the army from the polls ! A war because we want to say to the 
 States, " You are able and willing to control your elections as you have 
 done for seventy -five years of the government and we will trust you to do it 
 again ! r A war for that ! A war because we stand here as a bulwark of 
 defense for the Constitution of the country against disunionists, who would 
 destroy the Union by destroying the States! A war because we will not 
 consent to manacle the States of this Union, because we will not centralize 
 power in this government ! 
 
 Sir, I hope the people of America will not commit another mistake. I 
 always said it was a fearful mistake that the people of the North who did 
 not agree with the Republican party, and the people of the South who did 
 not agree to secession, could not have managed to preserve this Union and 
 let the others alone go to battle. If war must come, with whom shall it come ? 
 As I said to my own people on one occasion, and I repeat it here, if war 
 shall come God forbid that it shall ever come I give them notice now 
 that the men they call rebels, that the men they say are not trustworthy, 
 we of the South to a man will go to battle under the Stars and Stripes, 
 under the flag of our country. Do not imagine that the destroyers of the 
 States and the advocates of monarchy shall ever again bear the flag of our 
 country If you .must have a war, we shall maintain our rights in the 
 Union ; but I pray God that the people will take charge of this question and 
 see where the danger lies. 
 
 WHOM THE PEOPLE OF THE NORTH SHOULD FEAR. 
 
 You say the Northern people are alarmed. I assure you they have no 
 right to be alarmed with us of the South. I assure you they have no 
 right to be alarmed at Southern representatives on this floor and in the other 
 House ; but I tell you the Northern people have a right to be alarmed by such 
 threats as have been made here. They have a right to be alarmed by men 
 who say or intimate that if they cannot control the government, if they can 
 not surround the polls of freemen with armed men, if they cannot take con 
 trol of the elections in the States by Federal supervisors, they will come to 
 another war and cut deeper than the core. They are the men for the North 
 to be alarmed at, not we. 
 
 But, as I said in this letter to Mr. Greeley, the Constitution could not be 
 destroyed without war any more than the Union could be dissolved without 
 war, and the States can no more be destroyed without war than they can be 
 divided without war. I said that the danger to the country was imminent, 
 and I so confessed it to him ; that I feared that the course of the extreme 
 men who had remained untouched by the war, secession being utterly 
 crushed out, consolidation being not only alive but insolent by reason of its 
 apparent success I believed another war would come ; but I believe Prov 
 idence has averted that; I believe the very condition of things which seems 
 to alarm the country is going to save this country and preserve its peace. 
 I believe that the Democratic majority in the House and the Democratic 
 majority in the Senate are going to be able to take care of this country, pre 
 serve its peace, promote its glories, and increase its prosperity. 
 
 We appeal to the people. We are going to the people in favor of the 
 Constitution of Madison, the Constitution of Webster. We are going to the 
 people in favor of their own freedom at the polls, in favor of their own in 
 telligence in the jury-box, in favor of the independence of the States in the 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 631 
 
 management of their elections, as had always been the case heretofore. The 
 people will answer, in my judgment, North as well as South. 
 
 The course the gentlemen are pursuing, so far from bringing the day 
 which they expect of the reversal of a majority of this body wi?l, as I be 
 lieve, increase it. Men who have lost by revolution, men who have lost all 
 by revolution, are the ones who are not going to force another revolution. 
 Men who owe all they have to revolution, who owe wealth and position and 
 power to revolution, who owe the highest honors of the republic to revolu 
 tion, are the men who may be fairly expected to want revolution again. 
 They are the ones for the people to fear. 
 
 THE REPUBLICAN CLAIM TO SOUTHERN GRATITUDE. 
 
 But the senator from New York and the senator from Maine, as various 
 other gentlemen have done before, take occasion to remind us that they 
 were exceedingly gracious to us after the war. The senator from New 
 York tells us that after Reconstruction was completed, none of our property 
 was confiscated, and none of us were disfranchised, and none of us were im 
 prisoned. That is a fact, after Reconstruction was completed. He takes 
 credit for turning us loose after he had completed Reconstruction and re 
 organized the States upon his idea. I do not put the comparison as ap 
 plicable to the senator from New York, but it is just as true of the robber 
 who claims credit for kindness to the traveler because he had done him no 
 harm after he had robbed him and let him go, because since the time he had 
 let him go he had done him no harm at all. 
 
 Sir, the senators are mistaken if they do not think we understand to 
 what we owe our redemption. It is not to the Republican party. The 
 Republican party set aside our State governments. The senator from 
 Maine the other day said there had been only fourteen thousand citizens 
 disfranchised in the South. The senator confounded disabilities under the 
 Fourteenth Amendment with disfranchisement. There were at least two 
 hundred and fifty thousand citizens disfranchised in the South. 
 
 Mr. Blaine. I said by .the action of the Federal government. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Certainly, by the action of the Federal government ; by the 
 Reconstruction acts of Congress. By the Reconstruction acts you came 
 down there and took possession of our States, set aside our State govern 
 ments, declared we had no legal State governments, and you created a con 
 stituency and created new governments and disfranchised two hundred and 
 fifty thousand of the very best men, the most intelligent the property- 
 holding men in the whole South at a time when our governments were de 
 stroyed, when our industrial system was destroyed, and you put us in the 
 hands of our slaves, under the lead of strangers, men who came for no pur 
 pose but to get power over us and build governments for us, and we had to 
 stand by and witness the process, threatened with confiscation and exile if 
 we dared resist. And there were two hundred and fifty thousand id that 
 condition. 
 
 Do gentlemen say that we owe anything to them ? Did not my friend 
 from Kentucky quote from the senator from Maine, in 1868, a statement 
 that there was nothing more to be feared from the South ? You thought 
 you had destroyed us. You created new constituencies and created govern 
 ments to suit them ; you had the power. You thought we were powerless 
 forever, and then, like the wicked Delilah, you said : 
 
 Samson, the Philistines be upon you. 
 
632 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 And they were. And after that you left, and left us, as you thought, 
 bound with your cords and whips. It was then that the Samson of State 
 sovereignty stretched himself and burst them all. 
 
 Mr. Hoar. And pulled down the temple ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Well I should think if the senator would go through the 
 South he would find his carpet-bag temples in that country just now in the 
 returning boards. There is nothing so sacred to him as a returning board. 
 That is all that was left. 
 
 It was through this very agency of the autonomy and sovereignty of the 
 States that we were able to recover ourselves, not by violence, not by intimi 
 dation as you falsely charge, but by the very autonomy of the States which 
 you thought you had manacled, which you thought you had destroyed. It 
 is to this very autonomy of the States that we owe our presence here to-day. 
 
 WHY THE SOUTH IS " SOLID," AND FOR WHAT. 
 
 Oh, but you say the South is solid. That is true. And you intimate to 
 the North that we are solid against the Union. That is not true. There is 
 not a word of truth in it. We are solid. Solid how ? Solid against whom? 
 Solid against the Republican party. Why should we not be ? Do you 
 wonder? The past is enough to make us solid. But let that go. I would 
 remember nothing in the spirit of revenge. Do you think, senators, that 
 such speeches as you have been making here during the last four weeks have no 
 tendency to make the South solid against your party ! Do you think that 
 such speeches as you have been making in the House have no such tendency ? 
 Do you think that it is perfectly legitimate and proper for you to calumniate 
 and slander and misrepresent and abuse us in every form in which language will 
 authorize you to do it, and that we are going to love you for it ? You may 
 not know it, but we are men. You pick up every vagabond in the South 
 who caiv bt induced by any motive to testify against us, and you believe him, 
 you praise him. In your papers you scatter it through all your country. 
 You make it appear that we are rebellious. I do not care how vile a char 
 acter he is, I do not care how covered with crime he is, if he testifies to 
 barbarities and cruelties against the best class of Southern people you be 
 lieve him, you profess to believe him ; you parade that testimony on this 
 floor ; you parade it on the floor of the other House ; you parade it before 
 the Northern people ; and I do not care how manly, how intelligent, how 
 earnest a man may be that testifies justly for the Southern people and gives 
 them credit for honor and honesty, you discredit him as unworthy of belief. 
 
 That alone would be sufficient to make the South solid ; but the South is 
 solid against the Republican party for another reason. We regard the Re 
 publican party as only a sectional party. It was sectional in its origin. I 
 will not say anything about the questions which then divided us, but it was 
 a sectional party ; it had no organization save in some of the States. It 
 has been sectional in its history ; it has been sectional in its doctrines ; it 
 has been sectional in its purposes ; it has been sectional in its triumphs ; it 
 is sectional now. You never have had any organization in the South except 
 that which you forced and bought and that could not last and you never 
 will. 
 
 Now, we have tried sectionalism and we have abandoned it, and there 
 fore we cannot consistently affiliate with the Republican party. We are 
 for national parties now. We come back to the grand old party of the 
 North that never went off after secession ; that never went after the Baals 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WHITINGS. 633 
 
 or consolidation. If there are any men on this earth for whom I have a 
 higher regard than others, they are the Democrats of the North. I know 
 those of us at the South who were for the Union went through a trying 
 ordeal, and none can ever know how trying it was except those who passed 
 through it ; but it seems to me the Northern Democrats, who were so ma 
 ligned and abused by the Republicans, went through a greater, for when the 
 crisis came they that had no sympathy with the objects or purposes of the 
 Republican party shouldered their arms and marched side by side with the 
 Republicans of the North to put down their real friends in the South, and 
 they did it. And yet, notwithstanding their fidelity to the Union, notwith 
 standing so many hundreds of thousands of Democrats periled their all in 
 the war, you abuse, you malign them, you give them no credit for it. And 
 why do we affiliate with them ? Because when we grounded our arms they 
 met us as brethren and not as enemies. 
 
 Then, again, we never can affiliate with the Republican party for a 
 higher reason, a greater reason than the one I have given. The Republican 
 party to-day is the representative, and the only representative on this con 
 tinent, of the consolidation theory of our government, the theory, not of a 
 mixed union, federal and national, the theory of an absolute nationalism ; a 
 theory which in its doctrines is seeking, at this very hour, to destroy the 
 States of this Union. While we have abandoned secession, while we have 
 agreed never to divide the States, we have never agreed to destroy the 
 States ; we will not agree to do it. 
 
 And, then, gentlemen, because of your conduct, your calumnies, your 
 slanders what we know to be slanders the South is solid against you. 
 Every day things are repeated upon this floor against ten millions of people 
 which no gentleman would dare repeat against one man. You charge a 
 whole people with being false, untrustworthy, untrue, without evidence, 
 against the fact, and yet you alarm the North by crying of a solid South. 
 You seek to destroy the States when, so far from yielding our devotion to 
 the States, we owe all that is left of us to the States and to that very princi 
 ple of the government which recognizes the States as a part of our system. 
 
 Sir, if the South were solid from any motives of hostility to the Union, 
 from any motives of hostility to the Constitution, from any motives of hos 
 tility to the Northern people, the South would be exceedingly reprehensible. 
 We were made solid in defense of our own preservation ; we are now solid 
 in defense of our own honor and self-respect. We will be kept solid in 
 defense of the Constitution of our fathers as interpreted by Madison and 
 expounded by Webster. We would be glad, if it could be, to see two 
 national parties in this country national in organization, national in princi 
 ples, national in hopes, and consistent with the true interpretation of the 
 Constitution ; but the Northern man who, after having made the South 
 solid by calumny, by wrongs piled mountain high extending through years 
 that Northern man who takes advantage of the wrongs he has inflicted upon 
 the South, and thereby made them solid, who now undertakes for that very 
 reason to make the North solid too, having a solid North against a solid 
 South, is a disunionist in fact, for whenever we shall have a solid North 
 and a solid South in this country the Union cannot last. 
 
 WHO SAVED THE UNION CONCLUSION. 
 
 No, my good Northern Democratic brethren, you saved the country at 
 last ; you saved the Union in the hour of its peril ; not the Republican 
 
634 
 
 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OP GEORGIA. 
 
 party. You who had showed devotion to your flag saved the Union, and 
 now it is for you to go before your people and tell them that the solid 
 North must never become a fact against the solid South. If so, the dis 
 union will be accomplished. It is you that we look to. You saved the 
 Union and you will save the States. We could not help you save the 
 Union, but we are here with all the power that God has given us to help 
 you preserve and save the States of this country against the only remaining 
 enemy of either the States or the Union. 
 
 Mr. President, I know I have detained the Senate long. I was born a 
 slaveholder. That was a decree of my country s laws, not my own. I 
 never bought a slave save at his own request ; and of that I am not ashamed. 
 I was never unkind to a slave, and all I ever owned will bear cheerful testi 
 mony to that fact. I would never deprive a human being of any race, or 
 color, or condition of his right to the equal protection of the laws ; and no 
 colored man who knows me believes I would. Of all forms of cowardice, 
 that is the meanest which would oppress the helpless, or wrong the defense 
 less ; but I had the courage to face secession in its maddest hour and say I 
 would not give the American Union for African slavery, and that if slavery 
 dared strike the Union, slavery would perish. Slavery did perish, and now 
 in this high council of the greatest of nations, I face the leaders of State 
 destruction and declare that this ark of our political covenant, this Con 
 stitutional casket of our confederate nation, encasing as it does more of 
 human liberty and human security and human hope than any government 
 ever formed by man, I would not break for the whole African race. And 
 cursed, thrice cursed forever be the man who would ! Sir, in disunion 
 through the disintegration of the States, I have never been able to see any 
 thing but anarchy with its endless horrors. In disunion through the de- 
 
 O / O 
 
 struction of the States I have never been able to see anything but rigid, 
 hopeless despotism, with all its endless oppression. In disunion by any 
 means, in any form, for any cause, I have never been able to see anything 
 but blood, and waste, and ruin to all races and colors and conditions of men. 
 But in the preservation of our Union of States, this confederate nation, I 
 have never been able to see anything but a grandeur and a glory such as no 
 people ever enjoyed. I pray God that every* arm that shall be raised to 
 destroy that Union may be withered before it can strike the blow. 
 
SPEECH DELIVERED IK THE SENATE OF THE UNITED 
 STATES, MAY 11 AND 12, 1880. CAN THE SENATE DIS 
 FRANCHISE A STATE. 
 
 This speech was made in support of the resolution from the Committee on Privileges 
 and Elections, declaring that William Pitt Kellogg was not entitled to his seat as a senator 
 from the State of Louisiana. The argument is the most elaborate ever made by Mr. Hill 
 in the Senate. For severe logic, terrific invective, and lofty flights of eloquence it is not 
 
 surpassed by any he ever made. An able writer says of this speech : " The finest speech 
 I ever heard was Hill on the Louisiana contested election and Kellogg. As a forensic 
 argument it was absolutely conclusive ; as an invective, it was as severe as Grattan or 
 Brougham." 
 
 *o* 
 
 " The people will, I trust, rise up on this auspicious year and declare that a party 
 which has seized and held power by fraud against the popular will shall never again be 
 trusted with power by the popular will. They will cast out the thieves who divide the 
 public offices as their own legitimate spoil." 
 
 Is THE CONSTITUTION OR A RESOLUTION OF THE SENATE THE SUPREME 
 
 LAW? OK is FRAUD SUPREME OVER ALL? 
 
 Tuesday, May 11, 1880. 
 
 On the resolutions reported by the Committee on Privileges and Elec 
 tions, relative to the seat of William Pitt Kellogg as Senator from Louisi 
 ana, Mr. Hill said : 
 
 Mr. President: During the delivery of my remarks to-day I request 
 that I be not interrupted. Interruptions will only break the thread of the 
 argument, and perhaps unnecessarily prolong it ; and I feel satisfied that 
 the view I shall take of the case will be such that when am discussing 
 one proposition Senators will tind that the questions which may occur to 
 them on another proposition will be reached before I am through. At the 
 conclusion of my remarks I will answer any questions which any Senator 
 may desire answered. I propose to-day to discuss chiefly the legal views 
 involved in this case, going into the facts only to such an extent as 
 deem them necessary to elucidate those legal views. And now, sir, without 
 further delay, explanation, or apology, I proceed directly to the questions 
 on which we are asked to vote. 
 
 The first resolution reported from the committee is in these word* 
 
 Resolved, That, according to the evidence now known to the Senate William 
 Kellogg was not chosen by the Legislature of Louisiana to the seat in th 
 term beginning the 4th day of March, 1877, and is not entitled to s 
 
 The second resolution declares : 
 
 That Henry M. Spofford was chosen by the Legislature of Louisiana to the seat in 
 the Senate for the term beginning on the 4th of March, 1877, and that he be admit 
 to the same on taking the oath prescribed by law. 
 
 635 
 
636 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 If the first resolution be correct, a little reflection will satisfy Senators 
 that the second follows as a corollary, because it is conceded on all hands 
 that there was a Legislature chosen for the State of Louisiana by the elec 
 tion of 1876. I shall therefore direct my inquiries to the correctness of the 
 first resolution. That resolution analyzed contains one affirmation, and 
 from that affirmation announces a conclusion. The affirmation is that 
 William P. Kellogg was not chosen by the Legislature of Louisiana. The 
 conclusion is that, therefore, he is not entitled to sit in this body. Is the 
 affirmation true ? Was he chosen by the Legislature of Louisiana to the 
 seat which he occupies ? That is the question upon which we are to vote. 
 Senators will notice that this resolution deals in no vague generalities. It 
 does not spread a drag-net of phraseology by saying that the Senator is 
 lawfully entitled on the merits, without saying what those merits are, or 
 without making a distinct issue upon which the Senate is called to vote. 
 It alleges a Constitutional fact and in Constitutional language. It affirms 
 that William P. Kellogg was not chosen by the Legislature of Louisiana to 
 the seat. 
 
 The report of the committee alleges two reasons why that proposition is 
 true. First, the report declares that the body of persons which it has been 
 alleged elected Kellogg was not in fact the Legislature of Louisiana, and 
 therefore had no power, no authority, to choose him as Senator. The 
 second reason is, that, conceding for the argument that this body of persons 
 was the Legislature of Louisiana, yet that under the evidence there was no 
 quorum present at the time of the alleged election ; and secondly, that the 
 members were controlled in their votes by bribery and other corrupt prac 
 tices, and therefore did not choose the sitting member to the seat he oc 
 cupies. 
 
 I beg the Senate to keep these propositions distinct and separate. The 
 first proposition is that the body of persons was not the Legislature and 
 could not elect, and is a question of power and authority. The second 
 proposition is that because of the want of a quorum and because of corrupt 
 practices, the Legislature, conceding it to be such, did not choose him to be 
 Senator, and makes a question of will and compliance with the statutes reg 
 ulating elections. They are very distinct, and each must be considered sep 
 arately from the other, for they rest upon very different grounds. 
 
 The first proposition then, is, was the body of persons which it is alleged 
 elected Kellogg to the Senate the Legislature of Louisiana at the time of 
 the so-called election? 
 
 Mr. President, first of all let us settle the fundamental question, what 
 is the Legislature of a State? The Legislature of a State is that body of 
 persons who are invested with authority to make laws for the government 
 of that State ; and it is that body of persons whose enactments the courts 
 are compelled to administer, the governor is compelled to execute, and the 
 people are compelled to obey. That is the Legislature of a State. Who in 
 vests this body of persons with this legislative power, with this power to 
 make laws laws which demand the obedience of courts, of governors, and 
 of people ? Clearly, that investment of power is conferred solely by the 
 State, by the people of the State, according to the Constitution and laws of 
 that State. No other power can invest any body of persons in a State with 
 authority to make laws for that State and for its internal government. 
 You perceive at once that such a claim in another, if admitted, would strike 
 at the very foundation of popular government. Whatever authority a Leg- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 63} 
 
 islature of a State has to make laws, it derives only from the people of that 
 State. 
 
 This being true, the next question is this : who is to determine what 
 body of persons it is in a State that is invested with this authority to make 
 laws for the government of that people ? Why, sir, necessarily that deter- 
 mination can come only from those who have the authority to make the in 
 vestment. It would be absurd to say that the people of the State alone 
 could invest a body of persons with authority to make laws and then say 
 that some other body could determine whether that body of persons had 
 been in fact invested with that authority. It is impossible, in the nature of 
 things, that one power should alone be able to invest this body of persons 
 with authority to make laws, and that another distinct, separate, or different 
 power should have authority to determine whether that investment had 
 been made, whether that authority had been given. Other powers may 
 recognize what the State has done, but the State alone gives the authority, 
 and declares to whom she has given it. 
 
 I am thus particular in making this enunciation because the notion has 
 got abroad of late years that in some contingency or other there are other 
 powers or authorities which can enter a State and determine what is and 
 what shall be the Legislature of that State, and the report of the committee 
 concedes, in deference to this general loose idea, that where there are two 
 rival bodies in a State, each claiming to be the Legislature of the State, the 
 Senate in admitting a Senator may determine which of those rival bodies is 
 the Legislature of the State. 
 
 I simply wish here to say for myself, that in my opinion there is no 
 possible contingency under our form of government when this Senate can 
 have authority to determine, as an original proposition, for itself or for the 
 State or for anybody else, what is the Legislature of a State. I can con 
 ceive of a contingency under that article of the Constitution which says that 
 the United States shall guarantee a republican form of government to each 
 State, in which for a certain purpose Congress itself may have authority to 
 determine what is the legal government of a State pro hdc vice, and I can 
 conceive of a contingency in which the Executive, in executing the laws of 
 Congress carrying out that provision of the Constitution, may find it neces 
 sary to determine what is the Legislature of a State or the governor of a 
 State ; but the President and Congress, in the case mentioned, determine it 
 for themselves to enable them to execute a specific power in the Constitu 
 tion, and do not determine it for the State. 
 
 In other words, the power conferred by the Constitution on the United 
 States, and incidentally upon the President, in carrying out the laws of the 
 United States, to determine for a certain purpose what is the Legislature of 
 a State, is only conferred for the purpose of invoking the physical power of 
 the General Government to put the State in a condition to enable her to de 
 cide for herself what is her Legislature and what is her true government. 
 So that in truth, even in the cases mentioned, the final and authoritative de 
 termination as to what is the Legislature of a State must be by the State 
 herself. It would be at war with every principle on which pur system of 
 government rests to say that under any circumstances any outside power can 
 enter a State and determine for that State the body of persons who shall 
 make laws for the internal government of the people of that State. 
 
 But this question as to what may be the power of the Senate in the con 
 tingency mentioned, where the State has not determined the question, is not 
 
038 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 material for discussion in this case. I simply announce my view on this 
 subject, because I wish to go on the record as holding that opinion, and I 
 have not the slightest doubt of its correctness. 
 
 If a State has not determined what is her Legislature, then she is not in 
 a condition to elect a Senator, for the Legislature is the constituency of the 
 Senator, and until there be a Legislature there can be no Senator chosen. 
 The State must determine what is her Legislature. The Legislature is not 
 created for the purpose of electing a Senator mark that. The Legislature 
 is created to make laws for the State, and the Constitution of the United 
 States simply deposits with that Legislature, thus called into existence by 
 the State, the power, the authority, to choose a Senator ; and until the Legis 
 lature is called into existence there can be no authority to choose a Senator. 
 If domestic violence should occur in a State by which the State is rendered 
 physically unable to determine that question, then she may call on the 
 General Government for assistance to enable her to determine that question 
 by the suppression of the domestic violence, and the President and the Con 
 gress can determine what is the government of the State for the purpose of 
 answering the call, so as to remove the obstruction, and then leave the State, 
 when the obstruction is removed, to determine for herself what is her Legis 
 lature, what is her government. 
 
 But, Mr. President, as I said, I shall not stop to dwell upon that question, 
 because the next proposition I presume will receive the unquestioning assent 
 of every gentleman present. That proposition is, that whether this Senate 
 can claim the right to determine which of two rival bodies in a State is the 
 Legislature of that State or not, when the State herself has not determined 
 that question ; yet when the State has determined that question, when the 
 State has said, "This is the body of persons that I have invested with 
 authority to make laws for the government of my people"; when the courts 
 of the State say, " This is the body whose laws we will administer under 
 our oaths "; when the executive officers say, "This is the body whose laws we 
 will execute"; when the people say, "This is the. body whose laws we 
 will obey," it would be usurpation of the most reckless character for any 
 third power to go into that State and reverse that decision of the State, and 
 compel the people of the State, the courts of the State, and the governor of 
 the State, or anybody else, to say that another body is the Legislature of 
 that State. That would make such third power a tyrant and the State a 
 mere subject province. 
 
 Now, then, the question is, has Louisiana settled this question for her 
 self ? Unquestionably she has. In March, 1877, when the credentials of 
 Kellogg were first presented in this body and referred to a committee, there 
 were two bodies in the State of Louisiana, each claiming to be the Legisla 
 ture, one supported by the people, the other supported by the army of the 
 United States and the metropolitan police. If the Senate had authority, be 
 cause there were two bodies, to determine which of them was the Legislature, 
 it did not determine it while the controversy lasted ; it took no step for the 
 purpose of determining it ; no action whatever ; and before the Senate had 
 taken any action in the matter of determining that question the State settled 
 it for herself, and that settlement has remained from that day to this. There 
 is not a power on earth that questions the settlement. 
 
 The honorable Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Hoar) made the singular 
 statement yesterday that the majority of this committee, or somebody on 
 this side of the House., held to the doctrine that a revolution in the spring of 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 639 
 
 1877 had a retroactive effect, to make that unconstitutional which was Con 
 stitutional in January, 1877. That idea, like a great many others expressed 
 by the Senator, has no foundation but the unsubstantial basis of his own 
 vivid imagination. Nobody on this side has said any such foolish thing. 
 But what we say on this side is : that the question decided by Louisiana was 
 what was the body of persons chosen as her Legislature by the election of 
 1876, and which, therefore, was the legal Legislature in January, 1877, and 
 from the beginning of its term ; for the Legislature which was chosen (in 
 1876 was not chosen for the month of January, nor for the month of Feb 
 ruary, nor for the month of March ; it was chosen for a term, and that term 
 was fixed by the Constitution of Louisiana then to be two years. So that 
 whichever body was chosen by the people in the election of 1876 as the 
 Legislature, was chosen as the Legislature for the two years beginning on the 
 1st day of January, 1877. That is the question the people of Louisiana 
 decided. 
 
 Perhaps I ought to apologize to the Senate for stopping to notice this 
 statement of the Senator from Massachusetts. He speaks of the revolution 
 in April, 1877, by which the legal government of Louisiana was overthrown. 
 A revolution ! What was the revolution ? The simple withdrawal of force, 
 the simple withdrawal of troops. 
 
 The governor of the State in 1877 had called upon the metropolitan 
 police force and the Army of the United States to protect what he called the 
 Packard Legislature in the State-house. That army was withdrawn ; that 
 physical force was withdrawn in April, 1877, and the result was that that 
 which had no existence except by force simply dissolved ; it fell. Now, I 
 have heard of revolutions being accomplished by force, but I never heard of 
 a violent revolution being accomplished by the withdrawal of force. The 
 Senator says that the Packard government was overthrown by the revolution 
 of April, l 877. Did any man ever hear of a government being overthrown 
 by the withdrawal of force ? A government may be overthrown by the 
 application of force, usurpatory or otherwise, but it remained for the Senator 
 from Massachusetts, who made the brilliant discovery that the sun rose on 
 Mont Blanc, to discover that the withdrawal of force overthrew a legal 
 government ! 
 
 The very fact that that concern dissolved when the force was withdrawn 
 ought to be the highest evidence to a man accustomed to popular govern 
 ment that the thing had no basis whatever. How can that be the Legisla 
 ture of a State which has no foundation and no support in the will of the State 
 herself, nor in the will of the people of the State ? How can that be the 
 Legislature, invested with power to make laws for the government pi 
 people of a State, which has nothing to keep it in existence but a military 
 power, and the moment that military power is withdrawn the thing dissolves 
 into thin air ? Could the army, by whose presence alone this concern ex 
 isted, invest this body of persons with authority to make laws for the peo 
 ple of Louisiana? 
 
 The State of Louisiana then has peaceably, quietly, unanimously, legally, 
 forever, for all men and for all powers, settled which of these two bodies 
 \\ as her Legislature. She has settled that the body of persons who pretend 
 to have elected Kellogg had no authority upon earth to make a legal enact 
 ment, and they madeno legal enactment. She tells you that no port 
 the judiciary, not even a justice of the peace, would dare admimst 
 actment adopted by this mob \ that no governor would enforce a law < 
 
640 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 body ; and there is no man, woman, or child, black or white, in the bounda 
 ries of Louisiana that would obey one of its enactments or that could be 
 compelled to obey one of its enactments, and any person seeking to enforce 
 obedience to an enactment of this body of conspirators would be a tres 
 passer. 
 
 But the State has not only decided that this body of persons was not her 
 Legislature, she has further decided that another body, chosen by the election 
 of 1876, was and is her Legislature. Her Legislature from what date ? From 
 that election, and from the date of the term as fixed by the Constitution. 
 It seems to have crept into the minds of some men that there was one body 
 which was a legal Legislature for one month and another body which was a 
 legal Legislature for another month ; an idea which could only spring from 
 a mind which has come to the conclusion that the power in this country to 
 make Legislatures is not the will of the people but a fraudulent returning 
 board defeating the will of the people. They chose, as I say, that Legisla 
 ture for the term, and when all the authorities and all the people of the 
 State, and including the very men who had composed the so-called Packard 
 Legislature, agreed that the Nichols Legislature was the true Legislature of 
 the State of Louisiana, chosen in 1876, they determined that it was the Legis 
 lature from the beginning of the term and that this other body never was 
 the Legislature. 
 
 As the State has settled this question, can any other power annul it ? 
 Has the State of Louisiana by her courts, by her government, by all her peo 
 ple, by one united voice, determined that this was her Legislature that elected 
 Spofford, and that it was not her Legislature that elected Kellogg ? Pray tell 
 me whence you derive the authority to review that judgment ? To say that 
 you differ with the authorities and the people, and to place in some other 
 body the authority to reverse that decision of the State, is simply to give 
 that other power an authority over the State in making a Legislature for 
 that State, and would simply destroy the State and her frame of govern 
 ment by creating a power superior to that of the State over the State s own 
 affairs. 
 
 Mr. President, we hear of precedents, and it is said we must beware of 
 making bad precedents. I wish to say one thing to-day, and if I say noth 
 ing else I shall feel that I have discharged my duty to the country at this 
 time. There can be no greater danger to this country, no greater danger to 
 the institutions of this country, possible, than to recognize the idea, or to estab 
 lish the theory of government, that the Senate or any other power can de 
 termine for the State what is her Legislature. Where is the end of it ? 
 Do you hold that some other power can reverse the decision of the State ; 
 can disregard the decision of the State ; can decide against her courts, her 
 governor, and her people as to what is their Legislature, and that such other 
 power can go into a State and say that a mob, a town meeting, a company 
 of militia, or a party convention shall be the Legislature of a State ? What 
 will protect them ? Gentlemen say if we establish the doctrine here that 
 one Senate can reverse the action of another Senate on this question, there 
 is no stability to the Senate. Do you not see that the only safety for the 
 stability of the Senate, the only safety for the right of the State, is to 
 insist upon it that the State herself shall determine what is her Legislature, 
 and that the Senate has no right to reverse the action and the decision of 
 the State on that question. 
 
 The moment you say that the Senate can differ with the State and deter- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 641 
 
 mine for her as t<5 what is her Legislature, and that a Senator elected by 
 
 what the State calls her Legislature may be rejected by the Senate, and 
 
 another who is elected by a mob or a party convention may be admitted 
 here, and, being once admitted, can never be removed, you place the State 
 in the power of the Senate. I warn my friends to take care. When you 
 say that the Senate can enter a State and determine against the will of the 
 State what is her own Legislature, then you have established a doctrine by 
 which the Senate can be composed of Senators who do not represent the 
 States but who represent only party majorities in this Senate. The only 
 safety for your State is to hold to the rights, the inalienable rights, the 
 Constitutional rights, of each State to determine for herself what is her 
 Legislature, and that the Senator elected by that Legislature is the only 
 Senator that can be admitted on this floor. Then you are safe. Then 
 power and passion and sectional feeling will strike against you in vain. I 
 tremble at the very thought that any one on this floor would tolerate the 
 idea that the Senate or any other power may reverse the decision of a State 
 as to what is her Legislature, and make the partisan will and judgment of 
 the Senate paramount authority to determine what is the Legislature of a 
 State, and, therefore, who shall be admitted into the Senate. 
 
 On the first proposition, was this body of persons the Legislature of the 
 State, I think every man s mouth ought to be closed. It does seem to 
 me that we should heed the grand words uttered by Mr. Webster in his 
 argument in Luther vs. Bordin, when he said the State has the right to 
 decide this question, and when the State has decided it for herself she 
 decides it for all the world, and the mouth of every other person is closed 
 and closed forever. We have progressed so far in some directions I do 
 not know that I ought to stop to say in what direction but in modern 
 times we have progressed so far in some direction that to quote the Consti 
 tutional views of Mr. Webster on this floor is to incite the distinguished 
 gentlemen on the other side to a charge of rebellious disposition. 
 
 Mr. Webster said that when the State decides this question for herself 
 she decides it for all the world. The successor of Mr. Webster ( Mr. Hoar ) 
 has put it in writing that no other power can decide this question for the 
 Senate but the Senate. There is a vast difference. Mr. Webster says that 
 the State decides it for all the world. This modern Senator from Massachu 
 setts repudiates the decision of the State and insists that the Senate decides 
 it for itself, and no other power can decide it for the Senate. There is a 
 vast progress from Mr. Webster to the honorable Senator, whether up or 
 down or laterally, the world must determine for itself. I choose to bow at 
 the shrine of that grand man, Daniel Webster. But suppose the Senate 
 should say, "We want to look into the facts and decide for ourselves 
 whether the decision of the State was right; whether the State ought 
 have made that decision." That is the new doctrine, that we must inquire 
 not whether the State has made the decision, but whether the State ought to 
 have made it. 
 
 I say, then, that under the facts of this case the State decided it correctly. 
 The State could not have made any other decision, and no man in this body 
 who intends to be governed by the facts of the case can decide it diperently 
 even as an original question. Can any man say that this body of persons, 
 barricaded in their halls in January, 1877, was a Legislature ? You rau 
 abrogate the definition of a Legislature. Did it have authority to mak 
 laws ? It had no authority outside of its barricaded pen ; it did not pret 
 
642 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 t 
 
 to have any authority outside. It could not compel a man to pay a dollar of 
 taxes, and it did not. It did nothing ; it could do nothing. The evidence 
 shows that it was nothing in the world but a body of conspirators, gotten 
 together by this fraudulent action of the returning board expressly to defeat 
 the will of the State, and not to carry out the will of the State. 
 
 A portion of the members elected by the people, less than a quorum of 
 each house, being at the very furthest, on the very best view of the case 
 for the other side, only sixteen Senators, lacking three of a quorum; and 
 only fifty-two members of the house, lacking nine of a quorum, were there; 
 and they excluded by force the Democratic members who were elected and 
 certified to be elected. They seized the State-house and surrounded it with 
 troops by order of Kellogg himself, closed up the doors, and would let 
 nobody come in there without a ticket from them. It was a body of con 
 spirators ignorant, reckless, covered with every crime by their own confes 
 sion in this evidence, caring nothing for the State, governing nobody in the 
 State, having the respect of nobody in the State, held together by force, 
 controlled by bribery and corruption, and having no purpose in view but to 
 elect the chief of their own band of conspirators to a seat in the Senate ; and 
 you say that that body had authority to make laws for Louisiana. As 
 an original proposition you cannot come to any conclusion except that the 
 people of Louisiana decided right, and it is a most shameful mockery for 
 this Senate to pretend to believe that this self-barricaded den of self-con 
 fessed villains was invested with authority to make laws for the people of 
 Louisiana. No man in this Senate does believe it. 
 
 Mr. President, I have established two propositions : first, that by the 
 decision of Louisiana, and by the decision of everybody in Louisiana, includ 
 ing the conspirators themselves, the body of persons that elected Kellogg 
 was not the Legislature of Louisiana in January, 1877 ; but the body which 
 elected Spofford was the Legislature chosen by the people in the election of 
 1876. Then I have shown, secondly, that under the facts of this case the 
 State could not have decided otherwise, and you cannot decide otherwise. 
 The decision is right and just under the facts. Therefore the proposition 
 is established as a proposition of fact that the body which elected Kellogg 
 was not the Legislature of the State at the time of the election. So the af 
 firmation in the first resolution is true ; true by authority and true in law, 
 true by evidence and true in fact. 
 
 We advance, then, to the conclusion of the resolution, which is that Kel 
 logg not being chosen by the Legislature of Louisiana to the seat he occu 
 pies, he is " not entitled to sit in the same." Is this conclusion correct ? 
 My friend from Connecticut (Mr. Eaton) reminds me that this Packard 
 Legislature, as it is called, never, in fact, made a law. Certainly not. 
 How could they ? How could they do that which they could not do ? Make 
 a law, indeed ! Make a law that the very rats that burrowed with them 
 would not obey ! Make a law that not a child in New Orleans or Louisiana 
 would respect or could be made to obey ! They made no law. 
 
 Now, then, is the conclusion correct that he (Kellogg) is not entitled to 
 a seat in this body ? I advance to the discussion of this question with abso 
 lute pain. I know the extent to which absurdity can go, but I confess that 
 I never expected to hear it said anywhere in this broad land, and above all 
 other things I never expected to hear it said in the Senate of the United 
 States, that a man who was not chosen by the Legislature of a State could 
 acquire a title to a seat in this body. The Constitution says : 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 64:3 
 
 The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State 
 chosen by the Legislature thereof. 
 
 When you say that this man was not chosen by the Legislature of the 
 State, have I to reason with you to convince you that, not being chosen by 
 the Legislature of the State, he cannot possibly acquire a title to a seat in 
 this body ? But that is the whole question. Certainly no one on this side 
 of this Chamber will say the body of men who it is said elected Kellogg 
 was the Legislature of Louisiana, and yet it is whispered that some hesitate 
 to say he has no title to the seat. I do not believe that there is a man 
 on the other side who will get up and say that in point of fact this body 
 was the Legislature of Louisiana. There may be some who may persuade 
 themselves to the fanciful idea that it ought to have been ; they wish it 
 had been ; if they could have had their way it would have been ; but I can 
 not believe that there is a Senator on that side of the Chamber who will get 
 up and outrage common sense and the facts of the case to such an extent 
 as to say that in point of fact the body which elected Kellogg was the Leg 
 islature of Louisiana. Yet it is contended by all on that side that notwith 
 standing it was not the Legislature, he is yet entitled to the seat. 
 
 This makes it necessary to discuss as a question, " Can a man acquire a 
 rightful title to a seat in this JSenate who was not chosen thereto by the 
 Legislature of his State ? " I discuss it protesting that nothing can make it 
 plainer than the Constitution makes it. 
 
 There is no feature of our Government which was framed w r ith more 
 care, I may almost say with so much care, as the Senate of the United 
 States. Under the confederation we had but one body for our Legislature. 
 
 *. O 
 
 The Senate was created by the Constitution. It was founded in a great 
 principle. Its necessity arose not only from the experience of the past, 
 but from the character of our institutions. When our fathers met in con 
 vention in 1787 they were troubled with a new and a grand idea, and that 
 was how to make a federal nation a thing that no people had ever done. 
 The question was how to make a federal government which would have 
 national power to enforce its own laws upon its citizens, and at the same time 
 retain its federal features so as to preserve intact the independent and sep 
 arate character of the States. It was a grand and new thought in govern 
 ment. The House of Representatives was organized upon the national idea ; 
 it represents population. The Senate was organized upon the federal idea ; 
 it represents States. We have what no country or people ever had before. 
 Nothing can become a law without having the assent of the people through 
 their Representatives, and the assent of the States through their Representa 
 tives or Senators. 
 
 You see the reason why the choice of Senators was vested in the Legis 
 latures of the States. These Legislatures represented the sovereign power 
 of the States, and as the Senators were to represent the States the power to 
 choose Senators was lodged in that branch of State government which repre 
 sented the sovereignty of the State. There were many discussions in the 
 convention as to where this power of choosing Senators should be lodged. 
 There was at one time a proposition to lodge it in the House of Representa 
 tives. There was another proposition to lodge it in districts. ^ There were 
 several other propositions suggested ; but afteV all the propositions had been 
 fully considered, it was finalTy determined by a unanimous vote of all the 
 States present to vest the authority to elect Senators in the Legislatures of 
 the States. 
 
644 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 The next idea that followed was natural, was a mere corollary to the 
 first that the States should be equal in the Senate. This proposition 
 created a heated discussion, but finally it was agreed to, and thus in this 
 branch of the government Delaware was to be equal to New York and 
 Rhode Island equal to Pennsylvania. These modern schoolmen, who cast 
 out Webster and Madison and all the great f ramers of our system, mock the 
 idea that this is a body which represents States, when there is not a more 
 distinct feature in our system than this equality of the States in this Senate. 
 
 But that was not all. Having lodged the power of choosing Senators in 
 the Legislature, having determined that the representation of the States 
 should be equal, that each State should have two Senators, they next de 
 termined that the method of choosing Senators should never be changed. 
 Therefore we have the clause : 
 
 The times, places, and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives 
 shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof ; but the Congress may at any 
 time by law make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing Senators. 
 
 It was therefore put beyond the power of Congress itself to change the 
 manner of choosing Senators. You may regulate the time and manner of 
 choosing Senators, but you cannot change the place ; it was fixed forever in 
 the Constitution. That is not all. There is a grander provision yet, and it 
 shows how this idea now cast out by these modern statesmen absolutely 
 dominated the convention ; for having provided that Senators should be 
 chosen by the Legislature in the organic government of the State, that the 
 States should be equal in representation, and that Congress itself should 
 never have power to make any regulation changing the place of choosing 
 Senators, they did not rest the question there, but they added the most re 
 markable feature of our Constitution. It is one that every statesman ought 
 to study, and one that he cannot study too much. They absolutely provided 
 that no State without her consent should ever be deprived of her equal rep 
 resentation in this body, even by amendment to the Constitution. They 
 vested in the States the right to have an equal number of Senators here, 
 they put it beyond the power of Congress to change that right, and then 
 they did for this sacred right what they did for nothing else, for it is the 
 only provision of the kind in the Constitution. The people, the sovereign 
 people, the fountain of all power, solemnly pledged themselves that they 
 never would, even by an amendment to the Constitution, deprive a State of 
 her equal representation on this floor without her consent. 
 
 If there be any power in this land, any device or any scheme, which can 
 give a man a title to a seat on this floor who was not chosen by the Legis 
 lature of a State, that power, device, or scheme is greater than the State, be 
 cause it substitutes its own iudffment as paramount to that of the State. 
 
 rni ^^ i 
 
 1 hat power is greater than Congress, for Congress cannot by law authorize 
 any other body than a Legislature to choose a Senator. That power is 
 greater than the people, because the people have covenanted that they will 
 never deprive a State of her equal representation in this body even by the 
 exercise of the sovereign power itself. The sovereignty of the people, the 
 sovereignty of all the people, shackled itself in deference to the preservation 
 of the equality of the States. Sovereignty bound itself forever to respect 
 that feature of our Constitution which it seems to me it is the chief pleasure 
 of some of the modern statesmen to deride and cast out. 
 
 Where, then, does this marvelous power which is invoked to disfranchise 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 645 
 
 a State in this Senate live or lurk ? I have shown you it is not in Congress ; 
 it is not in the States themselves ; it is not in the people of all the States. 
 Thirty-seven States, with a unanimous vote, cannot deprive the little State of 
 Delaware of her equal representation in this body. In the face of that 
 grand tribute to the equality and sovereignty of the States, who cares for the 
 taunts of these modern Lilliputians in the science of government ? Their 
 argument springs from the cheek and not from the brain, and is made for 
 partisan and not for patriotic purposes. The man who can go before the 
 American people and mock at this Constitutional sovereignty of the States 
 mocks at what our fathers made the grandest feature of the system, and the 
 only one which the sovereign people bound themselves always to respect and 
 never to change. 
 
 But where, I repeat, does this extraordinary power lie this power that 
 can give a man a title to a seat in this body who was not chosen thereto by 
 the Legislature of his State ? We are told that it lies in the Senate. What 
 a paradox is this ! It lies in the Senate ! Think of it ! The Senate, which 
 is the very body organized for the purpose of preserving this right of the 
 States, organized to represent the equality of the States, has power to de 
 stroy that right and equality ! But to disfranchise the States is to destroy 
 the Senate itself. It is claimed, too, that a disfranchisement of the State, 
 once inflicted by an order of the Senate, however false or mistaken, can 
 never be changed even by the Senate itself ; that if the Senate once seat a 
 man who was not chosen by the Legislature of his State that the Senate it 
 self can never review or change it. Thus the Senate is made all-powerful in 
 disfranchising a State, all-powerful to annul the Constitution, all-powerful to 
 do what the people of the State themselves cannot do ; but the Senate is 
 powerless to undo its own wrong ! It is omnipotent over the people, omnip 
 otent over the Constitution, omnipotent over the States, but is utterly im 
 potent to correct its own outrage and wrong ! 
 
 By what sort of chemical logic is it that such a gigantic absurdity is re 
 solved into such self-destructivelnfallibility ? We are told that it is because 
 the Senate is a court. Ah ! there it is again ! In order to give to the Sen 
 ate the power to destroy the States that created it and the Constitution that 
 organized it, you begin with a reason for that power which changes the 
 character of the Senate itself. You convert it from a political body into a 
 judicial one. An absurd conclusion can only be sustained by absurd reasons. 
 
 A great deal has been said on the question as to whether the Senate was 
 a court in dealing with the admission of its own members. Pardon me if 
 say that any discussion, in my judgment, on that point is fruitless. If you 
 mean to say that the Senate is a court, you mean to say a very absurd filing. 
 It is not a court in the technical meaning of that word. It is the Senate, 
 and the Constitution makes the Senate a legislative body--a political body. 
 You cannot convert it into a court except in the case provided by the 
 stitution itself. That is a very clear proposition. But on the other 
 when we say the Senate is not a court, we do not mean to say it is bound by 
 no rules, bound by no considerations of right, bound by no sense of propriety. 
 
 Of course the Senate, though not a court, though a legislative body,- 
 must respect common sense, is bound by reason, is bound by propriety, isboun 
 by wise political policy, and above all is bound by the Constitution, thongl 
 it is now claimed that the Senate is not bound by the Constitution, and t 
 the Senate can seat a man here who the Constitution says shall not sit 
 A decision by the Senate, though it is not a court, I say has all the dignity, 
 
C4G SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 all the character, and all the solemnity of a decision by a court. Because 
 the rule of res adjudicata, as known to courts, does not apply to the Senate, 
 it does not follow that the Senate is at loose ends. The Senate is not a body 
 without discretion ; it is expected to be a judicious body whether judicial 
 or not, though I confess the expectation is often disappointed. 
 
 This judicial character is sought to be given to the Senate by the language 
 of the Constitution, which says that : 
 
 Each House shall be the judge of the elections, returns, and qualifications of its own 
 members. 
 
 It is said the Senate is the judge ; so it is. One gentleman, the other day, 
 in his perfect simplicity, with an expression of face which amused me, said, 
 "The senate is a judge, and is it not therefore a court ? v That does not 
 follow. The argument made by gentlemen who have preceded me on this 
 subject relieves me of the necessity of pursuing it further. 
 
 But what is the extent of this power? Mark you, I am discussing now 
 the first branch of the argument, whether a man can get a title to a seat in 
 this body who was not chosen by the Legislature of the State. That is the 
 proposition. 
 
 The point I make is, that the power to judge of the elections, returns, and 
 qualifications of members of this body does not include the power to say 
 what is the Legislature of a State. That is the point. 
 
 Every question propounded on the other side, every argument made here 
 tofore, has been upon the assumption that the power in the Senate to judge 
 of the elections, returns, and qualifications of its own members includes the 
 power to judge of what is the Legislature of a State. Some loose phrase 
 ology which is not necessary to the point, a mere dictum, a mere passing 
 remark of Chief Justice Taney in Luther vs. Borden, has been quoted as 
 authority for that statement. That is not true. This is true : the Senate 
 
 / 
 
 in admitting a Senator determines which is the Legislature that is recognized 
 by the State. We do not enter the State" and judge what is the Legislature 
 of the State, but we do judge whether the State has a Legislature. We 
 recognize the body that the State determines, and we, of course, adopt the 
 necessary evidence to ascertain what body the State has determined to be 
 her Legislature, and when we ascertain that fact we go no further. We 
 have no right to inquire whether the State decided wisely or unwisely. 
 That is none of our business. We ascertain the fact. We ascertain what 
 body the State has made her Legislature, but we have no right to make the 
 Legislature for the State. 
 
 Then what is the extent of the power of the Senate to judge of the elec 
 tions, returns, and qualifications of its members? Consider a moment and 
 you will see exactly what its extent is. It is to judge of the elections, not 
 of the members of the Legislature, but of its own members. Now look at 
 the Constitution : 
 
 The times, places, and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives 
 shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof ; but the Congress may at any 
 time by law make or alter such regulations^ except as to the places of choosing Senators. 
 
 The manner of electing a Senator by the Legislature, the times of election, 
 are regulated by the law of the State or by the law of Congress. When, 
 therefore, Congress judges of the elections of its own members, what is that 
 power? To judge whether the Legislature has complied with the law regu 
 lating the time and manner of electing a Senator ; that is all. 
 
 HI 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 647 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. Does not that make the State the judge ? 
 
 Mr. Hill.- -No, sir ; the Senate can judge this : the Senafe can say whether 
 the State that is, the Legislature has observed the regulations in the 
 election. I have answered that proposition. 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. Does not that make the State the judge of who is entitled 
 to sit in this body, and not the Senate itself? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I thought a State was entitled to choose her own Senators, 
 having the Constitutional qualifications. 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. But suppose we differ with a State as to what is the 
 legislative body in a State, we cannot decide it you say. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I have argued that extensively; I am only sorry the Senator 
 was not here. When my friend gets quiet and away from the excitements 
 of the Senate Chamber, and this argument shall be printed, I commend it 
 to his most considerate attention, for I respectfully think it is unanswerable. 
 I have said what we may judge in that direction. We may judge as to what 
 body the State had determined is her Legislature, and we have a right to 
 judge whether that body which is the Legislature of the State has complied 
 with the law in electing the Senator. The law now prescribes that a Senator 
 shall be voted for on the second Tuesday after the assembling of the body, 
 that he shall be chosen viva voce, that he shall be voted for in the separate 
 houses on Tuesday and in joint session the next day, and that there shall be 
 at least one ballot each day until there is an election. These are the regu 
 lations fixing the manner and the time of choosing Senators. Whether that 
 manner, whether that time has been complied with in the election of a man ; 
 whether those members voted honestly or whether they were bribed ; whether 
 there was a quorum or whether there was not a quorum, all these are ques 
 tions that the Senate may determine under the power to judge of the election 
 of its own members. You cannot go further and say that the Senate may 
 inquire into the election of the members of the .Legislature, because the Senate 
 has power to judge of the election of its own members. A proposition was 
 made in the convention framing the Constitution to invest the election of 
 Senators in the House of Representatives of the United States. That was a 
 proposition once that had considerable favor. Suppose it had been adopted, 
 and then there had been rules prescribed by law as to the manner of electing 
 a Senator by the House of Representatives, would that have given the Senate 
 the right to judge whether the House of Representatives had been elected 
 by the people? That would have been putting the very existence of the 
 House of Representatives in the power of the Senate in the power of the 
 body which the House was electing. And when you give the Senate the 
 power to annul the decision of a State as to what is her Legislature, you 
 give the Senate the power ultimately to destroy the very power that elects 
 the Senate, and thus enable the Senate to elect its own members ! I cannot 
 argue that any further. Centralism never took a more horrid, a more 
 dangerous, or a more unreasonable shape than this claim of a power in the 
 Senate to disfranchise a State. 
 
 Then of the returns. What does the Constitution mean when it says 
 that the Senate shall "judge of the returns of its own members" that is, the 
 evidence which is to satisfy the Senate that the Senator was elected \ The 
 law now prescribes that to be the certificate of the governor, under the 
 great seal of the State. That makes a prima facie case. That is what the 
 law says is the return. The Senate judges whether that is the great seal, 
 whether the certificate is by the governor. I say you judge whether that 
 
648 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 is the great seal ; but does that give you a right to make a seal for the 
 State ? You judge whether that is the seal adopted by the State. The 
 Senate judges whether that is the certificate of the governor, but does that 
 give the Senate the right to say who is or shall be the governor of a 
 State ? No. The Senate only judges who the State has made her governor. 
 The claim now set up that this Senate has power to determine what is the 
 Legislature of a State, because the Senate can judge whether the Legisla 
 ture has complied with the law in electing a Senator, would place the whole 
 State government in the power of this Senate. 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. Will the honorable Senator allow me to interrupt him 
 for a moment ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Perhaps I am responsible for the Senator s interrupting ; I 
 will listen to him. 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. I am just informed that the Senator has closed the door 
 against interruption ; so I will not interrupt him. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I did not wish to break the thread of my argument. 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. I wish simply to suggest to his sense of propriety that 
 a member of the committee who comes in here with a report charging 
 criminality upon a sitting member, and speaks in support of the report, 
 ought not, even if he had the right, to shut the door against such interrup 
 tions as might call up particular points or correct mistakes of fact, or any 
 thing of that kind. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I said, or intended to say, that I did not wish to be interrupted 
 during the delivery of my remarks, because it broke the thread of the argu 
 ment ; but I did also say, or intended to say perhaps I omitted it that 
 when I conclude my argument I would take pleasure in answering any ques 
 tion that Senators may propound. The impropriety of these interruptions is 
 manifest by the Senator s own interruption to-day, for he has taken occasion, 
 under pretense of an interruption, to throw in some statement that some com 
 mittee has made charges of criminality against a sitting member. We do 
 not charge him with anything. The witnesses charge him ; the facts charge 
 him, and we report the facts as the witnesses testify. That is all. 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. I will not interrupt you. 
 
 Mr. Hill. That shows the impropriety of it. Why should I stop my 
 argument now to answer a statement which has no foundation, or a question 
 which has no relevancy ? 
 
 The third proposition relates to the power of the Senate to judge of 
 qualifications of its own members. What do you mean by the qualifica 
 tions ? The Constitution prescribes the qualifications of a Senator. He 
 shall be thirty years old ; he shall have been nine years a citizen of the 
 United States, and he shall be an inhabitant of the State for which he is 
 chosen. You are a judge of whether he is thirty years old ; you judge 
 whether he has been nine years a citizen, and you Judge whether he is an 
 inhabitant of the State for which he is chosen ; tliat is your jurisdiction. 
 These judgments were necessary ; and no authority, and I challenge the pro 
 duction of one, who has treated of this clause in the Constitution, has ever 
 said that the power to judge of elections, returns, and qualifications of its 
 own members included the power to go behind and judge of the legality of 
 a Legislature of a State over the State itself and. to annul the decision of the 
 State on that question, because that would vest in the Senate the power to 
 make a Legislature for a State. But suppose that is true. Suppose I con 
 cede for the argument that this power to judge of the elections, returns, and 
 
JffIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 649 
 
 qualifications of its own members includes the power to judge as to what is 
 the Legislature of the State, then it is a limited power. That cannot give 
 you the right to seat a member on this floor contrary to other terms of the 
 Constitution. If you have the power under that clause to judge of the con 
 stituency that elected him and of the legality of that constituency, and of 
 the righteousness of the judgment of the State declaring what is her Legis 
 lature, you must exercise that power within the Constitution. The Consti 
 tution itself puts a qualification and a limitation upon that power even if it 
 exists, for the Constitution which gives you that power says that the Sena 
 tor you admit must be chosen by the Legislature of the State. If you have 
 the right to judge of a Legislature, that does not give you the right to seat 
 a man who under the facts was not chosen by the Legislature ; it does not 
 give you the right to say that is the Legislature which is not the Legisla 
 ture. The cases on this principle are abundant. 
 
 I lay down this proposition for the lawyers of the Senate : A decision 
 by a court, by Congress, or by the Senate, without jurisdiction or against 
 jurisdiction or beyond jurisdiction, is void, not voidable. I wish to make 
 this distinction because much has been said in this debate, and heretofore, 
 about motions for new trials, writs of error, bills of review, etc., in the 
 courts. There is no necessity for a motion for a new trial, no necessity for 
 a writ of error, and no necessity for a bill of review to set aside a void judg 
 ment. A judgment which is void as against jurisdiction or without jurisdic 
 tion or beyond jurisdiction, can be attacked collaterally anywhere and 
 everywhere, and is treated as a void judgment ; indeed, as a nullity. It 
 certainly ought not to be necessary to read law upon that subject, but I will 
 read some. I want to establish that proposition. In the first place, I read 
 a decision which shows that a judgment of a court, rendered without juris 
 diction, is void. It is the case of Elliott and others vs. Piersol and others, 
 in 1 Peters. I read from the decision of the court, on page 340 : 
 
 Where a court has jurisdiction it has a right to decide every question which occurs in 
 the cause ; and whether its decision be correct or otherwise, its judgment, until reversed, 
 is regarded as binding in every other court. 
 
 That is, where its decision is within its jurisdiction that is conceded. 
 But if it act without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. 
 Again, I read from 2 Peters : 
 
 The general and well-settled rule of law in such cases is that when the proceedings 
 are collaterally drawn in question and it appears upon the face of them that the subject 
 matter was within the jurisdiction of the court, they are voidable only. The errors and 
 irregularities, if any exist, are to be corrected by some direct proceeding, cither before 
 the same court, to set them aside, or in an appellate court. If there is a total want of 
 jurisdiction, the proceedings are void and a mere nullity, and confer no right and afford 
 no justification, and may be rejected when collaterally drawn in question. 
 
 I now read from 13 Peters, which goes further ; I read from page 511 : 
 Before we proceed to inquire whether the land in question falls within the scope of 
 any one of these prohibitions, it is necessary to examine a preliminary objection wh 
 was urged at the bar, which, if sustainable, would render that inquiry wholly i 
 ing. It is this ; that the acts of Congress have given to the registers and recei 
 land-offices the power of deciding upon claims to the right of pre-emption ; 
 these questions they act judicially ; that no appeal having been given from their < 
 it follows as a consequence that it is conclusive and irreversible. 
 
 Now, I want the Senate to notice this .position, because it advances a 
 step on the other, and does not treat it as a case where the court was wi 
 
650 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 out jurisdiction of the subject-matter, because here the court did have juris 
 diction of the subject-matter by express provision of Congress ; but the act 
 of Congress which gave it jurisdiction qualified that jurisdiction, and they 
 went beyond the jurisdiction. 
 
 This proposition is true in relation to every tribunal acting judicially, while acting 
 within the sphere of their jurisdiction, where no appellate tribunal is created ; and even 
 when there is such an appellate power the judgment is conclusive when it only conies 
 collaterally into question, so long as it is unreversed. But directly the reverse of this is 
 true in relation to the judgment of any court acting beyond the pale of its authority. The 
 principle upon this subject is concisely and accurately stated by this court in the case of 
 Elliott et al. vs. Piersol et al., 1 Peters, 340, in these words : " Where a court has juris 
 diction it has a right to decide every question which occurs in the cause ; and whether 
 its decision be corrector otherwise, its judgment until reversed is regarded as binding in 
 every other court. But if it act without authority its judgments and orders are regarded 
 as nullities. They are not voidable, but simply void Now, to apply this. Even as 
 suming that the decision of the register and receiver, in the absence of frauds, would be 
 conclusive as to the facts of the applicant then being in possession and his cultivation 
 during the preceding year, because these questions are directly submitted to them ; yet 
 if they undertake to grant pre-emptions in land in which the law declares they shall not 
 be granted, then they are acting upon a subject-matter clearly not within their jurisdic 
 tion ; as much so as if a court, whose jurisdiction was declared not to extend beyond a 
 given sum, should attempt to take cognizance of a case beyond that sum. 
 
 So, Mr. President, a decision against jurisdiction is void. Now, I pro 
 pose to read from 9 Howard, pages 348 and 350. I will only read a few 
 remarks of the court to show that it is always admissible to inquire whether 
 a judgment was rendered without jurisdiction, beyond jurisdiction, or 
 against jurisdiction. It does not follow that a court which has jurisdiction 
 of the subject-matter can yet render a voidable judgment only ; it may 
 render a judgment beyond its jurisdiction, and the judgment is as much 
 void if rendered beyond and against its jurisdiction as if rendered without 
 jurisdiction. Therefore the general principle is laid down : 
 
 When the record of a judgment is brought before the court, collaterally or otherwise, 
 it is always proper to inquire whether the court rendering the judgment had jurisdiction. 
 
 Then it goes on to describe the different kinds of jurisdiction, and it 
 
 says : 
 
 It may be difficult in some cases to draw the line of jurisdiction so as to determine 
 
 whether the proceedings of a court are void or only erroneous Jurisdiction is 
 
 not to be assumed and exercised in such cases upon the general ground that the subject- 
 matter of the suit is within the power of the court. This would dispense with the forms 
 of the law prescribed by the Legislature for the security of absent parties. 
 
 So it goes on to say that it does not follow because a court may have 
 jurisdiction of the general subject-matter, therefore any decision rendered 
 by that court is voidable only and can only be set aside by a proceeding in 
 court, but if it be exercised contrary to a qualification of its powers, con 
 trary to a limitation upon its powers, then the decision is void. 
 
 Now apply that to this case. Suppose you concede that this Senate has 
 jurisdiction of the general subject of admitting members to this body not 
 only jurisdiction to determine the regularity of the election, and the regu 
 larity of the return, and the qualifications of the Senator the express juris 
 diction of the body ; but suppose you enlarge that jurisdiction and say it 
 shall include the right to judge as to the Legislature of a State, still it can 
 not, in the exercise of that judgment, seat a man in this body who in fact 
 was not elected by the Legislature. Why ? Because that would be against 
 
 1 
 
LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 651 
 
 its jurisdiction, for the Constitution says that the Senate shall be composed 
 only of members chosen by the Legislature. That is very clear. 
 
 But, Mr. President, at the risk of detaining the Senate too long on this 
 branch of the question, I do want to read some remarks made by the great 
 Mansfield of American jurisprudence, Chief- Justice Marshall. The language 
 of such men cannot be read too often, though I apprehend that if I had 
 used this language as my own, somebody would have jumped up on the 
 other side and said, "You are preaching the doctrines of the rebellion 
 again." I have no doubt if Marshall lived in this day these new lights 
 would pronounce him a rebel. I read from 1 Cranch the case of Marbury 
 vs. Madison. 
 
 Mr. Davis, of Illinois. Marshall was a greater judge than Mansfield. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I think so ; and America is a greater country than England, 
 and therefore the American Mansfield is greater than the British Mansfield : 
 
 The powers of the Legislature are defined and limited ; and that those limits may not be 
 mistaken or forgotten, the Constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, 
 and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing, if these limits may at any time 
 be passed by those intended to be restrained ? The distinction between a government 
 with limited and unlimited powers is abolished, if those limits do not confine the per 
 sons on whom they are imposed, and if acts prohibited and acts allowed are of equal ob 
 ligation. It is a proposition too plain to be contested that the Constitution controls any 
 legislative act repugnant to it, or that the Legislature may alter the Constitution by an 
 ordinary act. 
 
 Between these alternatives there is no middle ground. The Constitution is either a 
 superior paramount law, unchangeable by ordinary means, or it is on a level with ordi 
 nary legislative acts, and, like other acts, is alterable when the Legislature shall please to 
 alter it. 
 
 If the former part of the alternative be true, then a legislative act contrary to the Con 
 stitution is not law ; if the latter part be true, then written constitutions are absurd at 
 tempts on the part of the people to limit a power in its own nature illimitable. 
 
 Certainly all those who have framed written constitutions contemplate them as form 
 ing the fundamental and paramount law of the nation, and, consequently, the theory of 
 every such government must be that an act of the Legislature repugnant to the Constitu 
 tion is void. 
 
 He goes on to enlarge upon that. It is of some importance that these ele 
 mentary principles should be reviewed ; it is important that the people 
 should learn anew the very fundamental idea of our Government, and that 
 is that the people of this country have affixed limitations upon the powers 
 of the Government, and that any act of any department of Government in con 
 flict with those limitations is not voidable, but void. Therefore an act of 
 Congress, though passed by both Houses and approved by the President, 
 contrary to the Constitution or beyond the Constitution or without the lim 
 its of the Constitution, is void. Whence comes it that we are told that a 
 decision of this Senate, seating a man in this body who was not chosen by 
 the Legislature of a State is not void, but as valid as the Constitution itsel 
 Sir, I ask Senators to think, which in this case is the paramount law. 
 is the Constitution, which says that a Senator shall be chosen by the Legis 
 lature of a State. Here is the fact ; here is the decision of the tate 
 Louisiana declaring that Kellogg was not chosen by the Legislature, /hen 
 why do you hesitate ? You hesitate because you say a former decision < 
 the Senate said he was entitled on the merits. Then you set up that 
 decision as above the Constitution. Which will you obey ? Senators, 1 pi 
 the question to you : Do you believe that the body which elected 
 was the Legislature of Louisiana ? Settle that first. Suppose you ad 
 
652 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 that the State is not the final judge of that fact ; suppose you retain the 
 right to judge yourself what is the fact, do you believe that the body which 
 elected him was the Legislature of Louisiana ? Will the Senate believe, what 
 no other power on earth believes, that that body was a Legislature ? If it 
 was not a Legislature, why do you hesitate to turn him out ? Why do you 
 hesitate to declare the seat vacant ? Because you say the Senate admitted 
 him. Then, gentlemen, you take the position that the decision of the 
 Senate is above the Constitution. If the decision of the Senate, admitting a 
 man who was not chosen by the Legislature of a State, comes in conflict 
 with the Constitution, which says he must be chosen by the Legislature, 
 which will you obey ? Choose ye this day whom ye will serve. If you will 
 serve the Constitution, vacate that seat. If you will serve the Senate over 
 and above the Constitution, let the intruder stay. That is the issue j that 
 is the question for you to decide. 
 
 Gentlemen allege that it is very painful to say that a former Senate acted 
 corruptly. I do not ask you to say that, though if they did I do not see 
 why you should not say it. I do not know anything that has made the 
 Senate a divine institution. I am afraid it is a very fallible concern, but it 
 is not necessary to say that. In the first place, the former decision of the 
 Senate does not say that he was entitled to the seat because he was elected 
 by the Legislature of Louisiana. It avoids that. In indulges in vague 
 generalities. It says he is entitled on the merits without saying what the 
 merits are. It is spread out without regard to facts in order to cover every 
 possible contingency. 
 
 The proper thing to do is this, not to charge the former Senate with cor 
 ruption, but simply to assume that the former Senate did not have the facts 
 before it that we have, and that if it had had those facts it would not have 
 acted as it did. The truth is it did not have the facts before it. That is 
 the proper ground to take. But are you going to hold that the Senate may 
 be deceived, may make a mistake, may act without facts, and then when the 
 facts come to light is bound by its wrong action, bound to violate the Con 
 stitution, bound to supersede the Constitution, bound to set its erroneous 
 judgment up against the Constitution, bound to say it will adhere to its own 
 erroneous judgment, though that erroneous judgment it now appears was 
 against the Constitution ? 
 
 If, therefore, the resolution of 1877 intended to adjudicate the question 
 as to what was the Legislature of Louisiana, its judgment is void and 
 beyond its jurisdiction, and without its jurisdiction, and also against its juris 
 diction. If the resolution of 1877 did not intend to adjudicate that ques 
 tion, then the question has never been passed upon ; and therefore in neither 
 case is it res adjudicata. 
 
 It results, Mr. President, from those propositions that no decision has 
 given Kellogg a title to a seat in the Senate, and its occupancy is only 
 actual and not rightful, and he must vacate it by an order which it is the 
 duty of the Senate to pass. 
 
 Now, I want to put one proposition to the Senate before I leave this 
 branch of the question. Suppose this resolution had been a simple affirma 
 tion of the proposition that Kellogg was riot chosen by the Legislature of 
 Louisiana ; suppose it had just said, " Resolved, That William Pitt Kellogg 
 was not chosen by the Legislature of Louisiana to a seat in this body," could 
 he occupy it ? Suppose you put that resolution on your minutes, could he 
 sit there an hour ? 
 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 653 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. It would be a mere conclusion of law. 
 
 Mr. Hill.- -That is true. I knew the elegant legal mind of the Senator 
 from Wisconsin would admit that. Then, if it be true that he was not 
 elected by the Legislature of Louisiana, the conclusion that he cannot sit is 
 one of law, and must follow. That is right. And yet, sir, the whole case 
 rests upon tb^e proposition on your side that he must still sit, notwithstanding 
 he was not chosen by the Legislature, because a former decision of the 
 Senate allowed him to sit. 
 
 Mr. Carpenter.- -The Senator must certainly allow an interruption there. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Yes, I think I ought to. 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. On that point my position is this : Of course the Senate 
 may declare now that he was not elected by the Legislature, and it would 
 be a conclusion of law that he could not hold his seat. But I say that he 
 was elected by the Legislature, because the Senate, which was the only body 
 under the Constitution that could try and determine that question, settled 
 it, and it is res adjudicata. 
 
 Mr. Hill. And you say if the Senate settled it wrong it stays settled ? 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. Just exactly. A wrong decision is as much res adju 
 dicata as a right one. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Then if the Senate put a man in this Chamber who was not 
 elected by the Legislature of a State he is entitled to the seat ? 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. Certainly. 
 
 Mr. Hill. That is your proposition, that he is entitled to a seat ? 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. By the decision of the Senate. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Then it is the decision of the Senate which gives him title, 
 and not the Legislature of the State. That is your proposition ? 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. Let me state it. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I think it needs another statement. 
 
 Mr. Carpenter.- -Take this case, which I put the other day to some other 
 Senator : The Constitution forbids the taking of any house for anything but 
 a public use. Now, suppose it is taken by act of Congress for some use that 
 Congress think public. I say it is not a public use ; I litigate it. The 
 Supreme Court decides that it is a public use ; everybody, we will say, 
 knows that it is not a public use ; the Supreme Court decided it wrong. 
 
 The question is whether the decision is conclusive upon the minds of 
 men who think it was wrong. In other words, the Senator puts the matter 
 of res adjudicata upon what he chooses to judge afterward was the correct 
 ness of the decision. That is not the point at all. Even the Supreme Courts 
 of the United States have decided that they cannot reverse one of their own 
 judgments which passed^by a divided court affirming jurisdiction when it 
 was admitted that it was by mistake, jurisdiction not being possessed. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Perhaps I ought not to read this decision of Chief Justice 
 Marshall, which I hold in my hand, against the judgment of the distinguished 
 Senator from Wisconsin. Here is Chief Justice Marshall- 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. You cannot read him against me. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I cannot ? 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. No, you cannot. 
 
 Mr. Hill. These are his words : 
 
 It is declared that " no tax or duty shall be laid on articles exported from any State. 
 Suppose a duty on the export of cotton, of tobacco, or of flour, and a suit instituted to re 
 cover it. Ought judgment to be rendered in such a case ? Ought the judges to cl< 
 their eyes on the Constitution and only see the law? 
 
654 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 The Constitution declares " that no bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be 
 passed." 
 
 If, however, such a bill should be passed, and a person should be prosecuted under 
 it, must the court condemn to death those victims whom the Constitution endeavors to 
 preserve? 
 
 The Constitution says that a Senator shall be chosen by the Legislature 
 of a State. Suppose the Senate admits a man not chosen by tlfe Legislature 
 of his State, is that void, or voidable ? 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. The Senator will pardon me for a moment. 
 
 The Presiding Officer (Mr. Vance in the chair). Does the Senator from 
 Georgia yield to the Senator from Wisconsin ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. The very decision the Senator first read from first 
 Peters settles that question, that where a court has jurisdiction at all it has 
 jurisdiction to decide every question necessary to the decision of the question 
 that it must settle. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Certainly. 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. The Senator concedes, because no good lawyer can 
 deny, that the Senate cannot seat a man until he is elected by the Legislature 
 of his State. If they had jurisdiction, therefore, to determine which of these 
 two men should be seated, they had the jurisdiction to determine which was 
 elected by the Legislature of that State, and when they decided which was 
 entitled to the seat, they decided and settled forever that Kellogg was elected 
 by the Legislature of Louisiana. 
 
 Mr. Hill. But the Supreme Court say that where the Legislature of a 
 country says that shall be law which the Constitution says is not law and 
 shall not be done, the law is void ; and yet I suppose, if the powers of this 
 country, with the army and navy at their back, choose to enforce that un 
 constitutional law and the people submit to it, in such case there might be no 
 remedy. Chief Justice Marshall SSLJS it is void and the Constitution says 
 that a man shall not sit in this body if he is not elected by the Legislature. 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. The Senate in seating him decided that he was so 
 elected. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Then the decision contrary to the fact makes the lie a fact. 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. Makes the judgment conclusive. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Ah, a wrong judgment conclusive ! Then if a man is elected 
 by a mob, and the Senate, for partisan purposes, seats him, that makes the 
 mob a Legislature, does it ? If a man is sent to the Senate by a bar-room 
 meeting in a saloon, can the Senate admit him? If it do admit him he is. 
 entitled, is he, rightfully ? Nay, more, if the Senate were to admit to-mor 
 row the Emperor of Brazil into this body as a member, no other Senate 
 could turn him out? The Constitution says that he shall have been nine 
 years a citizen of the United States ; but my friend says that when the Sen 
 ate admits him he becomes a citizen of the United States. The Constitu 
 tion says that a man to be a member of this body shall be thirty years old, 
 and that he shall not be a member at less than thirty years old. The Senate 
 admits a member who is not thirty years old, not knowing that he was under 
 age ; that makes him thirty years old, does it ? We do not have to go to 
 Rome to find infallibility in the Pope ; we have got infallibility in the Sen 
 ate ! The Senate by simply saying the Emperor of Brazil may have a seat 
 in this body, makes him a citizen of the United States for nine years ! The 
 Senate by simply saying that a boy twenty years old shall have a seat in 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. t>55 
 
 this body, makes liira that moment thirty years old ! And I suppose the 
 magnificent argument of my friend from Wisconsin will be now used by the 
 woman s rights people, who will say that if the Senate should seat a woman 
 here she immediately becomes a man. 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. In point of law. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Ah ! in point of law, a man, and entitled to hold a seat in 
 this Senate rightfully? What an absurdity! When a giant like the 
 Senator from Wisconsin has to be driven into such an absurdity to sustain 
 his position, how contemptible the position itself becomes ! " That the 
 Constitution can be reversed, that a State can be disfranchised, that a law of 
 nature can be changed because the Senate says so ! Infallibility ! Con 
 gress cannot do it. If Congress makes a law contrary to the Constitution it 
 is a nullity ; if the courts make a decision contrary to the Constitution it 
 is void ; but the Senator from Wisconsin comes here and says that a de 
 cision once rendered by the Senate, contrary to the Constitution, to the facts, 
 and to nature, cannot be corrected ; the body is infallible ; and the decision 
 cannot be reversed or avoided or denied. It must be true ! Suppose a 
 Senator came here with fabricated papers ; suppose nobody elected him ; 
 suppose he had no votes from anywhere ; suppose that there was a forged 
 certificate of a governor, certifying that he was elected by a Legislature and 
 he brought it here and delivered it to the Senate, and it was referred to a 
 committee and the committee reported that he was lawfully entitled on the 
 merits to the seat, and it should turn out afterward that he never got a vote 
 in his life ; that he sat down in the back room of a beer saloon and wrote out 
 the certificate. The Senator says that the order of the Senate seating him 
 makes the Legislature ; that makes the governor ; that makes a return, and 
 that makes him a Senator ! If the honorable senator should say that it gave 
 him an actual seat I could understand it. If th*e honorable Senator should 
 say that the decision rendered by the Senate in 1877 gave the sitting mem 
 ber a seat de facto, an actual seat, in this body, I could understand it. But 
 an actual seat is always open to investigation and to be set aside for a rightful 
 claimant. But when the Senator goes further and says it not only gave him 
 an actual seat, but gave him a rightful title, he utters what no man in this 
 country ever before uttered except for the purposes of this case, and what I 
 hope no man will ever utter again. 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. To-morrow I shall have the pleasure of doing it, I 
 hope. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Well, whenever the Senator can satisfy me that the Constitu 
 tion is not the supreme law of the land I will give it up. Whenever the 
 Senator satisfies me that a man can be made thirty years old simply by the 
 decision of the Senate it will be time to quit. 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. I believe the Senator thought some years ago the Con 
 stitution was not the supreme law. 
 
 Mr. ffill.T\ia,t is a fanciful idea again. I suspect that my friend has 
 been reading novels lately or has been losing sleep and lie is not in a normal 
 condition. His mind is romancing. I never held that the Constitution was 
 not the supreme law of the land. The Senator s memory is as bad as his 
 logic. He can hare it as he pleases. 
 
 I put it to you, Senators, 1 put it to you on this side of the House, dp you 
 believe Kellogg was elected by the Legislature of the State of Louisiana f : 
 If he was not elected by the Legislature of the State, can he have a rightful 
 title to a seat in this body ? He has an actual seat, a de facto seat, but has 
 
656 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 he a rightful title ? If so, as Chief Justice Marshall says, the Constitution 
 becomes a nullity. 
 
 But I am stopping too long on this point. I want to proceed now to the 
 second ground of the report. It is that if that certain body of men called 
 the Packard Legislature was the Legislature, Kellogg was not chosen by it 
 to the seat he occupies ; first, because there was no quorum when he was 
 alleged to have been elected ; second, because the election was the result of 
 force, bribery, and other corrupt practices. The Senate clearly has jurisdic 
 tion to determine these questions. I admit it. 
 
 Now, let us get the facts. Is it true that there was no quorum ? If the 
 members not elected and fraudulently certified are not admitted, the failure 
 to have a quorum at any time is absolutely shown and is conceded by all 
 parties. It is conceded by the other side that there never was a quorum of 
 elected members ; but even counting as members those who were fraud 
 ulently certified, admitting now the infallibility of the returning-board certifi 
 cates, admitting that the returning-board certificate was as infallible as the 
 Senator from Wisconsin would make a decision of this Senate, that it could 
 change facts admitting all that, still there was no quorum of even certified 
 members at the time this man was elected. 
 
 By examining the journal, which is in the evidence, we find that on 
 Tuesday, the 9th, the day fixed by law, there was no quorum whatever of 
 either the Senate or the House, and therefore no voting was had on that day 
 in either House. There were only forty-four members of the House, when 
 a quorum was sixty-one under the Constitution and laws of Louisiana. On 
 the next day, Wednesday, the 10th, when they went into joint session, it is 
 conceded there were but seventeen members of the Senate present, when 
 nineteen were necessary to make a quorum. Two of these senators, Kelso 
 and Baker, were seated without certificates. They were not elected, and 
 they did not have the certificates even of the returning board. Even the 
 returning board could not say they were entitled to seats, and yet these 
 Avere two senators in that body just brought in and sworn without right, 
 without election, without certificates, without anything ; and there was no 
 quorum when they were admitted. When Kelso and Baker were admitted 
 there was no quorum, as you will see by looking at the journal. In the case 
 of one of them, the last one, even Stevens did not make a quorum. They 
 brought in a man by force from the Nicholls Legislature by the name of 
 Stevens, and held him there without voting, he protesting ; held him by 
 force for the purpose of making a quorum until they could seat one of these 
 men. That body called itself a Senate, but no quorum voted. 
 
 Now, as to the House : the House lacked five of a quorum on Wednes 
 day. It is true the journal says there were sixty-six present, but the ser- 
 geant-at-arms came before this committee and swore that Avhen the House 
 met on Wednesday it lacked ten of a quorum ; that he was sent out to 
 bring in the members ; that he could only get five. He testified that mem 
 bers were represented as present and put on the journals as present who 
 were not present ; that a man by the name of Thomas, that he saw, in his 
 bed that morning sick with small-pox, and knows he was not there, is put on 
 the journal as present and was personated by a man named Watson. Se- 
 veignes swears himself that he was not there, though put on the journal. 
 The House lacked five of a quorum ; the Senate lacked four of a quorum, 
 even counting all the certified members, even giving authenticity to all the 
 false certificates ; and they made up a pretended quorum by personation, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 657 
 
 and by putting members names on the journal who were not in their seats 
 I will not stop to read this testimony. You will find it in the record The 
 sergeant-at-arms swore what I have said to you, a man by the name of Mur 
 ray, and he is borne out by all the circumstances of corroboration for the 
 journals show that there were only forty-four members of the House present 
 on the day before. So it is established by the journals and by the evidence 
 explanatory of the journals that there was no quorum in either House on the 
 day of the joint convention, that the journals were falsely made up : and the 
 clerks and others who swore there was a quorum are proven to have told 
 falsehoods. 
 
 Then, again, was bribery practiced ? The truth is that the evidence of 
 bribery in this record is simply overwhelming. I am not goino- fully into 
 it. What do you call this ? Here is a question propounded to & one witness 
 named Baugnon : 
 
 Question. Do you know of your own knowledge of any member of the Legislature 
 receiving money m consideration for his vote for Senator Kellogg ? 
 Answer. Yes, sir. 
 
 
 
 Q. Did you see any one paid ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, who did you see pay it or who did you see it paid to ? 
 
 A. To Senator Twitchell. 
 
 Q. Who paid him ? 
 
 A. Governor Kellogg. 
 
 They tell you that witness is not to be believed, and yet I say to you, 
 Senators, that testimony was not brought out by the memorialist. As the 
 record shows, it was brought out by the sitting* member himself. He was 
 told to his own face, in answer to the question of Senator Cameron, and 
 then in answer to the question of himself, that the witness did see the sitting 
 member himself pay money to Twitchell to vote for him for Senator. He 
 was a witness introduced by the memorialist, but the memorialist did not 
 know what he would testify to, and simply proved by him general rumor 
 and turned him over. The sitting member then regarded him as a com 
 petent witness, and put the question to him, and he answered as I have read. 
 
 Here is the testimony of Garrett : 
 
 Question. Did you see Kellogg give Milton Jones money ? 
 
 He had testified that this man Kellogg had given Milton Jones money 
 just before the vote was taken to vote for him for Senator. 
 
 Question. Did you see Kellogg give Milton Jones money ? 
 
 Answer. I saw him take an envelope out of his pocket and cipher something on the 
 back of the envelope, and say to him not to leave until he had voted for him ; that unless 
 he got the entire vote his seat would be worthless. Then, as he started to move, I saw 
 Jones make a movement like putting something in his pocket. They were both there 
 with their backs to me standing by the washstand. Then we came in, and I spoke to him 
 as he went into the hall, and I said how much did he get out of Senator Kellogg ? He 
 had the money in his vest pocket, and he said he got some ; that he made him come down. 
 
 Here is affidavit upon affidavit, piled up by the members themselves, 
 that they received money for their votes. Here is the testimony of Murray 
 testifying to the bribery of three men at one time. Here is the testimony 
 of Murray testifying to a great number that he saw coming out of Souer s 
 room, who was the fiscal agent, and it was understood that they got $200 
 apiece for voting for Kellogg. Sir, the question, when you look at all this 
 
658 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 evidence, is not who was bribed, but who was not bribed. One witness 
 testifies that it was stated by one of the prominent men that he did not be 
 lieve Kellogg got twenty votes that were not bought. 
 
 Now you have the direct and positive evidence of the bribery of over a 
 score of members. They swore to it positively, they swore to it directly, 
 they swore to it without an inducement. It is not disputed by even the 
 minority report that this proof exists. No man can deny that ; it is in the 
 record. 
 
 If, therefore, you believe the witnesses, if you believe the testimony 
 brought out by the sitting member himself, the question is settled, the facts 
 are established, there is no doubt of bribery ; there can be no cavil what- 
 
 / 9 
 
 ever. You are compelled to believe these witnesses. It is not necessary to 
 go into that. I can prove by every rule of evidence that you must believe 
 this testimony. No honest jury could escape it. True, these witnesses 
 were the officers and members of that Packard Legislature, and the minor 
 ity of the committee say you can find just such people in the slums of any 
 city. I will not allow the slums of any city to be slandered in such style. 
 I do not believe the slums of any city in the world ever had such material 
 as composed that Legislature. They could not furnish it. No man can 
 read this record of infamy and perjury and conspiracy, this record of every 
 crime openly and exultingly committed in the city of New Orleans, without 
 feeling ashamed of his kind. Think of it, that a man is to hold a seat in 
 this body by proving that the members who voted for him are not entitled 
 to be believed on their oath ! Who that is worthy to be believed would 
 have such a constituency ! Think of it ! We bring you witness after wit 
 ness of the very men that are claimed to have sent him here, who tell you 
 they received bribes ; we bring the officers who had them in charge, who 
 tell you they saw bribes paid, and he tells you that you must not believe it 
 because the members that gave him his commission, the members who, he 
 says, composed the Legislature of Louisiana, are such men as can be picked 
 up in the slums of any city and are unworthy of belief ! 
 
 Mr. McMillan. Will the Senator allow me to ask him a single ques 
 tion? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. McMillan. Were not these persons received into the Nicholls Leg 
 islature, and did they not compose part of the Legislature that elected Mr. 
 Spofford ? 
 
 Mr. Sill. A portion of them were, but Judge Spofford never claimed 
 a seat here by virtue of an election by their votes in that Legislature. 
 There was a quorum of good men without them. The Nicholls Legislature 
 had a great many excellent men, worthy men, who would be an ornament 
 to any society in the Union. They were too decent to be members of the 
 Packard Legislature. They were not admitted because they were too de 
 cent and honorable. And when this gang of infamous usurpers and con 
 spirators against the dignity, the sovereignty, the decency of Louisiana 
 were deprived of their army support and disbanded, the men who were sent 
 there under false certificates went home or into the custom-house ; and 
 those who were elected went into the legal Legislature, and now the honor 
 able Senator from Minnesota wants to destroy the character and the i 
 decency of the Nicholls Legislature because a portion of the Packard Leg 
 islature went into it. 
 
 This is the gravest charge I have ever heard against the Nicholls Legis- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 659 
 
 lature, that a portion of these people went into it ; and yet the Packard 
 Legislature, composed almost exclusively of those indecent people, of those 
 confessed perjurers, the gentleman holds up as an infallible Legislature, one 
 clothed with power to make laws for the people of Louisiana which* this 
 Senate is bound to respect ! Sir, water never rises above its level, nor yet 
 above its fountain ; and the Senate when it recognizes that body will be no 
 better than that body itself. 
 
 That is not all. These people that swore these things, where are they 
 to-day, where are they now ? Go up here to the Treasury building and you 
 will find some of them there occupying positions of trust. Go to the New 
 Orleans custom-house --and I have got the list containing thirty -nine of 
 them in office there under the government. The man who swore, as the 
 Senator from Missouri (Mr. Vest) quoted to you, that it was according to 
 the Scriptures to lie, and said that it was the privilege of a free American 
 citizen to lie when he pleased, has got an office in the custom-house. This 
 very man Seveignes, who testified before the committee that he went vol 
 untarily and of his own accord, without suggestion, without inducement, 
 without request, and wrote out his own affidavit, in which he swore that he 
 was not present on the day of election he was a member of the Packard 
 Legislature that man who came before the committee and confessed his 
 perjury and said it was right to lie for the benefit of his party, that man 
 was promoted in the custom-house from a six-hundred-dollar office to a 
 thousand-dollar office, and there he remains. 
 
 These men were worthy to be legislators for that State, we are told, 
 worthy men to be the office-holders of this government, but unworthy to be 
 believed when they testified against their chief conspirator. What will the 
 Senate believe ? What will the country believe ? Now, while I speak, the 
 very men that this minority report denounces as being composed of ma 
 terial which may be found in the slums of cities can be found in your 
 Treasury building, can be found in your custom-house, can be found filling 
 the offices of the government, put there, as I shall show before I am done, 
 as direct rewards for perjury. 
 
 But, Mr. President, I am not going to rest this case upon this. There is 
 evidence here that if no other man on earth believes, the sitting member has 
 to believe, for it comes from himself. It is perfectly astounding what a 
 flood of light the cjpher telegrams throw on this transaction. During the 
 testimony of one Barney Williams in New Orleans, he said that while here 
 in Washington acting as a spy and detective for the sitting member, being 
 in the sitting member s room, the sitting member read to him a lot of tele 
 grams which he was receiving from New Orleans in relation^ to these wit 
 nesses that were then coming on, the witnesses for Spofford. The committee 
 subpoenaed the manager of the telegraph company to bring in all the tele 
 grams to and from these parties during the months of May and June. The 
 result was that after hard struggling we obtained possession, in all, of 
 seventy-one telegrams all but one or two in cipher. With the aid of an 
 expert I am able to decipher almost every telegram, and I am going to call 
 the attention of the Senate to some of them, in connection with the charge* 
 of bribery and corruption in this case. The telegrams furnish the strongest 
 corroborations of the witnesses on this subject of bribery, and when read 
 the light of the evidence given by the witnesses establish the charge beyond 
 doubt. 
 
660 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Wednesday, May 12, 1880. 
 
 Mr. President: I shall now read a portion of the telegrams alluded to 
 on yesterday. I am going into the evidence only so far as is necessary to 
 make clear the legal questions which I propose to discuss before the Senate. 
 
 These telegrams show beyond all controversy that the sitting member 
 himself regarded that his title to his seat in this body depended upon the 
 successful suppression of the evidence of bribery. From the time the Sen 
 ate proposed to order an investigation of this case until the examination 
 was closed in this city in June, 1879, the sitting member and several of his 
 friends in this city were in constant communication by telegraph with 
 Badger, the collector of customs, and with Souer and others in New 
 Orleans, upon the express business of seeing to it that the members of the 
 Packard Legislature were not allowed to confess that they were bribed. 
 The necessity for this arose from the fact that the members had commenced 
 making confessions under oath. They had learned that indictments for re 
 ceiving bribes, while they were members of that Legislature, would not lie, 
 because prosecutions were barred by the statute of limitation, arid they 
 would therefore be safe, and having no moral shame, they were perfectly 
 willing to confess and did, many of them, begin to confess that they re 
 ceived bribes for their votes for the sitting member. They had to be 
 stopped. 
 
 I will call the attention of the Senate first to the frequent declarations 
 on the part of the sitting member in the cipher telegrams, that his safety in 
 his seat depended upon the fidelity of those members of the Legislature to 
 him. 
 
 The first telegram we have was sent from Washington City directed to 
 General Badger, collector of customs, New Orleans, and dated May 2, in 
 which he says : 
 
 Tell Violet send all good bales improper approaches. Can star here if grape sound. 
 Confident. Terrier ditto. 
 
 The translation of this is : 
 
 Tell Souer to send all good affidavits of improper approaches. Can succeed here if 
 members of the Legislature are faithful or sound. Confident. Kellogg ditto. 
 
 In these telegrams the sitting member has two names. He passes by the 
 name of Terrier and also by the name of Amity. He frequently speaks of 
 himself in the third person. See that expression, " Can succeed here if 
 members of the Legislature are sound. Confident. Kellogg ditto." The 
 very next day, May 3, another telegram is sent to Souer, the appraiser of 
 customs. In this telegram, of May 3, occur these words : 
 
 If grapes are kept moon, Terrier be moon. 
 
 The translation is, " If members of the Legislature are kept safe, Kellogg 
 will be safe." That is a literal translation. On May 8 he telegraphs 
 Badger again, in which occur these words : 
 
 If grapes Pin Amity Moon. 
 
 That is, " If the members- of the Legislature are fixed, Kellogg is safe." 
 " Pin " means " fixed," " moon" means " safe." Then, again, he telegraphs 
 to Badger, on May 10 : 
 
 
 
 Friends here expect Rose to bend every energy making grapes. Pin and moon. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 661 
 
 The translation is, " Friends here expect Marks to bend every energy to 
 make the members of the Legislature fixed and safe." Marks was the inter 
 nal-revenue officer. 
 
 I will remark here that these telegrams are very badly printed. This 
 telegram was not printed correctly, because there is a period after " grapes," 
 which should not be there. I have compared them with the originals and 
 state them correctly. May 12, he telegraphs : 
 
 If grapes are pin moon Terrier. 
 
 " If the members are fixed Kellogg is safe." On the 20th he says, in a" 
 telegram to Souer : 
 
 Rainbow here if Moon grapes. 
 
 That is, " All safe here, or all right here, if the members of the Legisla 
 ture are safe." So again, May 27, he telegraphs Badger, collector of cus 
 toms : 
 
 Moon here if rainbow there. 
 
 That is, " I am safe here if all is right there." I say to the Senate that 
 in these telegrams occur the same idea under different expressions time 
 after time : " My seat here is safe if you keep the members of the Legislature 
 right. Everything depends on them." 
 
 He gives you the reasons for that, but before going to the reasons for it 
 I want to call your attention to one remarkable fact. There was one wit 
 ness that he was especially anxious to have fixed. That was Murray, who 
 was the sergeant-at-arms of the house. Murray w r as a very important wit 
 ness in this case, and it is show T n here that before he w r as summoned he was 
 regarded by the sitting member as a most important Witness. There seemed 
 to be more trouble about Murray than the others because he was more diffi 
 cult to pin, to fix. Murray is the witness who rejected all efforts at corrup 
 tion, as the record shows. He was offered a large sum to sustain Kellogg 
 by his testimony. Refusing to accept any sum to testify falsely, as testified 
 to both by himself and Williams, he was then offered money to leave 
 the country and go to Canada and remain there until the investigation 
 closed and he should receive a telegram, " the Union forever," which would 
 mean that he could safely return. You will see it all in the testimony of 
 Murray and Williams. 
 
 Now, let us see from these telegrams how anxious the sitting member 
 was to fix Murray even before the investigation was ordered and through 
 the investigation. In the telegram of May 3, directed to L. J. Souer, the 
 appraiser of customs, he says : 
 
 Hope Rose Violet keep boat Pin. 
 
 Here is the translation : 
 
 Hope Marks and Souer will keep Murray satisfied, fixed. 
 
 " Boat " means Murray and " Pin " means "fixed" or "satisfied." Then 
 he adds what I read awhile ago : 
 
 If the members of the Legislature are kept safe Kellogg will be safe. 
 
 On May 7 again he telegraphs this earnest telegram, directed to Badger, 
 the collector of customs : 
 
 Think it is important that boat be moon. See to this. Confer with Violet and Oak 
 immediately. 
 
662 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 The translation is : 
 
 Think it is important that Murray be kept safe. See to this. Confer with Souer 
 and Lewis immediately. 
 
 Lewis was naval officer and the celebrated witness in this case who came 
 on here in charge of Spofford s witnesses, in the same train with them, and 
 said he only came to see the brigadiers in session. Again he telegraphs, on 
 May 22, to General Souer : 
 
 Hope boat Bottle rainbow. 
 
 That is, " I hope Murray has been bottled all right shut up." He adds, 
 on the 29th, to another telegram to General Souer : 
 
 Hope boat rainbow. 
 
 " Hope Murray is all right." He ends the telegram on June 3, to Gen 
 eral Badger, in this way : 
 
 How boat is look ? 
 
 " How is Murray looking ? Will any sane man tell me why it is that 
 the sitting member and his immediate friends here were telegraphing to 
 the collector of customs, to Souer and his friends in New Orleans, no less 
 than a dozen times, that the safety of his seat depended upon the members 
 of the Legislature keeping silent or being fixed ? He telegraphed no less 
 than half a dozen times to see to it that Murray especially was kept all right ; 
 that Murray was safe ; that Murray was fixed. Fixed for what ? The other 
 telegrams disclose. It is explained by the telegram I read a moment ago : 
 
 Friends here expect Marks to bend every energy to make the members of the Legis 
 lature fixed and safe, satisfied and right. 
 
 How is Marks to do that ? By appointments. Appointments for what ? 
 It is not left to conjecture. Read the testimony of H. T. Brown, testimony 
 that is uncontradicted and unimpeached. Brown says that Marks told him 
 that while this fight for Kellogg s seat was going on he, Marks, could do 
 nothing for his own friends, that " he was compelled to appoint a lot of curs 
 and hounds in order to keep them from squealing on Kellogg." 
 
 How were these members to be kept from squealing ? Let me read you 
 some on that point. I have read you the telegram already in relation to 
 Marks bending every energy to make the members fixed and safe. Here is 
 another on May 12, showing you how these members were to be fixed, in 
 what way they were to be kept satisfied. This is to General Badger : 
 
 Murrell approved. Tell Souer to send list of good safe members. Go ahead with 
 nominations ; that is necessary. Good plan to make Smith examiner. 
 
 . I will not read the ciphers further, but will read only the translation : 
 
 Go ahead with the nominations ; that is necessary." Necessary for what ? 
 
 The very telegram before explains for what. To keep the members safe, 
 
 shut their mouths, bottle up Murray. " If the members are kept safe, 
 
 Kellogg is safe." Here it is again : 
 
 Washington, May 13 
 The very next day 
 
 Appoint Chapron. Answer Sherman s letter of the 29th. Telegraph Kellogg that 
 fact. Give Waldon also some place. 
 
 One fellow who was a little unruly, by the name of Camelia, he goes by 
 that name here, was considered not much any way and was dismissed. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. CC3 
 
 One of the telegrams said that he could not do any hurt, and they dis 
 missed him. 
 
 Here is a remarkable telegram, and it confirms everything you can sus 
 pect as to the object of these appointments. It is dated May 19 and 
 directed to General Badger, collector of customs : 
 
 Wakefleld. Brown, Fobb, Springer, Walden, Joubert, Fish, Chapron, Carville 
 Adolph, Seveignes, approved. 
 
 What is that ? Eleven nominations sent by Badger. He telegraphed 
 * Go ahead with nominations," and here come eleven in one batch that were 
 approved, and he says : 
 
 Last lot goes to-day; all nominations received approved. 
 
 He does not even leave us in doubt as to the important question in the 
 case between him and Spofford upon which he wants to suppress this testi 
 mony. Here is a telegram, of May 28, showing that he understands the 
 issue perfectly, and what it is he wants suppressed, because he shows what 
 Spofford is seeking to prove : 
 
 Spofford or Merrick 
 Spofford s attorney 
 
 is hunting for evidence to show that five members of the Legislature were bribed, leaviDg 
 less than a quorum of those not bribed. Watch. 
 
 You see it took seventy-nine members of the joint session to make a 
 quorum. The journal pretends that eighty-three were present. Now, here 
 is a telegram to General Souer, the United States appraiser at the custom 
 house, New Orleans, directed to him in his official capacity, notifying him 
 that the memorialist has been hunting for evidence to show that five mem 
 bers of the Legislature were bribed, leaving less than a quorum of those not 
 bribed. " Watch." Do not let those five be found. Here it is again. 
 May 31 he telegraphs General Souer : 
 
 If Spofford fail to show bribery bad mess for him. 
 
 i 
 
 " If Spofford fails to show bribery, bad mess for him," and of course that 
 bribery must not be shown, and that it may not be shown, " keep the mem 
 bers of the Legislature fixed." Then the same telegram says : 
 
 Matters going in favor of Kellogg. Saulsbury, or chairman, gives Kellogg s officer 
 summons for eight witnesses. Spofford also limited to eight. Press all favoring Kellogg. 
 
 Very complimentary to the press. 
 Saulsbury disgusted with Spofford. If Spofford fail on bribery he is beat. 
 
 (The word "or" there is "on." I have compared it with the original 
 telegram. It is a mystery how these telegrams are so badly printed, 
 have had to go to the originals to get the correct words.) Here is telegram 
 after telegram urging Badger, Souer, Marks, and others to " keep the mem 
 bers of the Legislature fixed." They had committed perjury ; many of 
 them confessed their perjury ; nevertheless they must be appointed to 
 offices. " All nominations received will be approved." " Hurry up nomina 
 tions," or, " go ahead with nominations ; that is necessary." Ins necessary 
 to keep them fixed, to keep them " from squealing on Kellogg." 
 
 I will now show the Senate how this man kept watch on Spofford s wit 
 nesses. On the 7th of May the Senate ordered the Committee on Privileges 
 
664 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 and Elections to take testimony. Kellogg, in the telegram of the 7th, 
 notifies Badger of that fact : 
 
 Resolution to take testimony passed; every Republican voting or paired against it. 
 Kellogg made a speech. Delighted all friends. 
 
 Then on May 8 he telegraphs : 
 
 If members of the Legislature are fixed, Kellogg is safe. Perhaps Spofford will try 
 and get the members immediately. Watch. If so, send Swazie or Lewis. 
 
 Just as soon as the resolution to take testimony passes the order goes to 
 New Orleans to watch. To watch what? To watch Spofford s witnesses ; 
 to watch the members who may squeal ; and if you find that Spofford is 
 going to summon these witnesses immediately, send Swazie or Lewis with 
 them ; and yet Lewis and Swazie both came before the committee and swore 
 they had no purpose in coming with these witnesses to help Kellogg. May 
 12, four days afterward, he telegraphs : 
 
 It is reported that members of the Legislature are coming. If true, send Lewis or 
 Swazie or some others immediately. 
 
 Then he adds that same expression I have read : 
 If the members of the Legislature are fixed, Kellogg is safe. 
 
 " Where is Phillips ? " he adds. Phillips was the man who confessed 
 afterward, under the fire of cross-examination, that he was engaged in a 
 conspiracy to put up a job on Spofford, which miscarried. Now look at tel 
 egram No. 32. You see that the first telegram is that Spofford may send 
 for the members immediately. The next telegram is that it is reported that 
 he has sent for the members immediately. Now, what is the third telegram, 
 May 29 ? 
 
 Spofford s officer left with blank summons issued by the chairman, an unprecedented 
 thing. We will make a big point on this. Summons returnable Thursday. Watch. 
 
 How often that word " watch comes in. Jupiter is the cipher. He 
 knows when Spofford s officer goes. He knows he goes with blank sum 
 monses. I suppose it is an open secret that Mr. Spofford wanted summonses 
 issued blank, to keep Kellogg from finding out who his witnesses were, 
 because he knew these very efforts would be made to get control of them 
 and " fix " them. The next telegram, which is the very same day, he issues 
 two telegrams on that subject the same day, is as follows : 
 
 Spofford s man left this morning accompanying Cato. Watch every movement. 
 Watch closely Swamp and Wheelwright and others. Hope Murray is all right. 
 
 You see how his anxiety about Murray grew. Now look at telegram 
 No. 36 : 
 
 When you know Spofford s witnesses sure wire Jack what witnesses to summon for 
 Kellogg. Tell Marks to have Spofford s witnesses fixed right before they leave. 
 
 What can be more significant than that? Turn to telegram No. 48, 
 which is dated June 10. The examination had been progressing several 
 days then. It commenced on the 5th. After examining several witnesses 
 Mr. Merrick made a statement to the committee that he had no further wit 
 nesses except two, that he was expecting with a messenger. Kellogg being 
 there, hears this, and goes out and telegraphs to Badger : 
 
 Merrick stated to chairman that he had no more witnesses until the Arrival of two 
 who were coming in charge of a messenger. Who are they ? 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. f,6. , 
 
 You see how alert the man was. From the time he suspected that Spof- 
 ford was going to summon witnesses and commence the investigation of the 
 case he telegraphed his friends in New Orleans " to watch. Keep the members 
 straight," " Keep them fixed." " Give them appointments " ; and he keeps 
 it up to the end of the chapter. Then he had Lewis, Swazie, Williams, 
 Walsh, Randall, and Molere and others to meet the witnesses at the depot, 
 
 ready to take charge of them until after they gave their testimony. He 
 wanted to know by telegram who were coming, so that he could meet them 
 and have them in charge and keep them fixed. 
 
 Mr. President, I now want to call the attention of the Senate to some 
 telegrams that I would rather not have read. Of course the telegrams I 
 have read show you that the sitting member and the whole custom-house 
 were in accord and they were using all their power to keep members fixed 
 by appointing them to office, but of course the oificers down there could not 
 do much without the approval of the head of the Treasury Department, be 
 cause if the nominations \vSien sent here from the custom-house were not 
 approved the whole scheme would fall. I call your attention, then, to tele 
 gram 3, which was read by my friend, the Senator from North Carolina 
 (Mr. Vance). 
 
 Please appoint Ash and Zebra to places permanently. Important. Make all the ap- v 
 pointments you can while Sherman is absent. Hawley is a little easier. Sherman is 
 away a week. 
 
 Make all the appointments you can while Sherman is absent. Hawley is 
 a little easier ; that is, Hawley serves him better than Sherman. Sherman 
 struggled with his virtue and his virtue fell in a very few days. He says in 
 this telegram, " Sherman is away a week." Now turn to telegram 16, ten 
 days later, and you will see things are getting better : 
 
 Appoint Chapron. Answer Sherman s letter of the 29th. Telegraph Kellogg the 
 fact. 
 
 That is the 13th of May. Then on the 14th he telegraphs Badger : 
 Please appoint tiger for Sherman. 
 
 Why Sherman wanted that particular appointment down at New Or 
 leans I do not know. On the 17th this telegram was sent to Souer, appraiser 
 custom-house, New Orleans : 
 
 I go to New York to-day. Back Monday. Tell Marks he is all safe at the Depart 
 ment ; not to worry, he is all right here. 
 
 Here was a great change in Sherman. He was now quite as easy as 
 Hawley, and Marks was encouraged not to be afraid of him in appointing 
 " curs and hounds to keep them from squealing on Kellogg." 
 
 Now I read telegram No. 47, by which you will see Sherman had become 
 perfectly agreeable. It is dated June 9, to Badger : 
 
 Have no fear about Sherman. He is all right in everything Marks does. 
 
 A complete submission. At first he hesitated, then lie seemed to grow 
 indifferent, then finally " he is all right in everything Marks does." lave 
 no fear of Sherman ! " 
 
 Sir, what is to be said when, if these telegrams are true, the head 
 Treasury Department of the government is allowing the patronage of hiso 
 fice to be used for the purpose of controlling a contest for a seat in 
 ate, allowing the public offices of the country to be given to witnes 
 
666 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 expressly to prevent them from telling the truth, in order that he might keep 
 a man from getting a seat in the Senate who was entitled to it and give it to 
 a man who was not entitled ; for, mark you, as I have already shown, the 
 sitting member shows that he considered his whole case depended on sup 
 pressing this evidence about bribery. That is where he thought his case 
 rested. 
 
 This telegram concludes with the following significant words : 
 
 Seveignes has just testified all right. 
 
 Well, what does the sitting member mean by testimony that is " all 
 right ?" This man Seveignes is the witness alluded to by the Senator from 
 Missouri (Mr. Vest) who had made an affidavit and swore that though he 
 was a member of the Legislature and recorded on the journal as present, yet 
 he was not present when the alleged election was had ; and he came before 
 this committee and swore that he made that affidavit deliberately ; that he 
 wrote it out himself without inducement, without suggestion, without help, 
 and solely for the purpose of swearing to a lie ; that he believed that it was 
 right and legitimate to swear a lie for the benefit of his party ; and that is 
 what the sitting member telegraphed at once to Badger was testimony that 
 was all right, that was good testimony, safe for him ! This man Seveignes 
 was promptly promoted to a higher office in the custom-house. 
 
 I will read only one more of these telegrams. Here is a remarkable one. 
 I am not going to stop to discuss the testimony of Barney Williams, but I 
 can take these telegrams and convince any honest man on earth that Williams 
 told the truth. Williams testified that he came here under authority of 
 Lewis as a detective for Kello^sr to watch the movements of the memorial- 
 
 Cv C7 
 
 ists ; that he met witnesses on their arrival at the depot ; that after mid 
 night on the morning of the 5th of June he took five of these witnesses to 
 Kellogg s office in Willard s Hotel through the rear way. These witnesses 
 had made affidavits in New Orleans that Kellogg had paid them for their 
 votes in the senatorial election. 
 
 The objection they had tp " going back " on these affidavits was that they 
 would be indicted for perjury. Some law was read to them in Kellogg s 
 office to convince them that thev could not be indicted here. Then, when 
 
 / 
 
 they got over that difficulty, the fear of indictment, they entered upon a 
 trade. It was agreed that they should have $500 apiece and should be put 
 and kept in the custom-house while Kellogg was in the Senate. Then they 
 all agreed to go back on Spofford and " give it to the rebel." He wanted 
 corroborating witnesses, and on that very day the following telegram was 
 sent to Badger, and which was received by Badger on the next day, 6th : 
 
 Kellogg says if you can fix Foundry, Leopard, Templar, Screw, and Eagle, let Souer 
 send them, on as corroborating witnesses and the money will be ready at the hotel. 
 
 Mr. President, there are a great many other telegrams here, but I have 
 read enough to accomplish my purpose. No intelligent man, no honest man 
 can read the testimony given by these witnesses, and then read these tele 
 grams, and not be thoroughly convinced that the whole power of the gov 
 ernment in the Treasury Department was used to enable this man to sup 
 press testimony of bribery and corruption in order that he might hold a seat 
 in this body. It is impossible by any rule of evidence to weigh this testi 
 mony and arrive at any other conclusion. It is perfectly irrefutable and 
 overwhelming. I am not going into it further, for I have already taken up 
 more time with these telegrams than I intended. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WAITINGS. 667 
 
 What is my purpose ? I have shown you by the testimony that, even 
 counting all the persons certified by the returning board as members, yet 
 there was no quorum present at this pretended election of Kellogg. 
 
 They lacked seven of a quorum on the very day this man pretended to 
 be elected, although they make the journals say that there were five more 
 than a quorum, showing that they made up false journals. 
 
 Then the evidence places the charge of bribery of a large number of the 
 members beyond all doubt. I am not going to stop to read the affidavits of 
 the members themselves. Here is affidavit after affidavit of various mem 
 bers swearing that they received bribes for their votes. If there was no 
 quorum of that body, conceding it to be a Legislature, and if the members 
 were bribed, do you still say that this man is entitled to the seat? If you 
 do, you are defeating the Constitution and keeping a man here who was not 
 in fact chosen by the Legislature. If the body was not a Legislature, it 
 had no power to elect. If it was a Legislature and had no quorum or was 
 controlled by bribery, it did not elect. In either case, to keep this man is to 
 seat a man here who was not chosen by the Legislature of a State. 
 
 But again it is pleaded that the Senate had passed upon these questions. 
 Mr. President, I am going to meet that question on a legal proposition that 
 I challenge any lawyer to controvert. I say in point of fact, as the records 
 will show when the case was before the Senate before, there was no such 
 evidence of the want of a quorum, and there was no evidence of bribery ; 
 there was not even a charge of bribery, for the bribery has been discovered 
 since and was brought to the attention of the Senate first by the memorial 
 of Spofford when he asked that tho case be reopened and reviewed. 
 Now, I lay down the proposition that the judgment of the Senate before 
 rendered, while presumptively it covers all the questions that could have 
 been made, yet conclusively covers only the questions that were and 
 that the questions now before us were not made, were not passed upon, 
 and are not determined by the former judgment. That is a very important 
 legal proposition, and I shall proceed to establish it. I will read first some 
 good old English law, for I confess I never feel otherwise than a sense of 
 pleasure when I can get back to the old English authorities in the days of 
 Mansfield, Kenyon, and Holt. This question wfts made before Lord Mans 
 field in the case of Ravee vs. Farmer. Lord Mansfield decided it without 
 rendering a written opinion. It is reported in 4 Term Reports. It came 
 up again and was decided in the case of Seddon vs. Tutop (6 Term Reports, 
 607), Lord Kenyon being the chief justice : 
 
 Assumrjsit for goods sold and delivered. Plea a former recovery of 71 10s. for the 
 damages the plaintiffs had sustained as well by means of not performing the same identi 
 cal promises, etc., as for their costs, etc. Replication that the promises and undertaking: 
 in this action were not the same identical promises for the non-performance whereof 
 said sum of money was so recovered by the said judgment ; on which issue was taker 
 At the trial at Guildhall before Lord Kenyon it appeared that in the former act 
 which the defendant suffered judgment to go by default, there was a count on a promis 
 sory note for 51 and counts for goods sold and delivered, there being at that time * 
 due for goods ; but on executing the writ of inquiry, the plaintiffs only being prepared 
 with proof of the note, they took a verdict for that, which with the costs amounted 
 71 10s. Afterward, on an application to the defendant for the 25 7s., he refused to 
 pay, on which the present action was brought. It was objected on behalf of 
 ant that as the plaintiffs might have recovered this sum in the former action they < 
 not to be permitted to bring this, a second action, for the same demand, 
 was taken for the plaintiffs with liberty to the defendant to move to enter i 
 case this court should be of opinion that the plaintiffs were not entitled 
 rule for that purpose having been accordingly obtained. 
 
668 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 The case came on before the full court. Erskine argued it. In pro 
 nouncing the decision, Lord Kenyon said : 
 
 In this case it is clearly shown that this demand was not inquired into in the former 
 action. 
 
 That is, there was no evidence introduced upon it, though it was in the 
 pleadings and could have been proven and could have been recovered on ; 
 and he holds that the second action was right and that the former recovery 
 was no bar. He adds : 
 
 And I am glad that we are borne out by the form of the issue to decide with the 
 justice of the case. 
 
 Justice Grose says : 
 
 The recovery in the former action is only prima facie evidence that this demand has 
 been inquired into, but it is not conclusive. In the case of Hitchin vs. Campbell, where 
 the defendants pleaded a former recovery upon the same identical promises for which 
 that action was brought, though it was argued by very eminent counsel, it was not con 
 tended that because the same sum demanded in that action might have been recovered in 
 the former one therefore the plaintiff could not recover it in that action ; the only inquiry 
 there was, whether the same cause of action had been litigated and considered in the 
 former action. 
 
 That case of Seddon -vs. Tutop has been a leading authority on that 
 question from that day to this. The same decision was made by Chief 
 Justice Shaw, of Massachusetts. I could give you a hundred English 
 opinions on the subject as well as American. In the case of John D. Bridge 
 et al. vs. William Gray et al.. found in 14 Pickerino- s Massachusetts Re- 
 
 * -C5 
 
 ports, Chief Justice Shaw said : 
 
 On the issue joined upon the plea in bar of a former recovery, the defendant relied 
 upon a judgment in a former suit, upon a writ containing, among others, counts for 
 goods sold and delivered, and which might have embraced the goods sued for in the 
 present action ; but there was no specific enumeration or description of goods contained 
 in these counts, nor any account annexed to the writ or other specification filed by which 
 it could be shown that the goods in question in this suit were embraced in that. The 
 defendant relied upon that judgment as a bar, and as conclusive evidence that the claim 
 for goods sold now made in this suit must have been considered in the former. But the 
 plaintiff offered evidence aliunde^io show, in point of fact, that no claim was made in 
 that action for the goods now sued for. We think that this evidence was rightly 
 admitted. The modern mode of declaring in most general use is to insert several general 
 counts ; and when, in such case, the general" issue is pleaded, a vast variety of different 
 claims may be put in issue and tried ; so various, indeed, that in most cases it is found 
 necessary to call in the assistance of the court previously to the trial to require the plain 
 tiff to give in a bill of particulars, or specification, of the claims which he means to give 
 in evidence, in order to apprise the defendant of the actual claims relied on which the 
 declaration does not do to enable ^him to go to trial w T ith any safety. When such a judg 
 ment is pleaded in bar it seems *to be liberal enough, and going as far in support of a 
 judgment as experience will warrant, to consider it as prima facie, evidence of a prior ad 
 judication of every demand which might have been drawn into controversy under it, 
 Jeavrng it, like other prima facie evidence, to be encountered and controlled by any other 
 competent evidence tending to show that any particular demand was not offered or con 
 sidered. And so we think the rule is now settled by authorities. 
 
 You will find a similar decision in 5 Massachusetts, 339. You will find 
 that Mr. Greenleaf has laid down the same principle in his work on evidence, 
 section 532. The Supreme Court of the United States has made the most 
 striking decision on this subject that I have been able to find. It is found 
 in 24 Howard, page 344. I will state briefly the facts without reading it, 
 so that you can see the point, for it is a very striking case and covers this 
 case completely. Sickles & Co. had a patent for what they called a cut- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITWG& 660 
 
 off ; that is, a contrivance for saving fuel on steamboats. The Washington, 
 Alexandria, and Georgetown Steam Packet Company made a contract*with 
 Sickles & Co. for the use of this cut-off. The agreement was that this 
 packet company was to take the invention and apply it to its steamboat*, 
 and if it turned out that it was efficient and made a saving in fuel they 
 were to pay Sickles three-fourths of the net amount saved by the invention. 
 Sickles & Co. brought suit against the packet company for the recovery of 
 their proportion of alleged savings after a certain lapse of time. After con 
 siderable litigation they recovered a large sum, $16,000. The packet com 
 pany continued to use the cut-off. Subsequently Sickles & Co. brought 
 another suit for their proportion of further savings. Now, mark how the 
 point comes up. 
 
 The steam-packet company came in and pleaded that the contract was 
 void from the first and the machine inefficient, and that they were not 
 bound to pay anything under it. Sickles & Co. replied : " That question 
 has been adjudicated ; we sued you on the same contract once before ; you 
 litigated it, and the judgment was in favor of the plaintiff, and we recov 
 ered a sum of money which you paid. Now, that former suit adjudicated 
 the validity of this contract, because if this contract had been void for any 
 cause from the beginning, you had the opportunity of pleading it in the 
 former action ; you did not do it. and therefore you are concluded. It is 
 
 / * 
 
 the identical contract once sued on, once passed on, and a judgment recov 
 ered under it." The packet company rejoined that on the former hearing 
 this point was not made, and was therefore not passed upon, and was not 
 covered by the former judgment, and offered parole evidence to support this 
 rejoinder. The court below sustained the reply in bar, and held that the 
 point was res adjudicata. The case came to the Supreme Court and the de 
 cision was unanimous, and was pronounced by that great lawyer, Judge 
 Campbell. In the opinion he says : 
 
 In the case before the court the verdict was rendered upon two special counts, and 
 the general count in assumpsit, but the verdict in the subsequent stage of the proceed 
 ings was applied by the court only to the first count. The record produced by the 
 plaintiffs showed that the first suit was brought apparently upon the same contract as 
 the second, and that the existence and validity of that contract might have been litigated. 
 But the verdict misrht have been rendered upon the entire declaration, and without 
 special reference to "the first count. It was competent to the defendants to show the s 
 of facts that existed at the trial, with a view to ascertain what was the matter decided 
 upon by the verdict of the jury. It may have been that there was no contest in reference 
 to the fairness of the experiment, or to its sufficiency to ascertain the premium to be pa 
 for the use of the machine at the first trial, or it may have been that the plamti 
 doned their special counts and recovered their verdict upon the general counts, 
 judgment rendered in that suit, while it remains in force, and for the purpose of mr 
 taining its validity, is conclusive of all the facts properly pleaded by the plan 
 when it is presented as testimony in another suit, the inquiry is competent whel 
 same issue has been tried and settled by it. 
 
 That is, that though the record as produced shows on its f ace prima facie 
 that this issue was covered by the former suit, yet it is ovljpnma facie, 
 
 +J i 1 ~,4-*-i4-4rrf"T 
 
 ** v i i > v AJ\_/ \_/ I \^ V4 "-^ Y L I* v> 1^* ^^P^ J. AAV^ jw - 
 
 and was heard ao-ain on the merits and came a second time to 1 
 Court, and is reported in 5 Wallace, page 580, and the deci 
 nounced was reaffirmed. ^ 
 
 Now, apply this doctrine to this case, and the questions ar 
 
670 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 pose you admit for the sake of the argument that on the former hearing of this 
 case the Senate might have considered not only the regularity of the elec 
 tion, but also it might have considered the question of bribery ; it might 
 have considered the question of the want of a quorum ; it might have con 
 sidered the question of no Legislature. Say the court, That is the prima 
 facie state of the case, that is the presumption, but it is open to show that 
 in point of fact that was not done ; and if it was not done, and no evidence 
 was" submitted on the questions now made, then the questions now made are 
 not covered by the former judgment and cannot be res adjudicata and this 
 is the language of the highest courts both in England and America. 
 
 In this case I challenge any gentleman in the Senate to show me that in 
 the trial of 1877 there was any evidence of bribery. This evidence that I 
 have been reading you was none of it here. The truth is the fact of bribery 
 was discovered afterward ; it never was brought to the attention of the 
 Senate until Judge Spofford, as I have said, filed his memorial to reopen and 
 review the case. Now, how can you say, Senators, that the questions and 
 issues now presented were covered by the former adjudication when the 
 evidence is conclusive that they were not even made ? They were not in 
 the record and no evidence was submitted upon them. Then the former 
 judgment should have no force with the Senate, even allowing the Senate 
 to be a court. 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. Will the Senator allow me to ask him a question ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Certainly. 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. Do I understand the Senator to claim that if it can be 
 shown that Mr. Kellogg was elected by bribery, that would authorize the 
 Senate to say he was not elected ? It would undoubtedly authorize his 
 expulsion ; but could the Senate say he was not elected because he was 
 elected by bribery ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I certainly would say so, because bribery would make the 
 election void. That has been decided over and over again. 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. I do not understand whether the Senator says so or not. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I say so ; yes. I say bribery avoids the election ; that is, 
 provided the bribery controlled the result. There is a controversy as to 
 whether the bribery of one member, or two members, or a less number of 
 members than a sufficiency to control the result would avoid the election ; 
 but a bribery that does control the result avoids the election certainly. But 
 the Senator s question will do him no good, for not only is bribery in this 
 new issue, but no quorum is in this new issue, and no quorum is clearly 
 shown, and the Senator will not pretend that when there was no quorum 
 present a man can be expelled for that. 
 
 But I put the case and I challenge any lawyer to answer it : Suppose on 
 the first trial a man s credentials are presented and a contestant comes in 
 and says that man ought not to be seated because he was not elected by a 
 quorum, because he was elected by bribery, because he was not elected viva 
 voce, or for any reason he was not elected in the manner prescribed by law. 
 Well, upon that issue the credentials are referred to a committee. The 
 committee investigate the question, the whole question relating to the regu 
 larity of the election, and the committee finds that there was no bribery, 
 there was a quorum, there was a regular election, and report a resolution 
 that the contestee is entitled to his seat on the merits. Now, what did the 
 word " merits v cover ? You find he is entitled to the seat on the merits, 
 What merits ? The merits of the issue made. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 671 
 
 You could not say he was entitled to the seat on the merits of an issue 
 not made. You find that he is entitled to the seat on the merits of the issue 
 made and all the issues made ; but suppose after that it should turn out 
 that the man was but twenty years old ; suppose, while the election was 
 without bribery and by a quorum, and in all respects regular, still he was 
 disqualified, and that fact was not known at the first hearing ; suppose that 
 he was not a citizen of the United States ; do you not see that the new 
 issue is not covered by the old trial ? Do you not perceive that it is there 
 fore not included in the judgment, and do you not see that therefore it is 
 not res adjudicata f Even before a court it would be absurd to say it was. 
 
 Now, coming to the question, what was decided before ; let us get that 
 before the Senate. What was the question decided in 1877? I am not 
 going to leave it doubtful. That is one of the most important points in this 
 case ; and if gentlemen vote to keep this man here they shall do it with 
 their eyes open. 
 
 Mr. Hoar. Mr. President 
 
 The Presiding Officer. (Mr. Harris in the chair). Does the Senator 
 from Georgia yield ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Hoar. Before the Senator from Georgia passes to his new point, 
 will he allow me to interrupt him and ask whether I understood him to state 
 that the question of there being a quorum present of the Legislature that 
 elected Kellogg was not raised in the old case ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Hoar. Mr. Wadleigh s report in the old case occupies a page or 
 two in detailing all those facts which have been gone over again and find 
 ing the facts about the quorum ; Mr. Spofford s brief discussed it ; the ques 
 tion of the absence of the man who was brought in against his will, Steven 
 all those things were gone into, on the old trial. 
 
 Mr. Hill. That was gone into on a different view altogether, and for a 
 different purpose. The present issue was not then made, and the present 
 evidence was not even known. It was not known then that the journal was 
 false. It was not known that absent members were personated. The pro 
 ceedings alluded to by the Senator do not even refer to the issue or the evi 
 dence now before us. When was it shown before that Thomas was sick in 
 bed with small-pox ? When was it shown on the former trial that Seveignes 
 was not there ? When was it shown on the former trial that Murray, the 
 sergeant-at-arms, was sent out to get ten members to make a quorum and 
 only got five ? None of that was in the old case ; that is all of it new testi 
 mony, and the Senator cannot deny it ; it is a new feature altogether. 
 
 It is very important U-get before the Senate and the country the real 
 question in issue and what was decided before. I ask every man in the Sen 
 ate who has any doubt on his mind to listen to me now a few moments. 
 
 On the 22d day of October, 1877, the committee met, when, after in 
 formal discussion, Mr. Hill offered the following resolution : 
 
 The controversies heretofore existing in the State of Louisiana as to which of the two 
 rival bodies was the Legislature of that State, and as to which of two rival claimant 
 the governor of said State, having been settled by the State itsel 
 ment of the Senate. 
 
 Resolved, That the Senate do recognize and accept said settlement as 
 
 That was our position before the committee and that was the position of 
 this side of the Chamber before the Senate. The Senator from Massachu- 
 
672 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 setts read the motion made by the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Thurman) when 
 he moved to seat Spofford without taking testimony, and that motion was 
 supported by the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Bayard). Why ? On the 
 very ground here stated, that the people of Louisiana had settled this ques 
 tion ; it was no longer in doubt as to what was the Legislature of Louisiana. 
 The Packard Legislature had dissolved, gone into thin air, and all this had 
 occurred before this Senate or its committee had ever considered the ques 
 tion. That being the case, we all on this side said there was no necessity to 
 take evidence. That was voted down by the Senate. The question was re 
 ferred to the committee, and before the committee I offered that resolution 
 which made exactly the same question that the Senator from Ohio made 
 here in this body. So there was no inconsistency there. That was the posi 
 tion of the Democrats on the committee. 
 
 On the 25th of October Mr. Hoar, of Massachusetts, offered the follow 
 ing as a substitute for my resolution. You will see the issue now being 
 made, clearly : 
 
 Mr. Hoar offered the following as a substitute : 
 
 " Resolved, That it becomes necessary in determining the validity of. an election of 
 Senator, held in January, 1877, to inquire who were the lawful Legislature at that time, 
 and that no other authority is competent to determine that question for the Senate." 
 
 Mark you, now, there was no dispute that the State had determined 
 which was her Legislature, but this resolution of the Senator from Massa 
 chusetts declares that the State cannot determine that question ; that no 
 authority can determine it for the Senate, and therefore we will inquire what 
 was the true Legislature of Louisiana. You see how the two parties stood. 
 We insisted on taking the State s decision. It had been settled without the 
 interference of the military ; it had been settled by removing the military ; 
 it had been settled peaceably ; all the people had agreed to it ; all the 
 parties had agreed to it ; even the members of the Packard Legislature had 
 agreed to it ; even Packard had agreed* to it. He came here and got a 
 position and went to Liverpool as consul. Everybody had agreed to it. 
 We proposed, therefore, to take that settlement. No, said the Republicans 
 of the committee, we will not do that, but we will inquire what was the law 
 ful Legislature of that State, and no other authority is competent to de 
 termine that question for the Senate. Very well, what then ? We were 
 voted down. 
 
 And here I want to make a remark on this subject of res adjudicata. In 
 what a ridiculous position the gentlemen on the other side place themselves! 
 Here it is conceded by this substitute, and not denied but known as a fact, 
 that the State of Louisiana had passed upon this question as to which was 
 the lawful Legislature. That decision was niado in April and long before 
 the Senate acted. Now, I submit to every lawyer, if you deny that Louisi 
 ana was the only authority that can determine that question, you are bound 
 to admit that Louisiana was competent to determine it ; you are bound to 
 admit that Louisiana had jurisdiction of the question as to what was her 
 own Legislature. Louisiana did take jurisdiction of that question ; Louis 
 iana did settle it before the Senate touched it. Why was not the judgment 
 of Louisiana res adjudicata f In my opinion, Louisiana alone had jurisdic 
 tion to determine, as an original question, what was her Legislature ; but 
 whether she alone had it .or not, everybody admits that she certainly had 
 concurrent jurisdiction. She took possession of the question, therefore, 
 legally, and she did decide it, and who on that side of the House has ever 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 673 
 
 proposed to recognize Louisiana s judgment as res adjudicata? She decided 
 
 tell me, if you have no right to reverse your own judgment upon the ground 
 of res adjudicata, what right had the Senate of 1877 to reverse the judgment 
 of Louisiana, which was a decision by a competent jurisdiction ? Do you 
 not see the absurdity ? If the doctrine of res adjudicate applies in this case 
 at all, this decision made by a competent authority is the first permanent 
 judgment. Louisiana made that judgment ; she made it long before the 
 Senate made any ; and I challenge anybody to answer the argument ; for if 
 there is no right in Louisiana to bind the Senate by her judgment, how is 
 Louisiana to be bound by the Senate s judgment ? 
 
 But I am going on. This substitute offered by the Senator from Massa 
 chusetts on the 25th of October in committee was adopted by a party vote ; 
 five voting for it, three against it, and one absent. The Democrats on that 
 committee were then brought to this point : we had pleaded the judgment 
 of Louisiana as final in this case ; we had been overruled in that ; the Senate 
 and the committee had both decided that they would not be bound by the 
 judgment of Louisiana, but would investigate for themselves the competency 
 of the Legislature. Then Mr. Merrimon offered this resolution : 
 
 O 
 
 Resolved, That the committee proceed to examine and ascertain the substantial merits 
 of the respective claims of Hon. W. P. Kellogg and Hon. H. M. Spofford to a seat in the 
 Senate as a Senator from the State of Louisiana, and to this end to inquire particularly 
 which, or whether either, of the two rival bodies claiming to be the Legislature of said 
 State, in January and April last, was the true and lawful Legislature of said State. 
 
 That resolution w r as adopted. Then Mr. Saulsbury, now our honored 
 chairman, made the point distinctly. He brought the gentlemen square up 
 to the question. We think, said he, you ought to take the judgment of 
 Louisiana. You will not do it ; you say you have a right to inquire for 
 yourselves whether that was the lawful Legislature, and no other authority 
 can determine that. Then, says Mr. Saulsbury, we will go into the merits ; 
 and here was his resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That in order to ascertain which of the two bodies claiming to be the Legis 
 lature of Louisiana, respectively represented by William P. Kellogg and Henry M. Spofford 
 claiming seats in the Senate of the United States, it is necessary and proper to ascertain 
 who of the members of said respective Legislatures were elected as such members by the 
 votes actually cast at the election in November, 1876, and that the respective claimants be 
 requested to cause the original returns of the commissioners of election and the tabulated 
 statements of the registrars of election, or certified copies of the same, to be furnished as 
 speedily as possible to this committee. 
 
 That was voted down. Where did we stand then ? They had declared 
 that they would not be bound by the judgment of Louisiana, but would in 
 quire for themselves as to the legality of her Legislature. Then, said Mr. 
 Saulsbury, " We will go into the question and determine whether the men 
 seated by the returning board were lawfully seated, whether they were 
 really elected." No ; they would not do that. What do you mean, then ? 
 I will not charge gentlemen with a trick, but they were perpetrating one of 
 the shrewdest and boldest pieces of management ever perpetrated 
 country. They were determined to go into the inquiry of what was 
 Legislature for the purpose of getting rid of the decision of the S 
 order to fall back upon the infallibility of the returning board, 
 the whole of it, I shall not make this charge without proving it. 
 
674 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Now, here is what Mr. Mitchell, the acting chairman, said. I want you 
 to see what they meant by saying they would inquire which was the legal 
 Legislature : 
 
 The Acting Chairman. Suppose we were compelled to decide as to whether or not 
 this was a legal Legislature at that time. In determining that question, can we do more 
 or go further than to ascertain from the record that the forms of law have been com 
 plied with ? For instance, take it for granted that the returning board is a valid board, 
 if it appears to us from the records of that board that a majority of this Legislature was 
 made up of men returned by that board, that they met and organized, and declared the 
 result of the election as to governor and lieutenant-governor, elected a speaker, etc., and 
 then proceeded to elect a senator, does that determination determine the question as to 
 whether that was the Legislature or not, or do we go back of that ? 
 
 And they decided that the returning board settled the question. Was 
 such a thing ever heard of ? Here were these gentlemen repudiating the 
 decision of the State, repudiating what all the authorities of the State said, 
 and repudiating all that the people of the State said, insisting that, over the 
 will of the State and over the authority of the State, they should go them 
 selves into the question of determining what was the legal Legislature, and 
 then let that be determined absolutely by the returning board ! Do you 
 not see the adroit effort to get the Senate back into the condition of the 
 electoral commission ? Nothing would the Republicans of this bod}^ agree 
 to except the returning board. The State decision is to be disregarded, the 
 facts are to be disregarded, the law is to be trampled under foot, constitu 
 tions are to be disregarded and violated, but the decision of the returning 
 board must be infallible ! The Senator from Massachusetts announced that 
 much yesterday in his speech, in giving the reasons why they declined to 
 allow Spofford to take testimony in 1877. It is remarkable reasoning. 
 Hear this, gentlemen : 
 
 Second. The evidence offered, so far as the points to which it related were not 
 covered by the admissions or by the abundant testimony already in the case, was totally 
 immaterial. 
 
 Immaterial for what ? 
 
 The committee rested their decision of the cause upon a very simple principle. It was 
 that the persons who had the certificates of the officers appointed by law to give them 
 were entitled to take their seats in the Legislature of Louisiana and to hold them until the 
 legislative bodies respectively acting on each case by itself adjudged otherwise, and that 
 the Senate could not go behind the legislative action of such persons so holding seats to 
 inquire into the facts connected with the election of each individual member. 
 
 Mark you, they were going to inquire, but they would take no evidence 
 but the certificates of the returning board. So all this evidence of fraud and 
 all this evidence of corruption and all this evidence of bribery and all this 
 evidence that there was no Legislature was ruled out as immaterial! 
 
 Mr. President, I feel it my duty to impress this fact upon the Demo 
 cratic side of the House. We all know it is history, sad history that a 
 distinguished commission succeeded in 1877 in making a President of the 
 United States who was not chosen by the people. How ? By insisting that 
 you could not go behind the certificates of the returning board and introduce 
 evidence aliunde to prove that those certificates were given in fraud, to prove 
 that they were forged, to prove that they were procured by perjury ; and 
 they succeeded. They succeeded upon the familiar principle that the two 
 Houses of Congress had not jurisdiction of the elections, returns, and quali 
 fications of electors. This committee in 1877 determined, if they could, to 
 bring the Senate to exactly that position on the senatorial question, and 
 
777,9 LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 675 
 
 therefore they disregarded the decision of the State ; they refused to examine 
 into the frauds charged on the returning boards ; they said they would in 
 quire as to what was the valid Legislature, but they would only take the 
 certificates of the returning board as the sole evidence of the fact. They 
 had made the returning board supreme to make a President, and now they 
 are seeking to make the returning board supreme to make a Senator. 
 
 They got that vote through the committee. They ruled out all evidence 
 upon the idea and the theory as announced correctly by the Senator from 
 Massachusetts, that if a man held the returning board certificate it was con 
 clusive. You could not go behind those certificates ; you must take them 
 right or ^yrong. Though it was proved that the returning board was 
 covered with perjury, and that bribery and corruption were oozing from 
 every pore, you must take their judgment, you must take their action 5 ; it is 
 conclusive ; you cannot go behind it ; you may not contradict it ; you may 
 trample on the rights of the people, but you cannot question the infalli 
 bility of a Louisiana returning board. That is the decision. 
 
 Now, having procured one decision by the Senate upon that theory that 
 this man was lawfully entitled on the merits to the seat, they come in and 
 say the power of the Senate to judge is exhausted. Though the issue itself 
 was not made ; though it is proved now that there was no Legislature in 
 fact; though* you prove the bribery of members ; though you prove there 
 was no quorum present, it can all do no good, because the Senate has said 
 he was lawfullv entitled to the seat, and the Senate said so because the re- 
 
 t/ 
 
 turning board said it. There was not a particle of evidence before the Sen 
 ate in 1877 except what they took from the returning board. They refused 
 to allow any evidence to show fraud in the returning board. That was the 
 very proposition we wanted to go into, but the committee refused it. 
 
 They then came into the Senate on that theory and got a decision 
 of the Senate in 1877, and now they come and plead res adjudicate?. And 
 we are told that Democrats are to help them. This iniquity of forcing upon 
 this country, of forcing upon Louisiana, a Senator returned by the frauds 
 of a returning board, never elected by the Legislature, is to be accomplished 
 through the same theory that the returning board alone of all bodies in 
 Louisiana is infallible, and that you must take its decision as final. 
 
 Well, we shall see how much help they get. I warn you, gentlemen ; I 
 do it from the sincerity of my heart ; I am familiar with the facts of this 
 case ; I have watched every step of its progress. The whole argument is 
 the argument of the electoral commission applied to the Senate. I affirm 
 here to-day that in 1877 there was no evidence before the committee except 
 that which was before the electoral commission, and if you hold that this 
 man is irreversibly entitled to the seat you hold it because by the manage 
 ment of a partisan majority you are brought to the conclusion that governed 
 the electoral commission. If you do, you give up the issue of fraud in 
 Louisiana in 1876. You decide that the electoral commission was right. 
 You decide that the Democratic party for three years has been wrong in 
 charging fraud on the returning board of Louisiana. You say that after all 
 they committed no fraud. You make the returning board respectable, and 
 you bring the electoral commission into credit and yourselves into shame. 
 There is no escape from it none whatever. It may succeed ; cannot 
 tell ; but not because it is riijht ; not because it is law ; not because it i 
 Constitutional, but for some unknown reason that dare not be avowed. 1 on 
 Cannot foist upon the Senate a Senator from Louisiana on the principle oi 
 
676 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 the electoral commission. Every man who so votes gives up the whole 
 question of fraud. If the rule of the Democratic Senate is now to be that 
 there was no fraud in Louisiana, that the iniquities of the returning board 
 were all right, that the electoral commission was all right, I pray you as 
 honest men go upon your knees to Madison, Wells, and Anderson, and 
 Casanave, and Kenner, and plead for forgiveness at their hands. 
 
 It is for this reason I have taken an interest in this case. I have seen 
 with what persistence and adroitness, with what shrewdness, with what 
 skill, I will say with what avidity, they have been laboring to get the Sen 
 ate on the senatorial question in precisely the condition of the electoral com 
 mission on the electors of President and Vice-President and commit the 
 Democratic Senate to holding that the decision of the electoral commission 
 was right. You may live till you are as old as Methuselah, you may have 
 pretexts and excuses, you may rise a thousand times and deny it and pro 
 test your honesty and good motives, but I tell you that is the point. That 
 is the condition of the case precisely. That is the reason the committee re 
 fused to take testimony in 1877. They said it was immaterial, because the 
 certificates of the returning board had settled the question. They would 
 not inquire into the fraud. No testimony aliunde was the word. "No 
 testimony aliunde r is now to be made respectable, and by a Democratic 
 Senate ! 
 
 Now, there is a very singular argument made here which I will only 
 notice briefl} . It is contended by the Senator from Massachusetts in the 
 speech which he made the other day that we ought not to complain that we 
 were cut off from taking testimony in 1877. Why? Because he says of 
 those five points we did not take testimony on more than one of them. 
 
 Now, I will explain to you how that is. In 1877 Mr. Spofford charged 
 that the sitting member participated personally in the frauds of the return 
 ing board, that he was a personal party to those frauds, and that he man 
 aged it in this way : that he had a side door to the room of the returning 
 board by which he entered and held secret consultations with the returning 
 board, making false charges and false protests, and thereby getting men sent 
 to the Legislature who were not elected. It is said that this evidence does not 
 prove that ; that we have not proven any side door. I admit that we have 
 not. We have not proven any side door, but what have we proven ? A 
 much worse state of things. We have not proven that when the returning 
 board was in session Kellogg had communication with them through a side 
 door, but we have proven that before the returning board met he had clan 
 destine night meetings at his own house with none but his clerks and mem 
 bers of the returning board, and at his own house at night this whole 
 scheme of defrauding the State of Louisiana by false affidavits was hatched 
 and concocted. Gentlemen say, " Oh, you proved the frauds, but you did 
 not prove it was by a side door ! v It was worse than a side door ; it was 
 the whole house in which he fixed up the plan for the returning board in 
 advance. The Senator from Massachusetts on that argument would hold, I 
 dare say, that if you charged a man with stealing one horse and proved he 
 stole a hundred you would not thereby sustain the charge of stealing one. 
 
 The testimony, I admit, is tenfold worse than even Spofford thought it 
 was in 1877 or thought that he could prove. All believed it was there, but 
 the trouble was to prove it. In 1877 he said nothing about bribery, be 
 cause he did not know about it. As I have said, the evidence was dis 
 covered since. If we had been permitted to take testimony in 1877, under 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WHITINGS. 077 
 
 the charges then made, would not all the testimony now in be admissible ? 
 Unquestionably. So the question is not what we thought could be proven 
 in 1877, but what the memorialist has proven in point of fact now. 
 
 Gentlemen are trying to alarm somebody over here by saying, "Oh, 
 what a precedent you would establish, a dangerous precedent, and if you 
 can reverse the decision of the Senate nobody is safe in his seat." Is it 
 possible that any man sitting in the Senate of the United States can be entrap 
 ped by that sort of an argument ? To vacate the seat of a man not elected 
 by his Legislature, would that be a precedent to vacate the seat of a man 
 who was elected by the Legislature ? To vacate the seat of a man whose 
 mob has been dispersed by the State and declared not a Legislature, is that 
 to be a precedent to vacate the seat of a man whose Legislature is recognized 
 by the State ? Is there a man sitting here to-day, other than the sitting 
 member from Louisiana, who holds his title by a mob ? Is there a man sit 
 ting here to-day who holds his title by a body that the State has declared 
 was not the Legislature? If so, let that man beware ! I tell that man not 
 to seek to secure his own seat by voting in Kellogg, because if I could as- 
 . certain that such was the fact I would vote to exclude a Democrat from his 
 seat as readily as I would a Republican. 
 
 I am not making a partisan fight ; I am making no personal fight. I do 
 not give the persons in this case the slightest consideration ; I do not give 
 the political parties the slightest consideration. I say that the State of 
 Louisiana shall not be disfranchised if I can help it. I say that I will not take 
 an oath to support the Constitution and sit here and allow a man to have a 
 seat who was not chosen by his Legislature if I can help it. Precedent ! Do 
 you not know that men who are going to do wrong do not want precedents 
 for it? I declare the idea of being afraid to give the Republicans a pre 
 cedent is amusing. The children on the street ought to laugh at it. When 
 a party has done everything without precedent, do you talk about their 
 wanting a Democratic precedent? Do your own duty in the case before 
 you. If this man was chosen by the Legislature, chosen fairly, chosen 
 legally, chosen by a quorum, chosen without bribery, let him stay. If he 
 was not chosen by his Legislature, I charge you by that oath, which you have 
 taken to support the Constitution, to vacate the seat and let a man chosen 
 by the Legislature take it. 
 
 But it is said the remedy is by expulsion. What a mistake is that ! 
 Whatever might be the remedy in a case where the decision seating a mem 
 ber was only erroneous and voidable, such rule could not apply to the case 
 before us, where the objection to the member goes to the Constitutional 
 right to hold his seat, where he is not qualified by the Constitution ; where, 
 
 For this reason he sits in the seat just precisely in law as if he never had been 
 seated. Talk about the expulsion of a man who holds his seat by a void 
 decision, by a decision which is a nullity ! Talk about putting a man s < 
 stitutional right to sit in this body in the hands of two-thirds instead of a 
 majority! The whole doctrine of expulsion applies to the idea that when the 
 man has acquired a seat, either good or voidable, and forfeits it for any cause 
 he may be expelled by a vote of two-thirds ; but was it ever said that 
 take two-thirds of this body to enforce the Constitution ? Was : 
 or intended to be said that it should take two-thirds of this body to 
 
678 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 determine whether a man should sit here who was not elected by the 
 Legislature ? 
 
 No, gentlemen, the whole question in the case is this : was Kellogg chosen 
 by the Legislature of Louisiana ? First, was the body a Legislature ? If 
 not, then he was not chosen. Second, if it was, there was no quorum. If 
 there was a quorum, and he got the election by bribery, would he be entitled ? 
 The Constitution says not, and you have got to find in this country a power 
 superior to the Constitution before you can preserve your oath and say yes. 
 
 I have established the following propositions: first, that Kellogg was 
 not chosen by the Legislature of Louisiana, because the body was not 
 in fact the Legislature. That is established, first, by the decision of the 
 State, including all the authority of the State and all the source of authority, 
 the people. A gentleman said to me yesterday, showing a strange misap 
 prehension of my argument, " You argued that the Nicholls Legislature was 
 the Legislature because it was recognized by the courts and the governor, 
 whereas the Legislature itself is the source of power of the State and of 
 higher authority than either." I argued no such thing. I argued that the 
 Nicholls Legislature was the Legislature because it was recognized by the 
 courts, by the governor, and by the people who made courts, governor, and 
 Legislature, and that decision is rendered by the people without the inter 
 ference of the military. It is said that some Democrats have held that the 
 Packard government was not the government even when the people sub 
 mitted to it. That is because it was put upon them by military force. It 
 is said a court does not pass upon the title of a Legislature. I grant that. 
 One department of government cannot say whether another department of 
 government has a title, because they are co-ordinate, and if you say that 
 one should pass upon the title of the other, you put one co-ordinate depart 
 ment of the government in the power of the other. That is not the question. 
 
 The question is this : what department of the government do the other 
 departments of the government recognize, and do the people recognize and 
 freely obey? 
 
 So, if you say you will not take the judgment of the State, the judgment 
 of the people, as well as the judgment of the authorities of the State, then 
 the facts also establish that the Packard body was not the Legislature of 
 the State, because the facts prove that it was nothing on earth but a mob of 
 conspirators gotten up for the express purpose of preventing the will of the 
 State from having force. The members of one body met and seized the 
 ktate-house under authority of the governor. They barricaded themselves 
 in it and excluded members of the other party, and then by false certificates 
 of a returning board claimed to have a quorum, and made themselves the 
 Legislature, and you are asked to say whether that was the Legislature of 
 the State in point of fact. So that, if you take the judgment of the State, 
 the question is settled that the Packard government was not the government ; 
 if you reject the decision of the State and take the facts in the case as 
 apparent on the record, still it was not the Legislature. 
 
 Then I hold it is established, in the second place, that if it was a Legis 
 lature it did not elect the sitting member, because there was no quorum 
 present at his election, and because a number of members there were con 
 trolled by bribery in their votes. I have shown you that the Senate is bound 
 now to determine this question, because the facts have never before been 
 passed upon by the Senate, and therefore are not included in any judgment 
 rendered by the Senate. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WAITINGS. 679 
 
 Mr. President, I have now concluded the argument. Before leaving the 
 case I feel it my duty to make a few remarks upon the general subject 
 There is one feature of this testimony which I trust the American people 
 will note. When the war closed, the Southern States and people were in a 
 prostrate, helpless, and unresisting condition. Their governments were 
 gone, their pride was wounded, their property was destroyed, arid they were 
 confronted with the most startling fact that ever was brought to the face of 
 any people. Nearly half of their population had been suddenly released 
 from slavery, without education and without experience in government, and 
 was made to assume new relations both to society and government. It was 
 enough to appall the stoutest heart in the most prosperous times, and yet the 
 Southern people had to meet that state of things at a time when of all others 
 they were most humiliated and prostrate. 
 
 They went to work to meet it bravely ; but soon they were told that 
 they had no power to reorganize their own government, and that the central 
 power should do that. They never resisted it. They never stopped to 
 inquire whether that was Constitutional or not, for they were not in a con 
 dition to question the power of the Federal Government, and they did not 
 question it. 
 
 I want to state here, and I hope the Republicans will hear me, that the 
 troubles in the South since the war have never had the slightest foundation 
 in any disposition on the part of the Southern people to question or resist 
 the authority of the Federal Government. I affirm, on the contrary, what 
 I said as far back as 1868, and I have repeated it often, that I do verily 
 believe that if this Congress had taken upon itself to frame constitutions here 
 for each of the Southern States the Southern people would have accepted 
 them and organized their governments under them, trusting to time, expe 
 rience, and wisdom to cure whatever defects they might possess. There was 
 no disposition to question the authority of the Federal Government. There 
 was every purpose to recognize that authority. 
 
 Secondly, I want to say that the troubles in the South since the war have 
 not grown out of natural antagonism between the two races ; it has not sprung 
 from any disposition on the part of the Southern whites to do injustice to 
 the blacks. I say there could be no such disposition, because the colored 
 race is essential to the prosperity of the Southern people. Left to them 
 selves in their new condition, both races would have desired to organize 
 governments best calculated to secure their common prosperity. They 
 might have made mistakes, but they soon would have corrected these 
 mistakes. 
 
 The people of the South recognized absolutely and without question the 
 abandonment of secession and the abolition of slavery, and forever. None 
 of the troubles, I repeat, which have existed in the South since the war have 
 sprung from any disposition to question the authority of the Federal Gov 
 ernment or to do injustice to the black race. Where, then, have our troubles 
 come from? They have come from but one source. I affirm it here to-day, 
 and the whole history of the whole South will prove it. The Reconstruc 
 tion acts, unwisely and unfortunately, disfranchised over two hundred and 
 fifty thousand of the very best people of the South from taking part in the 
 work of reconstruction. They included in that disfranchisement over two 
 hundred and fifty thousand white voters. The very best men in the coun 
 try, all of those who had been trusted with office before the war, the edi 
 cated, the experienced, the men of property, were included in that 
 
C80 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 hundred and fifty thousand. At that most critical juncture, when" a condi 
 tion of things had to be met that no people in the world had ever had to 
 face before, the central power disfranchised from participation in govern 
 ment the intelligence and experience and the property of the South. That 
 alone would not have disturbed us much, for I believe if the work had gone 
 into the hands of even the colored people with the remnant of white people 
 left enfranchised, although the colored people were enfranchised indiscrim 
 inately without regard to their qualification, we would have got along in 
 comparative peace and quiet, and would have settled all our troubles ; but 
 the enfranchisement of so large a portion of our first-class citizens, and the 
 indiscriminate enfranchisement of the colored people, opened up a tempta 
 tion to a class of men in the North such as never before infested society and 
 I pray God may never infest it again a class of men who went down there 
 to take advantage of the situation and seek to use the colored people to get 
 the offices for their own benefit. 
 
 In order to succeed they had to create difficulties and dissensions among 
 the races. They sought to segregate the black race from the white race, so 
 as to get control of the black race, by convincing them that the white people 
 of the South were their enemies. They were sustained in that by the 
 Federal Army ; they were sustained in that by the Federal Administration. 
 In order to accomplish their purpose they went to work to dissatisfy the 
 colored race ; they went to work to get up divisions and strifes between the 
 two races ; they went to work to get up charges of outrages upon the colored 
 race by the white people ; and they went to work to fill the North with 
 charges of disloyalty and a spirit of rebellion. 
 
 Sir, when the history of that terrible period shall be written, the people 
 of the North will have to blush in the face of the fact that a large majority 
 of the very outrages of which they complained and which have so excited 
 them were incited by carpet-baggers for the express purpose of manufacturing 
 charges against the white people of the South to inflame the people of the 
 North and to keep the military power and Federal administration in their 
 support. To accomplish this they had to get up falsehoods ; and here is a 
 feature developed by this testimony. The poor colored people were actually 
 taught to believe that any crime was right if committed in support of the 
 Republican party. They were taught to believe, and this evidence reveals 
 it, that perjury itself was a virtue and lying and deception in every form 
 were right if by such means they would benefit the Republican party. The 
 Senator from Missouri (Mr. Vest) gave you some remarkable instances of 
 that. Let me read but one sentence, which the Senator from Missouri did 
 not read. This man Watson, who personated Thomas, and who is referred 
 to frequently in these telegrams as one of the men who had to be fixed, on 
 being examined confessed that he had lied ; he confessed that he had made 
 a false affidavit ; he said he was a preacher, and that he believed it was 
 according to the Scripture to lie. Then he was asked this question : 
 
 Question. Why did you write that letter to Cavanac, and thus pile lie upon lie, if 
 that was the fact? 
 
 Answer. I was exercising one of the gifts of a free American citizen. 
 Q. Which is to lie as much as he pleases? 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 jr 
 
 This poor creature, without blushing, sat before that committee and abso 
 lutely said that he piled lie upon lie in the exercise of the right of a free 
 American citizen, which was to lie as he pleased and as often as he pleased. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 681 
 
 That is not the only instance. You will find that witness after witness cairn- 
 before the committee and testified that way, and they seemed to be perfectly 
 surprised that we thought strange of it. Why was that ? They had been 
 taught it. Will the people of the North now wonder that affidavits were 
 piled up in the custom-house to prove outrages that never took place, to 
 prove assassinations that were never committed? Sometimes I hear able 
 Senators, distinguished gentlemen, who I know would not do so if they knew 
 the facts, stand up here and charge the best people of the South with all 
 kinds of brutal assassination and outrage, upon the testimony of these wit 
 nesses, who have been taught that it was right to lie for their party. You 
 can go into that country and gets affidavits by the thousand, and the poor 
 creatures who give them will not be at all loath to give them, and will not 
 have any idea that they are doing wrong. They are taught so, and this 
 evidence shows it. 
 
 Mr. President, what excuse shall we now give if we keep this man in a 
 seat to which he never was elected by a Legislature, for the voice of 
 Louisiana and the voice of all the w^orld says it was not her Legislature ! 
 You cannot say he was fairly elected, for the men w r ho paid the bribes, the 
 men who received the bribes, the men whose duty it was to procure a 
 quorum, come before you and swear that there was bribery, overwhelming 
 bribery, and there was no quorum on the day of the election. Will you 
 say, as the Senator from Wisconsin says, that whatever the Senate shall 
 resolve is true, however false. 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. In point of law. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Will you declare that if we choose to say that any one is 
 entitled to a seat here he shall be entitled to it? Though the Constitution 
 says no man shall be a Senator unless he has attained the age of thirty years, 
 the Senator from Wisconsin says he shall be a rightful Senator though not 
 thirty years old. Though the Constitution says no man shall be a Senator 
 who has not been nine years a citizen of the United States, the Senator from 
 Wisconsin says he shall be a Senator and have a rightful title to a seat in 
 this body if the Senate says so, right or wrong. 
 
 I need not be surprised at those gentlemen saying those absurd things, 
 but I will be surprised if they find reinforcement among Democrats, 
 ought not to be surprised at anything in this day, but really when a Demo 
 cratic Senate shall reaffirm deliberately the doctrine of 1877 and declare 
 that we are bound to believe that is true which we know to be a perjury 
 that we are bound to believe that is genuine which we know to be 
 forgery ; that we are bound to believe that is right which we know to be a 
 fraud if we are to reaffirm that doctrine, I will confess that even in 
 day of demoralization I shall be surprised. 
 
 If you say that you cannot eject an intruder from this body, the 
 child that ejects the worm that slimes its way into its play-house wi 
 you. No, gentlemen, if this wrong is to be continued, I repeat, it is not 
 be done upon law ; it is not to be done upon evidence ; it is not to be d< 
 according to the principles of the Constitution ; it is to be done foi 
 other reason. The people will know it is, not because of the law, t 
 dence, or the Constitution, but in plain disregard of all. 
 pered all over the country that there is some secret, unavowed 
 and nothing illustrates the brazen effrontery of the parties mterestec 
 this case so palpably as the charge they have made against membe 
 this side of the Chamber, of bargains, honorable agreements, and 
 
682 SENATOR R II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 standings, and their effrontery does not stop until it seeks to soil the char 
 acter of the most sensitive State in this Union on questions of honor in the 
 days of the past. While I have never been a disciple of that peculiar school 
 of politics known as the South Carolina school, I have always regarded 
 that State as the proudest in the Union. The charge that anybody on 
 this side is to be influenced by any other than proper motives is false, but 
 when applied to that gallant State I deny it with scorn and indignation, for 
 I tell you to-dav that that sense of honor which distinguished that State in 
 
 / ** 
 
 the days that are past and gone is still instinct with life above the ashes of 
 so many other dead hopes and ambitions, and it will continue so. What ! 
 South Carolina purchase her redemption from carpet-bag infamies by agree 
 ing to continue those infamies upon Louisiana? 
 
 If that were possible, no pelican bird could ever afterward fold its 
 weary wings in the shade of the palmetto without finding it a death-exhal 
 ing upas. Away with all these charges ; they are not true. Meet the 
 question upon the law, upon the evidence, upon the Constitution, and upon 
 the right. To do right can never be a precedent for wrong. To do right 
 can never be a reason for thinking there is danger. There is always safety 
 in right ; there is always danger in wrong. 
 
 Mr. President, I have looked with longing anxiety for that reaction in 
 the public sentiment which would restore a healthy Constitutional adminis 
 tration of this Government, when the tendency to usurpation, to centralism, 
 and to subversion should be arrested ; and yet I confess that while sitting 
 here during the present session of Congress I have heard very untoward 
 sounds. I have heard one honorable Senator on the other side of this floor 
 gravely argue in the most solemn manner that a military court had the 
 same dignity and character with the highest court of this country. I have 
 heard another honorable Senator, distinguished as one of the ablest con 
 stitutional lawyers of his party, the Senator from Wisconsin, solemnly 
 argue that a military court had power not only to dismiss a soldier from 
 the military service, but actually to disfranchise a citizen, and declare that 
 the people should not have power to elect that citizen to office ! Coming 
 through that door from the adjoining Chamber I have heard it declared 
 that a State officer, that a State judge, can be dragged before the Federal 
 judiciary, and incarcerated as a criminal for administering the laws of his 
 State according to his own conscience and judgment ! But worse than all 
 these, far worse than all these, is the proposition now made that the Senate 
 can disfranchise a State ! That the Senate can do what the people have 
 solemnly pledged themselves never to do, deprive a State of her equal suf 
 frage in the Senate. That the Senate can go into a State and tell her 
 judges, tell her governor, tell her people, " this body of men whose laws you 
 administer, whose laws you execute, whose laws you obey, is not your Leg 
 islature, but this other body, which is but a mob of conspirators, self-barri 
 caded criminals, that no court respects, that no officer respects, that no 
 citizen respects this other body is your Legislature and shall send the man 
 to represent you in the Senate of the United States." 
 
 Sir, do these things sound the retreat of Constitutional government and 
 herald the approach of imperial dynast} r as the only refuge from anarchy? 
 Is the trumpet that proclaims coming monarchy getting louder and louder 
 and nearer and nearer? Have the people ears and hear not the groans of 
 dying liberty? Have the people eyes and see not despotism stalking with 
 brazen front at noonday in the highest places of the nation? 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 883 
 
 If these things be so, why shall we not be honest and tell the people at 
 once to end this mockery of free government under written constitutions 
 peaceably, before fraud and force shall end it in blood? No, sir, the people 
 have ears and they will hear ; the people have eyes and they will see. Tin- 
 people still love liberty ; the people still have faith in written constitutions; 
 and the people will rise up, I trust, in this auspicious year, and declare that 
 a party which has seized and held power by fraud against the popular will 
 shall never afterward be trusted with power by that popular will. They 
 will cast out the thieves who divide the public offices as their own legiti 
 mate plunder. If we undertake to disfranchise a sovereign State of this 
 Union, the people will, as they ought, drive us from these places that we so 
 dishonor and send others here who will respect the popular will, who will 
 preserve the equality of the States, and who will obey the Constitution as 
 the supreme law over all. 
 
SPEECH DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED 
 
 STATES, JUNE 11, 1880. 
 
 THE STATE ALONE CAN GIVE TITLE TO A SEAT IN THE SENATE. 
 
 " The wisdom won in fiery air 
 Of siege and battle scarce availed 
 To serve him when he sought to wear 
 The civic laurels. There he failed." 
 
 This speech was made in the United States Senate in the Spofford-Kellogg Contested 
 Election Case from Louisiana. It was in reply to the arguments made in behalf of 
 Kellogg, and was especially in answer to the speeches of Senators Hampton and Butler of 
 South Carolina. Senator Hill, in his previous speech on this case, had referred to the 
 rumors and newspaper statements that the South Carolina Senators would vote for Kel 
 logg in pursuance of an agreement made with the Republicans when the seat of Senator 
 Butler was contested. He had eloquently denounced such charges as false, and a reflection 
 not only on the Senators, but on the proud State they represented. For some reason this 
 had given offense to both the South Carolina Senators, and they made bitter attacks on 
 Mr. Hill. This speech is replete with sarcasm and eloquence and formed the capstone 
 to his former argument on the same subject. 
 
 On the resolution reported by the Committee on Privileges arid Elec 
 tions, relating to the seat of William Pitt Kellogg as Senator from Louisi 
 ana, Mr. Hill said : 
 
 Mr. President: On the llth and 12th of May I had the honor of sub 
 mitting my views at length to the Senate in this case. Since then several 
 gentlemen have addressed the Senate, one only, I believe, making or 
 attempting to make anything of a legal argument purporting even to reply 
 to what I then said. Other gentlemen have seen proper to allude to me 
 personally, without attempting to assail the argument which I submitted. 
 I promised the Senate that I would at an early date, when I could get the 
 floor, notice some of the points that had been made in this connection. I 
 now propose to do so, and with this, I trust, be rid forever of this case as 
 far as I am concerned. 
 
 In order that what I say may be distinctly understood, I desire to restate 
 in brief form three propositions which, in my opinion, cover every issue 
 in this case. 
 
 The first proposition is this : Each State establishes her own Legislature ; 
 with the Legislature thus established by the State the Constitution deposits 
 the authority of choosing Senators ; in admitting Senators to their seats 
 the Senate recognizes the bo<ly choosing them as being the Legislature 
 established by the States. An attempt by this Senate to enlarge the 
 authority to ascertain or recognize the Legislature established by the State 
 into a power to establish a Legislature for the State, is a plain attempt at 
 usurpation and is void. The body pretending to elect Kellogg was never 
 established by the State of Louisiana to be her Legislature, and therefore 
 
 684 
 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND W1UT1XGS. 685 
 
 never had authority to choose a Senator. Kellogg, therefore, never had a 
 title to the seat, and his retention by the Senate, without a title, is a continu 
 ing violation of the Constitution, and a continuing fraud on the State of 
 Louisiana. 
 
 The second proposition is this : If it be assumed that this Senate can 
 inquire not only " What is the Legislature established by the State," but 
 can also declare that a body not so established is nevertheless the lawful 
 Legislature of such State, then sucli inquiry can only be complete when the 
 Senate has ascertained for itself the legality of the elections of the members 
 composing such body. 
 
 In 1877, the Senate first resolved to reject the Legislature established by 
 the State, and to inquire for itself " who were the lawful Legislature of 
 Louisiana," and resolved to take no evidence but the certificates of the 
 returning board, and refused to receive any evidence to show that these cer 
 tificates were forged and fraudulent and the result of a conspiracy between 
 Kellogg and the returning board to make a false Legislature. The evidence 
 showing this fraudulent conspiracy was not presented or considered in 1877, 
 and is now for the first time before the Senate to be considered and passed 
 upon. 
 
 The third proposition is this : In 1877 the only issue considered or passed 
 upon was the legality of the Packard Legislature as evidenced by the certifi 
 cates of the returning board only. There was no inquiry into the regularity 
 of the election of Senator, assuming that body to be the Legislature. The 
 charges now made are that, assuming that body was the Legislature there 
 was no quorum of certified members present, but that absent members were 
 recorded as present and were personated by others, and that a false journal 
 was made to show a pretended quorum, and that those who were present 
 were induced to vote for Kellogg by force, bribery, and other corrupt prac 
 tices. 
 
 These charges have never before been made, considered, or passed upon, 
 and the evidence fully sustaining the charges has never before been taken. 
 
 These three propositions cover exactly the points in this case. In the 
 first I say that there can be no final, conclusive, binding decision, because it 
 would make the decision of this Senate superior to the Constitution, because 
 if a man is not chosen by the Legislature, as the Constitution requires, lie 
 can never by the decision of this Senate acquire a legal title to a seat in this 
 body, and until he has a legal right to it he is subject to be ejected, and 
 ought to be ejected whenever that fact is known. On the other two 
 grounds I say that the evidence now submitted was never submitted before ; 
 was not known ; was not taken ; was not presented on the trial in 1877. 
 Therefore it never was submitted and passed upon, and did not enter into the 
 judgment then rendered. 
 
 Now, Mr. President, I desire to notice first of all the statement by 
 Senator from Wisconsin (Mr. Carpenter). I shall not notice all his points 
 I wish to notice two or three of what he evidently considered his strongest 
 points, for the purpose of showing how far from the law the Senator was, 
 
 In the first place, the Senator read from the opinion of the Supreme Court 
 of the United States rendered by Chief Justice Taney, in the case of 
 vs. Borden. I read this portion of the decision taken from the Senator s own 
 speech, and I call the attention of the Senate to it, for the difference be 
 txveen this decision as made by the Court and then as stated 
 ator himself, actually punctuates the difference between mys 
 
686 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Senator, for the decision rendered by the Court is simply the position taken 
 by myself. 
 
 Chief Justice Taney said : 
 
 Under this article of the Constitution it rests with Congress to decide what govern 
 ment is the established one in the State. For as the United States guarantee to each State 
 a republican government, Congress must necessarily decide what government is estab 
 lished in the State before it can determine whether it is Republican or not. And when 
 the Senators and Representatives of a State are admitted into the councils of the Union, 
 the authority of the government under which they are appointed, as well as its republi 
 can character, 13 recognized by the proper Constitutional authority. 
 
 Note that language. What is the emphatic word in that sentence ? No 
 man can escape it. " Under this article of the Constitution it rests with 
 Congress to decide r> what ? What is the goverment of a State ? No, sir. 
 To set up a government in a State ? No, sir. To overrule the decision of 
 the State as to what is her government ? No, sir. What does the court 
 say ? 
 
 It rests with Congress to decide what government is the established one in the State. 
 
 Established by whom ? Established by what authority ? Not by Con 
 gress. The power of Congress is to ascertain what government is the es 
 tablished one in a State ; that is, what government is established by the 
 State. So it says : 
 
 And when the Senators and Representatives of a State are admitted into the councils of 
 the Union, the authority of the government under which they are appointed, as well as its 
 republican character, is recognized by the proper Constitutional authority. 
 
 What government is recognized ? The power of the Senate is to recog 
 nize, not to create, a government ; not to go into the State and dispute with 
 the State as to what is her government, but the very term "recognized " is 
 used. The Senate recognizes the government established by the State. 
 
 Now, for the purpose of showing the difference betiveen the Senator and 
 the court, and therein the difference between the Senator and myself in this 
 case, let me read the language of the Senator himself when he undertakes to 
 repeat this decision in his own language. Here is what he said : 
 
 He 
 
 Taney 
 
 says that the power of determining what is the government of a State rests with Congress 
 under that clause of the Constitution which compels us to guarantee a republican govern 
 ment to every State. 
 
 Taney said no such thing. The Senator in intending to quote the de 
 cision of Taney leaves out the main word in Taney s decision. Taney never 
 said Congress had power to determine what is the government of a State. 
 Taney said that Congress had power to decide what government " is the 
 established one in a State," bringing in another power to establish an act al 
 ready done. Not that Congress ascertains what government it, Congress, 
 establishes, but what government is the established one in a State, by the 
 authority, of course, of the people of that State. 
 
 So in the admission of Senators this Senate has no authority to decide 
 what is the Legislature of a State in the sense of controverting the decision 
 of the State on that subject, or in the sense of establishing a Legislature, 
 but the Senate simply recognizes the body established by the State to be 
 her legislature, and the Senate ha.s no other power, In other words, the 
 
SIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WHITINGS. 687 
 
 power of the Senate is one of recognition only of that which exists, of that 
 which is established by another power the State. 
 
 Now, sir, I ask, is there a member on either side of this Chamber who 
 will risk his reputation for veracity, I will not say risk his reputation as a 
 lawyer, I will not say risk his reputation as a judge, as a wise man, but is 
 there any man on either side of this Chamber who will stand up before the 
 country in this high council and risk his reputation for veracity by say 
 ing that the Legislature which sent the sitting member was ever estab 
 lished as the Legislature of Louisiana? Who established it? When was it 
 established ? By what authority was it established ? There is not a mem 
 ber who will rise and assert it. Everybody knows the fact to be the reverse. 
 
 The Packard government, as it is called, had struggled for a while to be 
 established. It was maintained in that struggle solely by the military 
 power. It never succeeded in becoming established, and the moment the 
 military power was withdrawn, that moment the government fell, and this 
 occurred before Kellogg s admission to his seat. What were called the 
 Nicholls and Packard Legislatures were both struggling to be established at 
 the same time. They continued their struggle through the months of Janu 
 ary, February, and March the Packard Legislature sustained by the 
 military, the Nicholls Legislature sustained by the people. When the mili 
 tary was withdrawn by order of the President, that moment the struggle 
 ceased. What struggle ceased? The struggle to be established as the 
 Legislature of the State. Ho\v did it cease ? It ceased by the Packard 
 government failing to be established and by the Nicholls government be 
 coming absolutely established beyond dispute. The Packard Legislature 
 dissolved, disbanded, and the elected portion of it went into the Nicholls 
 Legislature, and that became the undisputed, established Legislature of the 
 State. After that Legislature was thus established, Mr. Spofford was elected 
 Senator to this body. 
 
 There can be no controversy as to the facts of this case. The only Leg 
 islature which in the language of Chief Justice Taney was ever established 
 in Louisiana from the 1st day of January, 1877, was what was known as the 
 Nicholls Legislature. I ask no better authority than that of Chief Justice 
 Taney. Strange to say the Senator from Wisconsin (Mr. Carpenter), after 
 quoting that decision establishing my proposition so directly, uses this very 
 remarkable language in the Senate of the United States. 
 
 I am very sorry I cannot see the Senator from Georgia in his seat, because I should 
 like to see what impression that language would make upon him after the speech he made 
 the other day. 
 
 I had alluded to it in my speech and said that the language of Chief 
 Justice Taney had been misinterpreted and did not mean what the Senator 
 now says it meant. The Senator himself cannot quote that language of Jhiei 
 Justice Taney without leaving out the strongest word of the sentence, be 
 cause to have incorporated that word was a direct overthrow of the Senator s 
 argument, and to leave out that word was a downright misrepresentation oi 
 Chief Justice Taney s decision. 
 
 Another remark made by the Senator from Wisconsin j feel it my 
 to notice. He said : 
 
 Mr. Carpenter. As I understood the Senator from Georgia, the first premise of his 
 speech was that the Senate could not determine which of two rival bodies was 
 lature of a State ; that the State had the power to determine it ; and 
 State changed front on the question and reversed its own decision as 
 
088 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 been its Legislature before, we were bound to follow it and unseat a Senator we had 
 seated according to their own first decision. 
 
 I should not care to notice that, if nobody had made that statement but 
 the Senator from Wisconsin. But other Senators have fallen into the same 
 error. The senator from Ohio (Mr. Pendleton) has made this singular state- 
 ment, and coming from a distinguished lawyer, professing to adhere to a 
 strict construction of the Constitution, it did startle me : 
 
 It has been urged in this connection with much force that the rule is absolute, unvary 
 ing, of universal application ; that the Senate must follow the decision of the political 
 powers of the State as to which body is the Legislature of the State. Doubtless, sueh de 
 cision is of persuasive authority 
 
 Very persuasive 
 
 but I cannot agree that it is conclusive upon the Senate. That decision may be changed 
 That is, the decision of the State may be changed 
 
 A forcible or a peaceable revolution, or a mere change of public opinion in its fitful 
 mood, might reverse a decision once made ; and this latter decision might by the same 
 means be again reversed. Can it be gravely contended that the Senate must follow all 
 these changes and seat, unseat, reseat, and again unseat a man elected by one of these 
 alleged Legislatures? 
 
 But the honorable Senator from South Carolina, the Senator who sits near 
 me (Mr. Butler), made the same mistake. He said : 
 
 But when the Legislature, the senatorial constituency, the electoral body prescribed in 
 the Constitution to appoint a United States Senator, has acted and sent one or more per 
 sons to the Senate with credentials in due form of law, and when the Senate has taken 
 jurisdiction of the person or persons, and, after investigation of the merits of their re 
 spective claims, has seated one of them, the State has no further control over that person 
 as a Senator. 
 
 * 
 
 After a person has been thus seated in the United States Senate, the State cannot six, 
 twelve, or eighteen months afterward say to the Senate, " The Legislature which sent A 
 B to you as my Senator was not my lawful Legislature, and A B is not my representative 
 in your body. This is my lawful Legislature, and it has elected C D. Seat him and 
 turn A B out." 
 
 Each of these Senators has drawn an inference from a plain Constitutional 
 statement for which inference there is not the slightest foundation whatever, 
 and I must be pardoned for saying an inference which ignores the whole 
 character and system of the Government under whicli we live. What ! Be 
 cause we say that the Senate is bound to recognize the Legislature estab 
 lished by the State authority, it follows that when a man has been once 
 seated, who was elected by a recognized Legislature, by an established Leg 
 islature, as often as another Legislature may be established so often must 
 there be a denial by the Senate to the person occupying the seat ! The 
 statement is remarkable. The Constitution says in plain language that a 
 Senator shall be chosen for six years ; and when lie is once chosen by a legal 
 body he is chosen for the Constitutional term of six years. How, then, does 
 it follow, because the State should determine in the first instance what is her 
 Legislature, that a revolution in the State would undo what the State has 
 previously legally done ? That is the error, an error completely answered in 
 my reply to the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Hoar). W T hen what the 
 Senator calls a Constitutional Legislature, " the senatorial constituency," 
 once elects a man, the question of his right to a seat for six years is at 
 end. If it were possible that the Legislature should change a thousand 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 
 
 times in political conviction, that would not change that which was done by 
 a legal Legislature, while that legal Legislature had existence. 
 
 But I said the inference drawn by the Senator from Wisconsin, by the 
 Senator from Ohio, and by the Senator from South Carolina, from the 
 premises I laid down, ignores the whole character of this government. 
 They talk glibly, as though a State could change her Legislature at will. 
 The State can do no such thing. The gentlemen ignore the great fact that 
 in this country we do* not live under a pure democracy ; we live under a Con 
 stitutional form of government, and when a Legislature is once establishc>d 
 in a State legally, and by the authority of the State herself, the whole peo 
 ple of that State cannot change that government except in the method 
 pointed out by the Constitution and laws. If, therefore, in the State of Louisi 
 ana, or any other State, the people establish a Legislature under their Con 
 stitution and laws, they cannot destroy that Legislature at will ; they can 
 not change it at will capriciously every six months, every few days, as 
 these Senators seem to think. They can only change their government in 
 the method pointed out by their Constitution. 
 
 Mr. Butler. The Senator certainly does not desire to misrepresent me ; 
 but he does misrepresent me when he says I claimed any such power or 
 authority for a State. On the contrary, I stated exactly the opposite. Now, 
 the Senator is putting me in the position of claiming that a State can change 
 her Legislature when she pleases. Just exactly the contrary is what I insist 
 upon. 
 
 Mr. Hill. The Senator does not see the point. 
 
 Mr. Butler. I do not think anybody else sees the point made by the 
 Senator. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I do not give way for such remarks. I say this : the Senator 
 has stated that if my position be true the inference he draws follows, which 
 he denies to be correct. He denies the correctness of the inference and 
 therefore undertakes to deny the correctness of the premise that I laid 
 down. That is the argument the Senator from Wisconsin, the Senator from 
 Ohio, and the Senator from South Carolina each made. They deduced their 
 own inference from the premise stated by myself, and because their in 
 ference is absurd then they want to infer that my premise was absurd. 
 There is the folly. I do not wish to misrepresent any Senator. 
 
 I say that if the people of a State establish their own Legislature and 
 the Senate Seats Senators in this body sent by that Legislature, the Senate 
 thereby recognizes the Legislature established by the State. I say the Sen 
 ate has no power to go into a State and recognize a Legislature for itself 
 not established by the State. It is the duty of the Senate to take the Legis 
 lature established by the State ; that is my premise, and the Packard gov 
 ernment never was established by the State of Louisiana. You cannot 
 a representative from that government. The Nicholls government 
 established by the State, and you are compelled to take the representative 
 from that State government. 
 
 Then come Senators and say, " If we admit your premises 
 bound to take the government recognized and established by the 
 that the power of the Senate is one of recognition, then it would foil 
 as often as the State changes we should have to change." I am amazed 
 intelligent gentlemen should attempt to deduce such an inference from * 
 a premise as that ; and then undertake, because their inference 
 to show that the premise is wrong. I say they are not authorize 
 
690 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 such an inference because the inference itself ignores the whole Constitutional 
 character of the Government under which we live. 
 
 How could a State change capriciously when she pleased, how could a 
 State which has a legal Legislature elected for two years change that Legis 
 lature every month or every six months ? We do not live under a pure 
 democracy, we live under a Constitutional Government, and the people can 
 change their government, they can change the Constitution, that is true, but 
 they must change the Constitution in the manner poiilted out by the Con 
 stitution itself and by the laws of the State. A mob cannot change the 
 government, and even when the State changes her government or her 
 Legislature, she does not annul anything that was done legitimately by the 
 government that formerly existed. Everything the government has done 
 while it had legal existence is valid, even though the State by due forms of 
 law may change subsequently her government. My own State, in 1877, 
 called a convention of the people in the manner provided by the Constitu 
 tion and framed a new Constitution, and in that new Constitution, which 
 was submitted to the people and ratified by them, she cut off the terms of 
 the members of the Legislature who had been previously elected ; but that 
 previous Legislature had been legal when it acted. The State changed it, 
 but she did not seek to undo anything that had been done by that Legis 
 lature while it had legal existence. That Legislature sent me to the Senate, 
 and that Legislature made laws, and those laws remain of force. Whatever 
 is done by a valid, legal Legislature remains valid though the State changes 
 her Constitution and orders a new Legislature, even during the time for 
 which the old one was elected. I am amazed that intelligent gentlemen 
 like the Senators from South Carolina, distinguished constitutional lawyers, 
 should draw an inference so absurd from premises so absolutely correct, and 
 then seek to destroy the premises by showing that the inference is absurd. 
 
 That is all on that point. I do not care to notice any other point made 
 by the Senator from Wisconsin. These two points are important because 
 they relate to the Constitutional character of the Government under which 
 we live, and I do not care that such representations, especially when they 
 seem to be taken up by the Senator from Ohio and the Senator from South 
 Carolina and repeated, should go on the record unchallenged. 
 
 Mr. President, I believe, as far as the other side of the Chamber is con 
 cerned in this case, I have done with them ; I have no further quarrel with 
 them, but I am going to have some very plain words with my friends on 
 this side of the House. I understand the gentlemen on the other side ; I 
 understand the logic of their position, and they understand it themselves, 
 and the country will understand it ; but there is one thing I do not under 
 stand, and the country will not understand, on this side of the House. The 
 fentlemen on the other side assume and believe, or pretend to believe and 
 must assume that they do believe that the Packard government was a 
 legal government. They assume to believe that the Packard Legislature 
 that sent the sitting member here was the valid Legislature of the State. 
 How they can believe it, I do not know ; but they do believe it. But that 
 is not the condition of the two honored gentlemen from South Carolina on 
 this floor. They admit that the Packard government was not the legal 
 government ; they admit that the sitting member sits here without author 
 ity of the Legislature of his State ; and 3 r etthey say they are going to vote 
 to continue him here. That is the proposition. I confess my inability to 
 understand it. Only two Senators on this side have thus far committed them- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AXD WRITINGS. 691 
 
 I 
 
 selves to that proposition on the record, and as I do not wish to misrepresent 
 them in the slightest degree, for they know the high esteem I have for them 
 I wish to quote exactly what they said. The Senator from South Carolina 
 ( Mr. Hampton) who spoke first, speaking of the Nicholls government, used 
 this language : 
 
 That this government was the legal one I have never for a moment doubted nor do 
 I entertain a doubt that the court would have so decided had a proper issue been brought 
 before it for its decision on this point. 
 
 The Senator puts on record that he has never doubted that the Nicholls 
 government w^as the legal government of Louisiana, and of course, there 
 fore, it follows that the Packard government was not the legal government, 
 for there could not be two legal governments in Louisiana at the same time. 
 The other Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Butler) said this : 
 
 I tell that Senator 
 Addressing the Senator from Alabama (Mr. Pryor) 
 
 frankly, that as an individual I do not believe the Packard Legislature was a lawful Leg 
 islature; but unfortunately this Senate decided, by a majority of its members, that it iras 
 a lawful Legislature, and made this decision before he and I became members of this 
 body. 
 
 Now, I want to know how it is that gentlemen can get up here and put 
 on record a formal admission that a man is sitting in this body who was 
 never elected by a legal Legislature, and yet have such a lawful title to sit 
 here that they will not vote to exclude him. 
 
 Mr. Hutler. I ask the Senator this question : he expresses some sur 
 prise that I should admit that in my individual judgment the Packard 
 Legislature was an illegal body. I repeat that opinion, that it was illegal. 
 I went on further to say that that, in my judgment, was not the question 
 before the Senate ; that a majority of the Senate had decided it was a legal 
 Legislature. Now, Mr. President, if that is so astounding to the Senator, 
 w r ill he answer me. this question : Does he believe the judgment of the elec 
 toral commission, which declared the present Chief Executive of this coun 
 try to be the President of the United States, a lawful judgment? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I do not believe that was a correct judgment ; I will not say 
 it was not a lawful judgment. Yes, I think it was lawful, but I deny that 
 it was a correct judgment. But the Senator in all this debate must keep 
 in mind the distinction between an erroneous decision and an unconstitutional 
 decision. The first is only voidable, the latter is absolutely void. 
 
 Mr. Sutler. Let me ask another question : Does he believe that the 
 judgments of the Supreme Court in the recent cases from Virginia and Ten 
 nessee are right and proper ? Will he set them aside ? 
 
 Mr. Hill I do not think they are right and proper, and whenever 
 where I have the authority to pass upon them I will say under my oath 
 that they are not right and proper. 
 
 Mr. Butler. I. will ask the Senator if he has not had it in his power, 
 ever since the 4th of March, 1877, to have passed upon the title of Mr. 
 Hayes as President of the United States ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Never, except once. I was a member of the House when 
 the decision of the electoral commission was submitted to the House, and 
 voted against it. 
 
 Mr. Hampton. Way I interrupt the Senator a moment 
 stand him to say that he voted against the bill for the electoral commis! 
 
692 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I did not. I said I voted against the correctness of the 
 decision by the electoral commission. 
 
 Mr. Hampton.- -W as the Senator opposed to the electoral commission? 
 
 Mr. Jif III.- -That has nothing to do with this question. I will come to 
 that. I know it has been stated by the honorable Senator that the electoral 
 commission had made a decision to which we had all submitted. Certainly 
 the electoral commission, after they had been clothed with authority by law 
 to make it, did make a decision 
 
 Mr. Butler. Then I would ask the honorable Senator if the Senate of 
 the United States was not clothed by authority of law with the right to 
 make the decision which it made in 1877 ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Let me attend to the other question first. 
 
 Mr. Butler. It is entirely germane to the question I had just pro 
 pounded. 
 
 Mr. Hill. The Senator does not allow me to get through with one ques 
 tion. I go back and repeat that the electoral commission made a decision 
 by authority of an act of Congress which clothed them with the power to 
 make that decision. I do not believe that decision was correct, and I did 
 not feel bound to vote for it because the electoral commission had decided 
 it. The House of Representatives and the Senate in joint convention 
 accepted by a majority vote that advisory decision and they declared Mr. 
 Hayes President of the United States. It was not the electoral commission 
 that did it. In determining that question I had the exquisite pleasure of 
 voting against the decision of the electoral commission. Now the Senator 
 asks whether we have had authority to review that since. By no means. 
 That is the very point. The jurisdiction that determined whether Hayes 
 was elected President or not was the two Houses of Congress of the Forty- 
 fourth Congress. They dissolved, by operation of law, on the 4th of March, 
 1877, and no other tribunal after that Congress disbanded has been clothed 
 
 J ^j 
 
 with authority to pass on that question. 
 
 Mr. Butler. I should like to ask the honorable Senator if, when the 
 electoral law was drafted, the reservation was not distinctly made that it 
 should not preclude the right to inquire into the regularity of that proceed 
 ing. As I remember the proceedings it was distinctly reserved, and the 
 honorable Senator could at any moment have moved in the matter. 
 
 Mr. Hill. The Senator is mistaken again. There could be no right 
 reserved to exercise a jurisdiction that did not exist by the Constitution ; 
 but the right was reserved by the bill creating the electoral commission that 
 the courts might exercise whatever power they had on the subject. That 
 was all. There was no new power given. There was no power given to 
 the courts which they did not before have. The truth is it was a snare. 
 It reserved no power. The courts could not review a political decision 
 rendered by the joint convention of the two Houses. 
 
 Mr. Butler. I understand the honorable Senator to say he voted for a 
 snare ; he voted for the electoral bill ; he voted with the understanding that 
 
 the Supreme Court or some other tribunal had the right to review their 
 proceedings. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I did not vote for the bill because that provision was in it, 
 but in spite of it. That provision was only a nullity. The Senator is ex 
 ceedingly captious to-day. I voted for the bill for other reasons. I repeat 
 there was no power in the courts to review and reverse a decision rendered 
 by the two Houses of Congress in counting the presidential vote. If there 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 
 
 was a power to review that decision would the Senator get up here and say, 
 " I believe that decision was unconstitutional, and yet because it had been 
 so once decided I was bound by it ? I would continue in force an unconsti 
 tutional decision ? Surely he would not ; and yet the Senator comes here 
 and says, " Oh, here is a man sitting in this body who was not chosen by the 
 Legislature of the State, and yet because the Senate once seated him, though 
 his opinion is that he has no right here under the Constitution, for he 
 denies his right, yet since the decision of the Senate he will vote for retain 
 ing him." 
 
 Mr. Butler. --Tk&t, is not a fair statement of my position. I vote to 
 retain him here, because under my opinion of the powers of this body it 
 cannot unseat him after having seated him upon the merits of his case. 
 That is the point. 
 
 Mr. Hill. That has been stated. Of course the Senator means by his 
 statement that he recognizes a power in the Senate superior to that of the 
 Constitution ; and that, with all due deference to my friend, is the startling 
 feature of his position. The Constitution says that no man shall sit here 
 who wa not chosen by the Legislature ; the Constitution says that this 
 Senate shall be composed of two Senators from each State chosen by the 
 Legislature thereof. That is what the Constitution says. 
 
 Mr. Butler. But, Mr. President, in pursuance of that, the Senate has 
 once said that he was sent here by a proper Legislature, and I say that in 
 my judgment we have not the power to oust him. I do not take the ground 
 the Senator puts me upon, that I am voting to retain him in his seat. There 
 is a great deal of difference between voting to retain him in his seat arid 
 voting to oust him. I say I do not believe we have the Constitutional power 
 to oust him after the decision in his favor. 
 
 Mr. Hill. The Senator will not be able to escape. I am not trying to 
 do the Senator injustice. I have the kindest feelings personally for him. 
 He will not be able to escape. He is asked to vote for a resolution from 
 the Committee on Privileges and Elections, which simply says that Kellogg 
 was not chosen by the Legislature of Louisiana. 
 
 Mr. Butler. If the Senator thinks I desire to escape the result of any 
 action of mine, he is very much mistaken ; but I undertake to say that 
 before I acknowledge myself convicted I will select some other tribunal 
 than his own unsupported opinion. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Well, Mr. President, I am not condemning the Senator, 
 am only condemning his position, and it is from the logic of the argument 
 he cannot escape. 
 
 Here, I repeat, is a resolution reported from the Committee on Privi 
 leges and Elections, simply declaring as a fact that the sitting member was 
 not chosen by the Legislature of Louisiana. The Senator admits that 
 he was not*chosen by the Legislature of Louisiana, and yet says he will 
 vote against that resolution, and he says he will vote against that reso 
 lution because the Senate once seated him, and thus he admits that 
 Senate has the power to seat a man in this Senate with a legal title who 
 was not chosen by the Legislature ! Why, does my friend support 
 Constitution according to the view of a majority of the Senate as to wha 
 the Constitution is ? When he swears to support the Constitution, he 
 he will support the Constitution as he understands it, not as somebody 
 understands it. Now, if the Senator will take the position the gent! 
 on the other side take, that the Packard government was the lawful gove 
 
694 SENATOR 13. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 ment, however absurd I think that might be in point of fact, I could under 
 stand him. I understand them. 
 
 Mr. Butler. I do not support the Constitution as the majority of those 
 on the other side understand it ; nor do I support it as the Senator from 
 Georgia understands it, by any means. I should be very sorry to base my 
 judgment on either construction of that instrument. I support it as I un 
 derstand it, not as the Senator interprets it, nor as the majority of those on 
 the other side interpret it. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Let us take the Senator s support of it as he understands it. 
 He understands it that Kellogg was not chosen by the Legislature of 
 Louisiana. 
 
 Mr. Bailer. That is my individual opinion. 
 
 Mr. Hill. And he will not vote according to his individual opinion. 
 
 Mr. Butler. I say if this were a question brought up for the first time, 
 my vote would be very different. I say that if I had to pronounce judg 
 ment in the first instance, I should vote very differently. If the Senator had 
 made his speech in the first instance, if he had brought in this resolution in 
 the first instance, it would have presented a very different issue ;. but the 
 Senator is making a speech three years after, which would have been very 
 appropriate three years ago. I think he jumps entirely over the main ques 
 tion ; he dodges the main question, has dodged it from the beginning. He 
 has gone clear over it. There is the difference between the Senator and 
 myself. I am discussing the issue before the Senate ; he is discussing the 
 issue which was before the Senate three years ago ; and hence I say I chose 
 not to select his interpretation of the Constitution to-day. I think his posi 
 tion would have been entirely correct three years ago, when this question 
 was first considered. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I admit that the Senator says that the reason he does not vote 
 to unseat the sitting member is because the Senate has previously decided to 
 admit him on the merits. Then he votes to keep a man here whom he 
 admits was not chosen by the Legislature, because the Senate has previously 
 said so. Can the Senate change the Constitution ? Was the Constitution 
 different three years ago from what it is now ? Did he not say a moment 
 ago that he voted according to his own convictions of what the Constitution 
 was, and not according to what the Senate said ? Arid yet he turns around 
 now and reminds me that he votes so because the Senate has said so. What I 
 am bringing my friend to is the point that he who believes that this man 
 was not chosen by the Legislature cannot be protected in voting to keep 
 him one hour because the majority of the Senate once thought otherwise. 
 The Senate has no power of absolution. It cannot change the Constitution. 
 You must vote on a Constitutional question, not once, but always, according 
 to your own convictions. It will never do to establish the doctrine that a 
 man is relieved from his own judgment and convictions of what is a Consti 
 tutional provision by any vote of the Senate. You can do this and it is your 
 duty to respect the decisions of the Senate thus far : when a majority have 
 admitted a man here that we believe has no authority from a State to sit 
 here, we of course have to recognize him as a Senator, we have to recognize 
 the fact that lie draws the pay and has an actual seat ; he is a Senator de 
 facto ; but whenever opportunity is presented for us to vote on the question 
 as to whether he has a title to sit here, it is our duty then to rescue the Con 
 stitution from continued violation. Because a State has been denied her 
 equal suffrage in this Senate for a portion of a term is no^reason she should 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. C95 
 
 be denied that equal suffrage the whole of the term. The State alone can 
 give title to a seat in this body. A resolution by the Senate seeking to give 
 a title over the State is void. If the Senator would have voted three years 
 ago to exclude Kellogg because the State had given him no title to sit 
 here, he is equally bound now to exclude him because the State has not yet 
 given him a title, and has sent us her most solemn protest against allowing 
 Kellogg to sit here against her will and without her authority. This is the 
 logic the Senator can never escape. 
 
 Mr. President, I assure the Senator that if I endeavor to state the ar^u- 
 ment strongly it is not from personal unkindness. I desire to strip the point 
 naked so that all the world can see it. My friend has made a mistake, a 
 grievous mistake ; it is a dangerous mistake ; it is a mistake, I respectfully 
 submit, to which he cannot adhere, when he says that he will vote to con 
 tinue a man in this body for any cause in the heavens above or in the earth 
 beneath, who he admits has not been chosen by the Legislature of his State. 
 If it was the last hour of his six years term and the question was up if he 
 should remain here for that hour, it would be our duty under the Constitu 
 tion to say, "no," because the Constitution is imperative that this Senate shall 
 be composed of persons chosen by the Legislatures, and you cannot allow 
 any man to sit here if you believe he was not chosen by the Legislature. 
 
 It is not a question of discretion ; it is a question of duty. The Consti 
 tution, not a resolution of the Senate, is the supreme law. It is the Consti 
 tution we swear to support. We cannot keep that oath and support a reso 
 lution or continue a resolution which we admit was unconstitutionally 
 adopted. 
 
 Mr. Butler. Will the Senator allow me to interrupt him now ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Butler. He says I have made a great mistake, one from which I 
 cannot escape. 
 
 Mr. Hill. That is my opinion. 
 
 Mr. Butler. He will pardon me for saying that I think he has made a 
 most grevious mistake in thrusting this discussion upon the Senate at this 
 time, one which he cannot persist in with safety. And when the Senator 
 threatens me with making this issue sharp before the country, I desire to say 
 to him that he may make it just as sharp as he pleases, and I will meet 
 it whenever and wherever and at whatever time the Senator makes it. Let 
 me say that to him. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I wish to say distinctly to the Senator that I decline to yield 
 any more for the purpose of such interruptions as that. 
 
 Mr. Butler. Well, Mr. President- 
 
 Mr. Hill. I decline to yield further. 
 
 Mr. Butler. I ask the Senator, then, not to misrepresent and put me in 
 a false position. 
 
 "nil ill ll-llO lllitlJ Ilcl . JL Hill llUt tlJ.1 UiVLirillll!^ UUV J^ 
 
 wish to strip the issue naked I I want to make the Senator feel as I feel, if 
 I can, because I want nothing in the world but the truth shown and the 
 right to triumph. That the Senator is honest in his opinion I do not ques 
 tion a moment. I am not assailing his motive ; I am simply discussing his 
 position, and I will illustrate it now further. 
 
69G SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 This same clause says : 
 
 The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, 
 chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six years ; and each Senator shall have one vote. 
 
 Now there are four things required to organize the Senate under that 
 clause : (1) that each State shall have two Senators ; (2) that they shall be 
 chosen by the Legislature ; (3) that they shall be chosen for a term of six 
 years, and (4) that each Senator shall have one vote. One of these provisions 
 is just as imperative as the other. If the Senator can say that because the Sen 
 ate has once seated this man that it will justify him in keeping him here, 
 though he believes he was not chosen by the Legislature, then if the Senate 
 should seat a man for three years, for twelve years, for twenty years, for life, 
 the Senator would be bound to sustain that according to his position. If the 
 Senate should override that other clause, which says that each State shall have 
 two Senators, and give each State three Senators, or only one Senator, as in this 
 very case, would the Senator feel bound to sustain that resolution ? If the 
 Senate should say that each Senator should have two votes, or that each 
 Senator should have half a vote, would the fact that this Senate so overrode 
 the Constitution be obligatory? Has the decision of this Senate superior 
 power and authority to the Constitution of the country ? And yet it is just 
 as imperative that the Senator shall be chosen by the Legislature as that he 
 shall be chosen for six years, as that each Senator shall have one vote. If 
 the Senator believed that the body which chose Kellogg was the Legislature 
 as a matter of fact, established by the State, that would change the case, I 
 admit. If he took the position the gentlemen on the other side take, that 
 this was a legal Legislature, that would make a difference, I admit. But 
 when the Senator concedes that he has no doubt that this man was not chosen 
 by the Legislature, then he is compelled to yield the whole position, because 
 he must support the Constitution, not as the old majority say, not as this 
 majority say, not as any man says the Constitution is, but as the Senator 
 himself believes it to be. 
 
 I leave this branch of the subject. 
 
 There is another thing I do not understand, and it is this : If Senators 
 believe, if this side of the Chamber believe, that when the Senate passed 
 judgment in 1877, that judgment was final and conclusive, and that it is not 
 competent for the Senate to review and examine it, pray tell me why did you 
 order this investigation ? These gentlemen talk here as though it was this 
 committee that ordered this investigation ; as though this committee is press 
 ing this thing unnecessarily ; and my friend says he thinks I am unneces 
 sarily thrusting this discussion before the country. What am I doing ? 
 What is the committee doing ? Nothing on earth but obeying the instruc 
 tions of the Senate. The Senate ordered the committee to make this inves 
 tigation ; the Senate ordered us to make this report ; and because we made 
 the investigation, and made the report under the orders of the Senate, gentle 
 men arraign us. I do not wish to misrepresent Senators on that subject. 
 This very question was decided on the 7th day of May, 1879. A resolu 
 tion was then adopted, and after elaborate debate, instructing the Committee 
 on Privileges and Elections to take testimony, to make this investigation. 
 
 Mr. J3utler.--Then I understand the resolution did not order the com 
 mittee to make report. 
 
 Jfr. Hill. Certainly ; every committee is to make report when it makes 
 investigation. We have to investigate first. 
 
7/7.9 LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 697 
 
 Mr. flutter. --Take testimony. 
 
 Mr. Hill.- -We had, when we took testimony, to act on it. 
 
 Mr. Ifeitfer.- -That is the question. 
 
 Mr. Hill.- -No question at all. The very object of ordering an investi 
 gation is to have a report. While that resolution was pending, the Senator 
 from Vermont (Mr. Edmunds) offered an amendment to allow the inquiry 
 to go- 4 
 
 So far only as relates to any charge in said petition of personal misconduct on the part 
 of said Kellogg which may render him liable to expulsion or censure. 
 
 And the Senate voted that down, and the honorable junior Senator from 
 South Carolina voted in the negative. Then, again, the Senator from New 
 York (Mr. Conkling) offered this amendment : 
 
 Provided, That the inquiry hereby authorized shall be confined to the matters alleged 
 in the memorial of Mr. Spofford to be new and different from those covered by the 
 previous inquiry. 
 
 There was an admission that there were matters in the memorial which 
 never had been before the Senate hitherto, and the Senator from New York 
 moved to confine the new investigation to them, and this Senate voted that 
 down, and the honorable junior Senator from South Carolina voted also 
 against it. 
 
 Again the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Edmunds) moved another amend 
 ment : 
 
 Resolved, That, recognizing the validity and finality of the previous action of the 
 Senate in the premises, the Committee on Privileges and Elections, to which was referred 
 the memorial of Henry M. Spofford, etc. 
 
 Recognizing the finality of the former decision, says Mr. Edmunds, and 
 we voted that down ; the honorable junior Senator from South Carolina again 
 voting in the negative. Then the Senator from New York (Mr. Conkling) 
 offered another amendment : 
 
 Provided, That such questions in said case as were fully considered and adjudged in 
 the former investigation shall not be reopened under this resolution. 
 
 And they voted that down, the honorable junior Senator from South 
 Carolina (Mr. Hampton) voting against it. 
 
 Mr. flutter. Will the honorable Senator now read the resolution under 
 which the committee did act. 
 
 Mr. Hill. That is not before me, but I will read the substitute offered. 
 
 Mr. flutter. I would like to have the resolution under which the com 
 mittee acted read. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I will find that presently. Here was the substitute offeree 
 by the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Hoar) to the resolution reportec 
 by the committee : 
 
 Strike out all of the resolution and insert the following : 
 
 "Whereas, on the 25th day of October, 1877, the Senate unanimously adopt 
 following resolution : 
 
 11 Resolved, That the Committee on Privileges and Elections on the conte 
 William Pitt Kellogg and Henry M. Spofford, claiming seats as Senator 
 of Louisiana, and whose credentials have been referred to such committee be autho 
 to send for persons and papers and administer oaths, with a view of enabling d c 
 mittee to determine and report upon the title respectively on the merit 
 contestants to a seat in the Senate. O j lhp fnl . 
 
 " And whereas, on the 26th day of November, 1877, said committee report, 
 lowing resolution : 
 
698 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 " Resolved, That "William Pitt Kellogg is, upon the merits of the case, entitled to a 
 seat in the Senate of the United States from the State of Louisiana for the term of six 
 years, commencing on the 4th of March, 1877, and that he be admitted thereto upon taking 
 the proper oath. 
 
 " Resolved, That Henry M. Spofford is not entitled to a seat in the Senate of the 
 United States. 
 
 " And on the 30th day of November, 1877, the Senate adopted said resolutions ; and 
 thereafter, on the same day, said Kellogg was duly admitted to take the oath, and took 
 his seat as a Senator from said State for said term : Therefore, 
 
 "Resolved, That said proceedings are final and conclusive upon the right of said 
 Kellogg arid the claim of said Spofford to such seat for said term." 
 
 And that the honorable Senator from South Carolina, the junior Senator, 
 voted against, and that resolution the Senate voted down. Six times in one 
 
 ^J 7 
 
 day this Democratic Senate solemnly voted that this question was not finally 
 passed upon. Six times in one day you solemnly voted it was not res adjudi- 
 cata, and should be reviewed. If one vote of the Senate by a Republican 
 majority in 1877 was so solemn as to justify the Senate in keeping a man in 
 this seat who was not chosen by the Legislature, pray tell me how much 
 respect would the Senator have for six votes of the Seriate passed on the 
 same day that the case was not res adjudicata f 
 
 My friend (Mr. Vance) calls attention to the seventh vote : 
 
 Mr. Hoar. I move to amend the original resolution by adding thereto the following : 
 " And said committee was further instructed to inquire and report whether bribery 
 
 or other corrupt or unlawful means were resorted to to secure the alleged election of the 
 
 memorialist." 
 
 And that was adopted unanimously. Republicans and Democrats wanted 
 that testimony. Seven times, then, the Senate solemnly voted that this case 
 was not precluded either as to Kellogg or as to Spofford. Here is the reso 
 lution adopted by the Senate, and see how imperative it is. You voted seven 
 times to reopen the case, and then you voted to pass this resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That the Committee on Privileges and Elections, to which was referred the 
 memorial of Henry M. Spofford, praying permission to produce evidence relating to the 
 right of Hon. William Pitt Kellogg to the seat in the Senate held by him from the State 
 of. Louisiana, and in support of the claim of said petitioner thereto, be, and said commit 
 tee is hereby instructed to inquire into the matters alleged in said petition ; and for that 
 purpose said committee is authorized and empowered to send for persons and papers, ad 
 minister oaths, and do all such other acts as are necessary and proper for a full and fair 
 investigation in the premises. 
 
 Mr. Butler. Now, I should like to ask the honorable Senator if that is 
 not the resolution under which the committee acted ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Certainly. 
 
 Mr. Butler. I ask him, then, if the seven propositions which he has 
 said we voted down, thereby asserting that the question was not res adjudi 
 cata, Avere not amendments to that resolution ? 
 
 Mr. //^.Certainly. 
 
 Mr. Butler. Were they not amendments offered by Senators on the op 
 posite side of the Chamber for the purpose of defeating the resolution ? I 
 ask the Senator that. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I do not know what the purpose was. They seemed intended 
 to limit the investigation to new matter only. 
 
 Mr. Butler. I ask the honorable Senator if they were not offered by 
 what is called the opposition in the Senate ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I read that, and stated the name of the Senator moving each 
 amendment. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPKECIIES, AND WRITINGS. 699 
 
 Mr. Butler.- -Then I ask the honorable Senator if he does not know that 
 on almost every bill which the opposition attempt to defeat they submit 
 amendments for the purpose of defeating it and which commit the Senate 
 to nothing when voted down? 
 
 Mr. Hill. The Republicans insisted that the vote of 1877 was final and 
 could not be reviewed, and offered amendments to carry out their views. 
 The Democrats insisted that the case could be reviewed, testimony could be 
 taken, and voted down all the amendments seeking to deny or limit the in 
 vestigation. 
 
 The amendment submitted by way of substitute could not have been for 
 the purpose of defeating the motion except by declaring that the case was 
 
 4-w -v . . I v T- f\ *"1 1 11 y^i 1 y-V *- 4- *-v y~l f\ *- y-J -I- -4- 1-* *-v ^k - ^ *~* A- n l^. ^. _1 * _ .1*1* T . 
 
 question has no relevancy whatever. They 
 Senate had done in 1877 was final and could not be reviewed, and if an in 
 vestigation was ordered they sought by every means to limit the investiga 
 tion to new matter. The Senate voted it down every time and reopened 
 the case to full investigation, and when the proposition was distinctly made 
 by the Senator from Massachusetts by his substitute, that the whole matter 
 was final and conclusive, the gentlemen on this side said no. Now, read that 
 in the light of the declarations made by the honorable Senator. Here is 
 what the junior Senator from South Carolina said : 
 
 These authorities which I have cited are conclusive to my mind that in passing on 
 election cases the Senate acts in a judicial capacity, and that when it decides such a case 
 on its merits its action is final ; it does not possess the lawful power to reverse or even re 
 view its action. 
 
 And yet seven times on the 7th of May, 1879, the honorable Senator who 
 says that, voted that it should be reviewed, voted that it was not final, and 
 ordered this committee to make this investigation. And here is the other, 
 the senior Senator s statement : 
 
 Second. The Senate expended its power, under that provision of the Constitution 
 which makes it the " judge of the elections, returns, and qualifications of its members/ 
 when it confirmed the judgment of a majoritj T of the Committee on Privileges and 
 tions, giving the seat to the sitting member, no motion to reconsider having been entered 
 at the time of the rendition or at any other time. 
 
 The idea that the Senate s voting once on the question expended its 
 power ! Even courts are not limited to one judgment or trial. Then why 
 did the Senate order the investigation a second time ? Why did the Senate 
 order the committee to do an unconstitutional thing ! I acquit the gentle 
 men on the other side. They voted that it was final ; they voted against 
 this investigation ; but every Democrat who voted on this side of 
 Chamber voted to order a reinvestigation, voted that it was not final, voted 
 
 final, why did you order this investigation . 
 
 Senator that the Senate had no power even to review ; if you believed, i 
 
 language of the honorable senior Senator, that the power to review 
 
 amine was exhausted by the first decision, why did you order 
 
 view ? Why did you order an unconstitutional thing : \V h y di 
 
 order the expenditure of thousands of dollars from the public 
 
 do what you say we have no power to do ? Why did you order 
 
700 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 mittee to do the most unpleasant work that a committee ever had to perform? 
 Why did you order this committee to be stenched in a den of skunks for 
 months in the execution of an unconstitutional and unnecessary order ? 
 Such corruption, sucli debased perjury, such bribery, such effrontery, such 
 degradation of human nature in every shape and form, I never imagined 
 could exist as I saw in this investigation. We obeyed your order ; we 
 spent thousands of dollars of the public money in executing the order ; we 
 stood submissive under the shafts of abuse and calumny, some of us pelted 
 with filth, to execute your order ; and when we had passed through it all, 
 and when the money was expended, and when we had executed your instruc 
 tions faithfully and we come here to report to you, you rise up in your places 
 and most graciously say, " We do not think you had any right to do it ; we 
 do not think it was Constitutional to review what was done in 1877." 
 
 Mr. Hampton. May I interrupt the Senator for a moment ? I am not 
 disposed to interrupt him at all. 
 
 The Presiding Officer (Mr. Johnston in the chair). Does the Senator 
 from Georgia yield ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Hampton. It is simply in reference to my vote authorizing the 
 committee to act. It is well known, I suppose, to the Senator from Georgia,- 
 it certainly is to very many other members of that committee and to very 
 many others in the Senate, there were a good many Senators who were op 
 posed to having this committee authorized to make this investigation. I 
 was one of that number, and I said at the time that if it was proposed to re 
 open the case I would not vote for the committee, and a good many others 
 of my colleagues said the same thing. We were assured by some of the 
 members of the committee that it was not the intention to reopen it ; but 
 the committee, an honorable committee of this body, came in and asked per 
 mission to collect evidence. We thought that a proper respect to them 
 made it mandatory upon us that we should allow the committee to investi 
 gate ; and I voted then with the committee, voted at the request of the 
 committee, but I did not feel that I was committing myself in advance to 
 resolutions, and in fact I did not think the committee was authorized to 
 bring in such resolutions as they did, and without any consultation with the 
 majority of the Senate. 
 
 Mr. Bailey. Will the Senator from Georgia give me one moment ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Certainly. 
 
 Mr. Bailey. In view of what has been said by the Senator from South 
 Carolina, as one of that committee, I feel constrained by a sense of justice 
 to myself to say that at the time this question was submitted to the com 
 mittee I myself had formed no opinion upon the main question, which, as I 
 conceived, was presented to the committee, and is f .o-day presented to the 
 Senate, namely, whether the former so-called adjudication by the Senate was 
 binding and conclusive. I expressed no opinion upon the question, for I had 
 then really formed no opinion. I beg leave to say for one of that committee 
 that I gave no such assurances as have been intimated by the Senator from 
 South Carolina, nor do I remember that any other member of the committee 
 gave to the Senator such assurances, either in public or in private. I feel 
 constrained to say this much in justification of myself from what might 
 seem to be an implied charge of bad faith made by the Senator from South 
 Carolina. 
 
 Mr. Hampton. Mr. President 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 701 
 
 Mr. Bailey. Qt course I do not understand the Senator to refer to me 
 personally, for my relations with him are exceedingly pleasant. 
 
 Mr. Hampton.- -Nor to the committee, in the slightest degree. I was 
 only saying what I had learned privately and what had influenced my action 
 in regard to this matter ; not that the committee had made any pledge, not 
 that the members of it individually or privately had done it, but the under 
 standing left upon my mind was that the committee desired to take evi 
 dence and collect facts, and bring all this evidence before the Senate, and 
 leave it to the Senate then to determine whether they should take any other 
 final action or review the action that had been taken before. 
 
 Mr. Hill.- -That last statement is correct to this extent : we all agreed 
 that if there was no evidence to be taken other than that which was before 
 the Senate in 1877, it would then be a question whether we would disturb 
 or change the former judgment, especially as far as the regularity of the 
 election was concerned ; but it was alleged that evidence was suppressed in 
 1877 ; it was alleged that new evidence had been discovered since 1877. 
 Whether you would reverse that judgment, therefore, on the ground of 
 new evidence would depend upon the evidence when it came in. But the 
 position of the Senator now is that no amount of evidence would justify a 
 review. The position of the two Senators from South Carolina is that under 
 the decision of 1877 the Senate had exhausted its power of review and no 
 amount of evidence would be sufficient. If no amount of evidence would 
 be sufficient why take any evidence at all ? If the Senator voted contrary 
 
 / t/ J 
 
 to his views of the power of the Senate in 1879, when he voted against this 
 amendment and to order this investigation to accommodate the committee 
 or because the committee requested it, I wish he would vote on the request 
 of the committee again. But the Senator has no right to say he voted on 
 the request of the committee. The committee requested nothing. The 
 committee believed the investigation was within the power of the Senate and 
 so reported. The Senate agreed with the committee and ordered the in 
 vestigation. The committee acted solely from a sense of duty. 
 
 Mr. President, there is no escape logically from the position of Senators 
 who hold to the doctrine that when the Senate had decided this question 
 once it was decided finally and forever. If there is no power of review they 
 had no right to order this investigation. 
 
 I want to say one more thing : that gentlemen not only ordered this in 
 vestigation andV.ompelledjthis committee to take this testimony, but now 
 some of our friends have made very strange mistakes as to what the testi 
 mony is. I want to call the attention of the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Pendk- 
 ton)," who took generally a more correct view of the law of this case, and who 
 escapes the dilemma into which I think the gentlemen from South Carolina 
 have placed themselves, by admitting the power of review, but he says the 
 new testimony is not sufficient. I want to call his attention to the fact th.it 
 he made a most remarkable mistake, and a mistake of fact that ![ think the 
 Senator owes it to himself to correct. I will call his attention to it and then 
 he can examine it at his leisure. That Senator in his speech makes this 
 statement : 
 
 In this case it has been asserted in every form of phrase and expression that the State 
 government of Louisiana was fraudulently in power, inaugurated and siistaii 
 and fraud, by false returns of illegal returning hoards ; that the Legi 
 elected Kellogg was never elected ; that it never had a quorum ; that 
 bribed ; that IT fell of its own inherent lifelessness, leaving no trace except 
 
702 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 election. But all these allegations every one of them whether of the contestant or the 
 committee, tending to impeach the validity of the State government as such, or to ques 
 tion the complete organization of the Legislature, or affecting its action, were made be 
 fore the Senate in 1877. 
 
 The Senator is vastly mistaken ; there was nothing before the Senate in 
 1877, behind the certificates of the returning board, as to the legality of the 
 Legislature. The very evidence that Mr. Spofford proposed to introduce in 
 1877, which was excluded, was the evidence attacking the fairness of the re- 
 turning-board certificates. The Senate in 1877 refused to go behind those 
 certificates. Mr. Spofford offered to show the complicity of Kellogg in 
 those frauds, but they rejected the evidence as immaterial. The Senator 
 speaks of the charge of bribery, and says it was before the Senate in 1877. 
 There was no such charge in 1877. There is none in the record ; there was 
 none before the committee ; there was not a particle of evidence taken on 
 the subject. Not a particle of evidence was taken on the subject of the 
 want of a quorum, assuming the returning-board certificates to be correct. 
 Now, we have taken evidence to show that there was a false quorum ; that 
 in truth there was no quorum ; that absent members were recorded who 
 were not present, and that absent members were personated. All that is 
 new ; none of it Avas before the Senate in 1877. 
 
 I tell the Senator if he will look at the question he will find that we were 
 shut up in 1877 to the returning-board credentials. I think it but fair to ask 
 the Senator to review his conclusion on the evidence, and I take the liberty 
 of referring him to the able argument of the Senator from Arkansas (Mr. 
 Garland) on this subject of the new evidence. The record abundantly 
 shows that the Republicans, including Kellogg, admitted the bribery charge 
 was a new one. 
 
 The Senator quotes me in his speech very unjustly, but I know he did 
 not intend to do me injustice. He quotes remarks made by me to show that 
 these questions were all passed upon by the Senate in 1877. I was showing 
 in the remarks which the honorable Senator quotes, and in the speech which 
 I then made from which he quotes, what we sought to get before the com 
 mittee, and what we tried to get before the Senate the evidence of frauds 
 in the returning board and of Kellogg s personal complicity in those frauds, 
 but the evidence was rejected by the committee and rejected by the Senate. 
 Therefore it was never before the Senate. I respectfully ask the Senator to 
 review his position upon that subject, and also the evidence of the want of a 
 quorum, which in my judgment, is conclusive. 
 
 Mr. President, I had intended to say what I have said in a very few 
 brief words and to devote most of the remarks I intended to make to a very 
 singular assault made upon me by the Senators from South Carolina, r Why 
 it was made I shall not inquire. But the senators are not only content to 
 take the position which they have taken, and which they no doubt hon 
 estly believe to be a correct position, they have not only been content 
 to give their reasons for it to the Senate as they have done, but they have 
 taken occasion, after all the tribulations through which this committee have 
 passed, to turn upon the committee rather savagely, and to select me, as a 
 member of the committee, upon whom to expend their polished satire and 
 splenetic rhetoric. Certainly nothing has ever entered my thoughts incon 
 sistent with the strictest personal honor on the part of the Senators from 
 South Carolina. There were no two Senators on this floor for whom I had 
 higher personal regard. There is no State represented on this floor which I 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 70:* 
 
 could less desire to injure. It was perhaps because I felt the interest in the 
 State and in the honorable gentlemen personally which has brought me into 
 the trouble with them. I have felt, indeed I know, when friends differ the 
 best remedy is plain language, and plain language I shall use, assuring the 
 gentlemen that I intend nothing personally offensive to them. If I did not 
 regard them as I do personally, I should not notice what they have said. I 
 do not respect a man who require&ane to notice the vilest calumnies of men 
 who stand covered with bribery and perjury before the country, but when 
 honorable gentlemen like the Senators from South Carolina, standing justly 
 high in the confidence of their State and justly high in my own confidence, 
 go out of their way to give a meaning to language used by me, which is not 
 justified, and to make their own misconstruction of it the occasion fora per 
 sonal assault, they must excuse me if I come back in proper tone and proper 
 temper to give that proper attention demanded by my own self-respect. 
 
 Sir, simultaneously with my introduction into" the* Senate almost and my 
 assignment to the Committee on Privileges and Elections, the two cases from 
 South Carolina and Louisiana were referred to the committee for investiga 
 tion. The first work I was called on officially to do in committee was to 
 examine those cases. I did so honestty and earnestly. I say to the Senator 
 from South Carolina (and I believe I speak the judgment of every Demo 
 crat on that committee), we had much greater trouble with his creden 
 tials than we had with those of Mr. Spofford. We did seriously doubt, 
 at one time, whether he had been legally elected, because there was doubt 
 as to whether there was any Senate at all to the body of the Legislature 
 which elected him. But we were satisfied that he represented the will of his 
 State, and the State of South Carolina had established as her true Legisla 
 ture the one that elected the Senator from South Carolina. Therefore we 
 became satisfied that he represented the Legislature that was established by 
 the people of South Carolina and admitted him. Others labored more ably, 
 none labored more earnestly, than I did to admit the Senator to his seat ; 
 and I say there is not a Democratic member of that committee who did not 
 feel and admit that the title of Mr. Spofford was far freer from doubt than 
 his own, and that indeed there was not a member of the Senate who had a 
 more unquestionable title than Spofford had, because he was elected by a 
 Legislature after the factions had ceased and after they had all united in 
 one body. 
 
 Mr. Cameron. Will the Senator allow me a moment ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I am not dealing with you on that side now. 
 
 Mr. Cameron. I understand that ; but you are dealing with the Com 
 mittee on Privileges and Elections, of which I happen to be a member. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Not your side of it. 
 
 Mr. Cameron. I understood the Senator to state that when the case of 
 the Senator from South Carolina was considered by that committee 
 Democratic members of the committee had serious doubts, etc., concerning 
 the question ns to whether 
 
 Mr. Hill I said we had serious trouble with one question. 
 
 Mr. Cameron. -What I rose to say was this : that the case of the Sena 
 tor from South Carolina was never, according to my recollection, considered 
 at all in the committee. 
 
 Mr. Hill. That is wholly unnecessaiy. 
 
 Mr. Cameron. The committee was discharged from the cons: 
 of his credentials, and the case was not considered at all in the committee. 
 
704 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Mr. JKS.--That is a wholly unnecessary interruption. The committee 
 did consider it, but they took no testimony. The briefs of both sides were 
 submitted to the committee. That the committee was discharged before 
 they concluded their labors, I admit. The committee did not come to any 
 decision about it, that is true. 
 
 Mr. Cameron. It was not taken up. 
 
 Mr. Hill. The Senator will excuse me ; I cannot yield. The individual 
 members of the committee did consider it, I considered it, the Democratic 
 members of the committee considered it, and I found there was no issue of 
 fact whatever between Corbin and Butler ; it was nothing but a legal ques 
 tion, and that legal question is the one I stated. 
 
 Mr. Cameron. If the Democratic members of the committee considered 
 it, the committee did not. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I decline to yield any further. 
 
 The Presiding Officer. (Mr. Ingalls in the chair). The Senator from 
 Georgia must not be interrupted without his consent. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Now, then, I will speak to the Senator frankly. He says in 
 speech, with some spleen, that I have been disappointed. I have been. I do 
 not blame the Senator, I am not censuring him ; but I tell him with a frank 
 ness and a candor which is due from one to another who are entitled to 
 mutual esteem, that I did not dream, when I was laboring so earnestly to do 
 what was right to admit him to his seat in this body, that I was admitting 
 strength which would be used to keep a better title out. I did not 
 dream when South Carolina stood redeemed and disenthralled from the 
 \ carpet-bag government that South Carolina in this Senate would take the 
 \ lead in keeping up a most odious carpet-bag misrepresentation upon 
 Louisiana. 
 
 Mr. Butler. I will say in reply to that that the Senator from South 
 Carolina has done nothing of the kind. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I have told the Senator I did not attack his motives ; I am 
 speaking of the fact. 
 
 Mr. Butler. The honorable Senator goes on and he puts me in a false 
 position, and puts words in my mouth that I have never used, and it goes 
 upon the record. If he will just confine himself exactly to what is the 
 record and what is the fact, I will promise him not to interrupt him. Of 
 course I have no right to interrupt him if he objects to it, but when he 
 undertakes to say indirectly or by implication that South Carolina has im 
 posed upon Louisiana one single hardship which they could prevent, he 
 states that which is not so. 
 
 Mr. Hill. The Senator had as well keep his temper. 
 
 Mr. Butler. My temper, Mr. President, is perfectly preserved. I am 
 not in the slightest degree excited. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I must decline any further interruption from the honorable 
 Senator. 
 
 The Presiding Officer. The Senator from Georgia cannot be interrupted 
 against his consent. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I have said so once before, and I hope the Senator will re 
 spect it. His interruptions are unnecessary. I have put no words in his 
 mouth, and the statement that I misrepresent him is not so. I submit that 
 [ am speaking of the effect of the Senator s position. That is what I say. 
 I did not expect, when I was voting for him to come into the Senate, that he 
 should ever take the position that he has taken, I will not say what his 
 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 705 
 
 position is. Let it be judged by his own language. I am not attacking bis 
 motives. 
 
 The Senator says I spoke of whisperings. Where did those whisperings 
 come from ? he asks. " How did they reach the Senator s ears ; through the 
 corridors of his imagination, or from the polluted lips of busy scandal 
 mongers?" And the Senator adds other indignant interrogatories as though 
 the whisperings were new to him. Whisperings come from my imagina 
 tion? I remind the Senator that the report from this committee was made 
 on the 22d of March, and on the 24th of March an elaborate article ap 
 peared in the Charleston News and Courier demanding that the report, 
 which the writer evidently had never read, should not be adopted, and in 
 sisting that the honor of Southern Senators was involved, and that Kellogg 
 ought to be retained in his seat. That was the first Democratic paper In 
 the Union that took position in behalf of Kellogg, so far as my observation 
 extended, and it was two days after the report was made. That elaborate 
 article was quoted extensively here in the Republican papers. Is the News 
 and Courier a "busy scandal-monger"? When the Senator was delivering 
 his philippic against myself, a gentleman placed in my hands a letter taken 
 from the Charleston News and Courier, and at the very moment he was 
 calling upon me to know where those whisperings came from I read this : 
 
 To the Editor of the News and Courier : I have talked to-day with prominent citizens, 
 business men, and others. 
 
 This was written the day after the speech delivered by the junior Sen 
 ator from South Carolina (Mr. Hampton). 
 
 They all agree that Senator Hampton has acted well and in good faith in the Spof- 
 ford-Kellogg matter. 
 
 " Good faith ! " What is that ? 
 
 We are all sorry for Louisiana. Our sympathies are with her ; but we cannot forget 
 the fact that Kellogg was seated at the same time as our gallant Butler. If one is un 
 seated the other may be hereafter. 
 
 And he goes on in that strain. "Charleston, May 14, 1880" -signed, 
 "A Merchant" published in the Charleston News and Courier. No w, if 
 the Senator becomes excited and gets mad because these things are "whis 
 pered," he ought not to point his wrath at me. He has not become 
 offended, that I am aware, at the Charleston News and Courier, He has 
 not called that to account. Why this discrimination? I alluded to the 
 rumor to stamp it, as I said, with scorn and indignation. 
 
 The News and Courier gives the fact as a reason why Southern Senators 
 should allow this man to remain in his seat. Yet it has not aroused the ire 
 of the honorable Senators from South Carolina. 
 
 The first Democratic paper in the United States to take position agains 
 the unseating of Kellogg was the leading Democratic paper of 
 olina. 
 
 The first Democratic Senator on this floor to announce his detern 
 to vote against unseating Kellogg was the junior Senator from k 
 olina. 
 
 The only Senators who, up to this time, have taken the ground 
 there was no Constitutional power to unseat Kellogg are 
 from South Carolina. , , 
 
 And now, disclaiming all personal unkindness, I must review 1 
 of the Senators on this case. 
 
 i 
 
706 SENATOR B. 1L HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 The junior Senator could not have had the facts of this case in his mind 
 when he was writing the speech which he delivered. I know the high char 
 acter of that Senator, and I would do nothing to impair it even if I could ; 
 but it is not possible to mistake the thoughts which engaged the Senator 
 while he was writing his speech. He was not writing a speech which even 
 attempted to fit the facts of this case or the issues of this case, and I will 
 convince even him of it. He was writing a very handsome speech for deliv 
 ery in the Senate, but he was not writing a speech on the Spofford-Kellogg 
 case. Now I will call his attention to his speech in the light of the facts of 
 the case and see how it will read. The first point I call attention to is this : 
 
 _But on the matter under consideration such is the wide difference of opinion prevailing 
 among some of the ablest jurists in this body that the unprofessional mind seeks in vain 
 for light to guide it to a correct judgment. Amid this great and fundamental diversity 
 of opinions among the eminent members of the legal profession, a layman like myself may 
 well be excused for entertaining grave doubts as to the settled principles of law which 
 should determine this important issue, and he surely cannot be blamed if, disregarding 
 the mere technicalities of law, he strives earnestly to conform his action to the fixed and 
 immutable principles of justice. 
 
 In this sentence the Senator from South Carolina admits he is in doubt 
 as to the law which will determine this case, and yet he gives the benefit of 
 that doubt to his enemies against his friends. Yet he gives the benefit of 
 that doubt to the representatives of a body which he admits was not the 
 Legislature, against the representative of a body which he admits was the 
 Legislature ; he gives the benefit of that doubt to a resolution of the Senate 
 against the Constitution of the country. He gives the benefit of that doubt 
 to the sitting member against the supreme voice of Louisiana with her pro 
 test before him. 
 
 Now, talking about unprecedented things, talking about revolutionary 
 matters, I ask the honorable Senator if he can find in history, religious, 
 moral, or political, an instance, before, where a man ever gave the benefit of 
 a doubt to the wrong against the right according to his own admissions ? 
 He gave the benefit of a doubt to what he admits to be a wrong against what 
 he admitted to be a right. Then again, the reason of the honorable Senator, 
 the manner in which he gives the benefit of this doubt, is by getting rid of 
 the technicalities of the law and conforming his action " to the fixed and im 
 mutable principles of justice." I thought there was no way on earth to sus 
 tain Kellogg in his seat in this body except on a technicality, on a very 
 narrow technical ity. The matter was contested on a technicality the tech 
 nicality that the Senate had once passed on it. This is the ground on which 
 even Kellogg s friends seek to sustain him, but the Senator throws away the 
 technicality and he concludes to sustain Kellogg upon the principles of 
 "fixed and immutable justice," Keeping a man in a seat to which he admits 
 - he was not elected by the rightful Legislature upon the principles of fixed 
 and immutable justice ! The Senator was not thinking, when he wrote that 
 sentence, of the facts of the case, or I am sure he would not have written it. 
 I will now call the attention of the honorable Senator to another clause. He 
 says : 
 
 I recognize, painfully, in my own case, how difficult it is to throw off the shackles 
 forged by partisanship ; to oppose the mandates of party, or to rise superior to that spirit 
 of sectionalism which has so often exercised its malign influence on matters which have 
 come before us. 
 
 I appreciate as fully as any one the necessity of party organizations, and I acknowledge 
 to their fullest legitimate extent the obligations of party fealty. But there are sometimes 
 
HIS LIFE. SPEECHES, AND WHITINGS. 707 
 
 questions upon which we are called to act which each man must determine for himself- 
 when his only guide must be his conscience and his sense of right. Such aque-tion is the 
 present one ; one as grave, as important, as far-reaching in its consequence as ever came 
 before this body, and one which demands all the prudence, all the wisdom, all the patriot 
 ism which should belong to this the highest as well as the most conservative legislative 
 tribunal in this country. We cannot afford, in a matter of such vital consequence to 
 draw party lines or to be governed by sectional prejudices. We are here as represent* 
 tives of great coequal States, and in judging of the rights of any of UK-M- states we are 
 bound to do equal and exact justice to all, while we protect inviolate the rights and 
 privileges of our colleagues. Any proceeding in this Chamber that could be considered 
 as at all revolutionary or even irregular would shock the sentiment of the whole country, 
 and would shake the settled foundations of the Government itself. We cannot tamper 
 rashly with the principles, the rules, the traditions even which have obtained in the or 
 ganization of this august body. Some may treat these fears as groundless while they 
 boldly seek to establish new precedents, but I seek safety and repose in clinging to 
 the old, for I realize how dangerous innovations may become. 
 
 I have analyzed that sentence honestly arid earnestly five or six times ; I 
 have analyzed it to the best of my ability, and I must say to the honorable 
 Senator from South Carolina that I am unable to extract but two ideas from 
 the whole paragraph I have read. One is an implication that the Democratic 
 party in this Senate is proposing to do something "harsh," something " sec 
 tional," something revolutionary, something unprecedented, and that they 
 are employing party discipline, and party mandates, and party plans, and 
 party organization to enforce the observance of the party to such purposes. 
 The other idea is that the Senator finds himself so much purer, so much bet 
 ter, and so much more patriotic than his party that he bursts the shackles of 
 party in this case, rises above his party, and asserts his independence of his 
 party in this particular case for "conscience sake and from a sense of right." 
 
 I do not doubt the truth of the latter proposition. I would not question 
 the honorable Senator s claim to great purity or attempt in the slightest de 
 gree to derogate from it, for I know he is entitled to all he claims ; but the 
 Senator did very great injustice to the Democrats of the Senate and to the 
 party with which he usually associates when he put them in the position of 
 proposing something revolutionary, something unprecedented, or something 
 sectional in order to lift himself to a high pedestal of conservative patriotism 
 and lofty Unionism above his party. 
 
 After that the Senator quotes some very beautiful poetry. The only 
 objection to it is that I do not see any idea in it that has the slightest 
 relation to this case. The Senator then proceeds to make an argument and 
 read authorities in support of his position. I am not going to refute them. 
 I simply say to the Senator that every point lie has made and every author 
 ity he has read in this case is conceded, and they have no more application 
 to the facts and issues in this case than has the Decalogue or the Lord s 
 Prayer or the Sermon on the Mount. The position he has taken and the 
 authorities he has read apply to the regularity of an election by a conceded 
 Legislature. They have no reference whatever to the case now before the 
 Senate. The very fundamental question involved is the denial of what 
 himself admits to be true, the existence of a Legislature at all. That is why 
 the Senator fell into error. Whoever directed his attention to the authori 
 he read, misled him. 
 
 The Senator then closes his argument with a very beautiful peroratioi 
 which he speaks highly of his own bravery and gallantry during the war 
 I have no objection to that, but what has that to do with the quest 
 He reminds us that he carried the palmetto flag to the front amid 
 
 
708 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 of shot and shell and bladed steel, and that he was in a very dangerous place, 
 while somebody else was at a safer place. I say to the Senator and he will 
 pardon me for doing it suppose he was brave during the war, and does not 
 everybody admit it ? Does that make the Packard government a legal gov 
 ernment ? Does that make a resolution of the Senate declaring it a legal 
 government Constitutional? Because the Senator was brave in war and car 
 ried the flag to the front, does that justify him or justify us in keeping a 
 man in the Senate not chosen by the Legislature of a State? 
 
 f 
 
 Sir, the Senator is unfortunate and Louisiana is peculiarly unfortunate. 
 Of all the States which have been called on to pass through the terrible 
 Reconstruction ordeal, Louisiana was most defiled, most maligned, and most 
 plundered, and South Carolina was next. When the people of Louisiana 
 saw their sons shot down in the streets of New Orleans on the memorable 
 14th of September, it was no mitigation of their sorrrow to be told that those 
 who shot them down were under the command of a brave and gallant ex-con 
 federate general, and I tell the honorable Senator, disfranchisement will not 
 be less galling to Louisiana because its infliction is continued under the lead 
 of South Carolina ! 
 
 The honorable Senator was not content with a glowing eulogy upon his 
 own brilliant daring in the war, but he takes occasion also to inform the 
 world that while he was following the palmetto flag on bloody fields that 
 were "shot-sown and bladed thick with steel," he did not enjoy the benefit 
 of the precepts and example of myself. He intimates that while he was 
 gaining honors I was enjoying a place of safety. My only answer is that I 
 was brave enough during the war to discharge as best I could the duties of 
 the position to which the people of Georgia, without any solicitation from 
 myself, saw proper to call me ; and I am brave enough now neither to boast 
 of my own achievements nor to depreciate those of the Senator from South 
 Carolina. 
 
 Sir, it did not require a war to make me a Union man. I am and ^ver 
 have been one from conviction. I feel under no obligation or necessity to 
 yield one jot or tittle of the equal rights and privileges of the Southern 
 States and people, under the Constitution, in order to appease Northern 
 wrath or to show to the Northern people that I have been effectually 
 thrashed into a condition of submission and subservient loyalty. No South 
 ern State shall be deprived of her equal suffrage in this Senate by my vote 
 or without my protest. I would surrender a thousand seats in this body be 
 fore I would give one vote to place or retain a man here who I admitted 
 was not chosen by the Legislature and did not represent the sovereign will 
 of the State, or to exclude a Senator from his seat who I admitted was 
 chosen by the Legislature and therefore did represent the sovereign will of 
 his State. One military record may suffice to restrain the just indignation 
 of the people for such a vote, for it seems a man who has a military record 
 can do anything with impunit\^ ; but ten thousand military records would 
 never be sufficient to satisfy my own conscience with such a vote. 
 
 Sir, I believe the only basis of either permanent or honorable union is 
 the Constitution. That Constitution I will demand as fearlessly for the 
 South as I will grant it cheerfully to the North. Contrary to that Consti 
 tution, I will consent to no sacrifice of a single right or privilege of any State 
 or citizen of this Union. 
 
 Wars, especially civil wars, are more damaging in their sequel than in 
 their progress. Their moral slaughters exceed their physical slaughters. 
 
HTS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 709 
 
 Mr. Burke says : 
 
 Civil wars strike deepest of all into the manners of the people. They vitiate their 
 politics ; they corrupt their morals ; they pervert even the natural taste and relish of 
 equity and justice. 
 
 One chief source of these evils is found in the fact that civil wars breed 
 a species of heroes who invariably use their war exploits as means of secur 
 ing civil positions, and to this end keep alive the spirit of the conflicts. 
 These remarks do not apply to the Senator from South Carolina. 
 
 Montesquieu says : 
 
 If Europe should ever be ruined it will be by her warriors. 
 
 Mark the words, not by her wars, but "by her warriors" 
 
 The people of the United States have been struggling for fifteen years 
 to recover from the consequences of a very unnecessary civil war. 
 
 The greatest obstacle to success has arisen from the difficulty in freeing 
 the people from the spirit engendered by the war. The Southern States 
 and people have suffered a double portion of the evils which have followed 
 civil war. At the North, a large number of politicians are ever appealing 
 to the war passions to justify any wrong, any outrage, any slander upon the 
 Southern people. At the South, we have a few who are ever magnifying 
 their own exploits in the war in order to further their individual schemes, 
 to excuse their deficiencies, failures, mistakes, and shortcomings in every 
 respect. Sensational writers are exciting the war pride of the people with 
 glowing accounts of achievements which were not known to or reported by 
 Lee, and fifteen years after the war ended we are having eloqment speeches 
 to the soldiers which the soldiers never heard. 
 
 It is pleasant to know that these remarks apply to but few. There are 
 men in this presence who carried the Confederate flag bravely to the front, 
 whom no man can discover wdthout inquiring of others. 
 
 Mr. President, there are other things I had intended to say. I had in 
 tended to take up and review the speech of the senior Senator from South 
 Carolina more particularly, but it is wholly unnecessary, because it has no 
 more relevancy to the question at issue than did the speech of the junior 
 Senator from South Carolina. They are all made upon the theory which is 
 conceded by the report of this committee. The gentlemen did not touch 
 the real issues that are before the Senate. I invoke them again to consider 
 the real issues which are before the Senate, and not the issues decided in 
 the Bright and Fitch case and other similar cases, which have no relevancy 
 whatever to the present case. 
 
 Mr. President, one more remark and I shall close. The Senator from 
 Massachusetts (Mr. Hoar) some time ago called for the list of members of 
 the Packard Legislature who had been appointed to offices under the Fed 
 eral Government. At my suggestion, and with the aid of my friend from 
 Missouri, an elaborate list has been prepared, giving the names. 
 
 Mr. Hoar. The Senator errs, if he will permit me ; I did not call 
 the list. 
 
 Mr. mil. I do not see what you meant ; you said the statement 
 been made that there were so many of these members of the Legislature of 
 Louisiana appointed to office, and it had not been retracted, implying 
 thereby it was not true, and I promised to produce it. 
 
 Mr. Hoar. It the Senator will pardon me, I should like to say i 
 
710 SENATOR B. It. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 suppose he prefers to state the facts as t*hey happened, and would be un 
 willing to fall into any error. When the Senator stated that the Senator 
 from Massachusetts called for a list I replied and corrected him that I did 
 no such thing. I do not think he makes his original assertion good by say 
 ing that he did not know what I meant. 
 
 Mr. J?ill. -F\\e Senator rose in his place and called the attention of the 
 Senate and of the country to the fact that the statement had been made 
 that thirty-nine or some other number of members of the Packard Legis 
 lature had been employed in the custom-house and other government offices, 
 and he said the statement had not been retracted. 
 
 Mr. Hoar. Exactly ; that is true. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Is not that calling for the list? 
 
 Mr. Hoar. No, sir. 
 
 Mr. Hill.- -The Senator is exceedingly critical ; he is hypercritical, not 
 hypocritical. I say I have had prepared the list ; here it is in full, showing 
 in the employ of the Government eight senators of the Packard Legislature, 
 three senate officers, thirty-two members of the House, and four House 
 officers, receiving in the aggregate $49,490 a year. 
 
 Mr. Cameron. Does the list show the date of their several appoint 
 ments ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. No, simply because the Blue Book and the list of custom 
 house employees furnished the committee do not always give the date. It 
 seems from the evidence and the list that most of them were appointed in 
 May and June last. 
 
 Mr. Cameron. I think perhaps that might be quite important. I have 
 no doubt it would show that very many of them were appointed long be 
 fore Mr. Kellogg was elected. . . 
 
 Mr. Hill. No, sir, I beg your pardon ; only a few of them, three or 
 four perhaps. The evidence shows that a few were appointed before this 
 investigation began, and the evidence shows that nearly every one of them 
 has been appointed since the investigation began. A few of them were ap 
 pointed before, but as the evidence shows they were appointed in pursuance 
 of promises made at the time the votes were given ; for instance, take the 
 man Twitchell, a senator ; the witness swore that he was given $300 by 
 Kellogg and promised an office if he would vote for him, and sure enough, 
 some time after the inauguration of Mr. Hayes, Twitchell was appointed 
 consul to Kingston. He is among them. The whole number is forty seven 
 members and officers of the Packard Legislature who are in the employ of 
 the Government. We got some of this information, most of it, from the 
 list furnished before the committee by the custom-house officers, but that 
 list was incomplete. We had to go to the Blue Book for a portion of it 
 and to the testimony for a portion of it. I will furnish this list to be 
 printed as part of my remarks without reading it all, and the gentleman can 
 see it in full in the Record. 
 
 Mr. President, I hope I have closed my connection with this case for 
 ever. I have done nothing but my duty as I understood it to be. I say 
 again to the Senators from South Carolina, that while I have a very positive 
 way of expressing myself, I have not meant to be offensive. I did not 
 mean to be unjust to the Senators. I could not see the impropriety of al 
 luding to a rumor when it was published in the papers of their own State, 
 and when it had been repnblished all over the country and read upon the 
 very floor of the Senate. If I have said anything that any gentleman can 
 
fifS LtFfi, SPEECHES, AND ifmftSGS. 
 
 construe to be unjust to anybody I regret it, and would freely and gladly 
 correct it. There are no members on this floor for whom I have entertained 
 a higher personal regard than the honorable Senators from South Carolina. 
 I will not question the honesty of their convictions. In my judgment, 
 looking at the law as I do and the facts as I regard them, they have taken 
 a most unfortunate position, I think a most incorrect position, and I am con 
 strained to believe that the honorable Senators have contented themselves 
 with an abstract legal view without reading all of the testimony in this 
 case. 
 
SPEECH DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED 
 
 STATES, MARCH 14, 1881. 
 
 All men respect an honest change of opinion, but the people of no portion of this country 
 
 will tolerate treachery. 
 
 FIDELITY TO TRUSTS THE HIGHEST DUTY. 
 
 This speech, on the political treachery of William Mahone, was the last delivered by 
 Senator Hill in the Senate of the United States. It was wholly impromptu, and sprang 
 from the indignant impulse of the occasion. It is one of the most bitter and scathing 
 invectives against political treachery ever spoken. A graphic writer, in describing the 
 scene and Senator Hill s speech, uses the following vivid language : 
 
 " When Senator Hill rose, all eyes were turned on the Georgia giant. As he pro 
 ceeded, warming to the subject, his magnificent head became gracefully erect ; his 
 splendid eyes shone radiant with a genius that thrilled all hearers, and his long arms 
 were soon swinging right and left with the grace and vigor born of the inspiration of the 
 hour, ever and anon held out at full length like the wings of an eagle when poised for a 
 long and vigorous flight, swooping suddenly to earth to clutch its pre} 7 and rend it into 
 pieces in the twinkling of an eye. No wonder that the object of attack his terrible 
 denunciation of Mahone, as the papers expressed it next morning no wonder Senator 
 Mahone instinctively dropped behind his desk, now and then dodging to one side or the 
 other nervously, as if he felt the talons of the great eagle buried in his flesh. The speaker 
 did not look at the Virginian, nor at any one else, but far away and above the crowd, as 
 if addressing an invisible audience and arraigning an imaginary culprit." 
 
 The Senate resumed the consideration of the resolution introduced by 
 Mr. Pendleton, March 10, for the appointment of standing committees. Mr. 
 Hill, of Georgia, said : 
 
 Mr. President: Whatever else may be said of the Senate of the United 
 States, I think on all hands it will be agreed that it should be a place where 
 no masquerading ought to be tolerated. Senators should deal candidly 
 with each other as well as with the country, We owe it not only to our 
 selves but to the place in which we are assembled. No man in this body 
 has a right to put members of the body in a false position, even if we con 
 cede that any Senator has a right to put himself in a false position. 
 
 I for one have favored the organization of the Senate without delay. I 
 am aware, as all other Senators are aware, that the Senate cannot proceed 
 with the discharge of its duties, duties which the President of the United 
 States is constantly and daily exacting of us, without that organization ; and 
 because it is our duty to transact the business of the Senate, I have favored 
 the organization of the committees. 
 
 The country is witnessing a most singular exhibition, an exhibition for 
 which there ought to be a very strong and controlling reason. For the first 
 time in the history of the United States Senate the regular, orderly, timely, 
 proper organization of the committees is resisted, resisted by an entire party, 
 resisted by a great party. But one reason has been given or intimated. 
 That reason, if I understand Senators correctly, is that by waiting a few 
 
 712 
 
ffIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 713 
 
 days the Senate committees would be organized in a manner different from 
 the organization that must result if they are organized now ; and there 
 fore to get what they claim to be their legitimate party advantage in the 
 organization of the Senate, gentlemen on the other side insist that the organ 
 ization shall be postponed. The only reason given why they would have 
 an advantage a few days hence that they do not now have, is the fact they 
 state that no less than four seats on this floor have been vacated, one by 
 death and three by the action of the President. That is true. 
 
 Mr. President, let us come to the point. The Senator from New York 
 has repeated over and over again, in language too plain to be misunderstood 
 (he has not stated it as his opinion ; if I understand his language he has 
 affirmed as a fact), that within a few days the Republicans will control a 
 Constitutional majority of the Senate, and that that Constitutional majority 
 will have it in its power to select the committees. If not his language, at 
 least what we have regarded as the imputations of the distinguished Senator, 
 are to the effect that we on this side are seeking to precipitate the organiza 
 tion now, because we may procure an organization now for a few days which 
 we cannot procure when the Senate is full. 
 
 Let us come to the fact ; it is the great fact. I have believed that when 
 every seat shall be filled the Senate will be Democratic, precisely as it is now. 
 If I am wrong in that belief I have been deceived ; if the Senator from New 
 York is correct in his statement, I have been deceived. I owe it to myself, 
 I owe it to the country, I owe it to those with whom I am associated on this 
 floor, to state distinctly to the country and in this presence why I say the 
 Senate will continue to be Democratic when all the seats shall be filled. 
 I am right in that conclusion, the Senator has no right to say that we are 
 seeking an advantage now which we cannot have when the Senate is full. 
 Mr. Conkling (in his seat). Suppose you wait and see. 
 Mr. Hill. I have no doubt the Senator is anxious for us to wait. That 
 is what he says. We have heard that before, and he has a most apt way of 
 interrupting a gentleman s argument by putting in something that does not 
 belong to it. He seeks, I suppose, thereby to break the force of it. 
 
 I have a list of the Senators before me chosen by the Legislatures of 
 several States to the Forty-seventh Congress, except the few the 
 mentioned who have not yet arrived. I assume what I believe is true, that 
 every Senator yet to arrive will be a Republican ; I believe all the seat! 
 vacated will bellied by Republicans ; but when full, how will 
 stand ? That is the question. I have the list before me. 
 every man knows, that the Senate, when full, consists of seventy-six membe 
 Thirty-eight members of the body now sitting here were elected to t 
 as Democrats. Let that fact go to the country. Thirty-eight member 
 the Senate, now in the hearing^of my voice, were sent here commit 
 sit here as Democrats. Thev hold no commission that was no 
 them as Democrats and by Democrats. That thirty-eight amoun 
 cisely half the Senate. One member of the Senate, the distinguished fc 
 tor from Illinois (Mr. Davis), was not sent here as a Democn 
 sent here by Democratic votes, and in words of high and lof ty pat 
 and fidelity to trust, worthy of the very best days of this Repu 
 nounced on Friday that he would be true to the trust that sent him here 
 and which he agreed to fulfill. ., 
 
 Mr. Hoar.-l understood him to announce that he thought 
 cratic organization was contrary to his taste and his judgm< 
 
vu SENATOR B. n. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Mr. Conkllng. And his conscience, too. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Mr. President, I shall be excused if I do not reply to that 
 statement. The Senator from Illinois needs no defense. His words are on 
 record ; his words have gone to the country ; and if the country has not 
 lost its reverence for high fidelity and manly patriotism, they will electrify 
 the country with pleasure and delight. In this day, when so many evils 
 have afflicted us, fidelity at least ought to be cherished and have its reward- 
 fidelity in this high, conspicuous place, which stands the very focus of the 
 nation s blaze, where no man can dare to be treacherous. 
 
 This being true, I challenge contradiction to the statement I make when 
 I say there are thirty-nine members of the Senate now sitting here com 
 missioned by Democrats, elected by Democratic votes. Thirty-nine consti 
 tute two majority of this body when full. Yet in the face of this high pres 
 ence, in the face of the nation, the leading Senator on the other side, the 
 great Senator from the great State of New York, rises and repeats over and 
 over again that when the Senate shall be full it will have a Constitutional 
 majority of Republicans. How has that been accomplished? That is the 
 question. It was not accomplished by the people. It was not accomplished 
 by the Legislatures of the States. How? By whom? When ? For what 
 purpose has that wonderful coalition been accomplished by which somebody, 
 sent here as a Democrat, has been seized on no, I will not say seized ; I will 
 imitate the words of the distinguished Senator from New York taken and 
 carried away to the Republican party ? Who did it? The Senator from 
 New York did not ; I acquit him ; I know him too well. Who did it? Who 
 has seized, who has taken and carried a way? How is it that we on this 
 
 / 
 
 side have no right to act on the assumption that thirty-eight members who 
 were sent to this body as Democrats are not still Democrats? Sir, I say 
 they are, and I stand here to vindicate the honor, the integrity, the fidelity 
 to State, to people, and to principle of all the thirty-eight who were sent 
 here as Democrats, and I deny that either has proven treacherous to his 
 constituents or has falsified the commission that lies upon your table. The 
 Senator from New York has done injustice to some Democrat 
 
 Mr. Conkling. Does the Senator make it personal to himself ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. No, sir, and the Senator knows it ; but I have a right to say, 
 as I do say, that I assume that every man whom the Legislatures of the 
 States sent to this body, worthy to hold a seat in this body, is true to the 
 mission and the trust with which they clothed him, and when the Senator 
 from New York intimates that somebody is false, I say the Senator from 
 New York does injustice to that somebody. 
 
 Mr. Conkling. Mr. President, I think I ought to ask the Senator to 
 allow me to interrupt him, as he refers to me so pointedly. I interrupt him 
 to deny what the honorable Senator has said. I have neither stated nor im 
 plied that anybody was to be false to any understanding 
 
 Mr. Hill. Mr. President, I will not yield further to the gentleman. He 
 understands that I am not charging him with that. 
 
 ^ Mr. Conkling. I understood the honorable Senator to say that I had im 
 plied or charged that somebody was to be false, and I think it is quite fair 
 and just, without being generous, that the Senator should allow me to inter 
 pose to say that my meaning, my statement, my implication, my belief is that 
 everybody is to be true, and therefore that somebody is to be true to the 
 opposition to a reigning element in this country, opposition to which sent 
 him to this body. That is what I mean. 
 
LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 715 
 
 Mr. Edmunds. Order, order, Mr. President. 
 
 The Vice-President.--The Sergeant-at-Arms will see that order is en 
 forced in the galleries. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I was not astonished at the interruption, or the length of it, 
 or the manner of it ; nor do I object, nor will I complain ; but I have said, 
 what the Senator will not dispute, that there are thirty-eight members of 
 this body elected by Democratic votes and sent here as Democrats. 
 
 Mr. Conkling I do deny it. 
 
 Mr. Hill.- -Thirty-eight sent as Democrats, and one as an independent by 
 Democratic votes. 
 
 Mr. Conkling. I do deny it. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Very well ; the records of the country must settle that with 
 the Senator. The Senator will say who was elected as a Republican from 
 any of the States to which I allude. I say, what the whole world knows, 
 that there are thirty-eight men on this floor elected as Democrats, declaring 
 themselves to be Democrats, who supported Hancock, and who have sup 
 ported the Democratic ticket in every election that has occurred, and who 
 were elected, moreover, by Democratic Legislatures, elected by Legislatures 
 which were largely Democratic ; and the Senator from New York will not 
 deny it. One other Senator whojwas elected, not as a Democrat, but as an 
 independent, has announced his purpose to vote with us on this question. 
 That makes thirty-nine, unless some man of the thirty-eight who was elected 
 by a Democratic Legislature proves false to his trust. Now, the Senator 
 from New York does not say that somebody has been bought. No ; I have 
 not said that. He does not say somebody has been taken and carried away. 
 No ; I have not said that. But the Senator has said, and here is his language, 
 and I hope he will not find it necessary to correct it : 
 
 It may be said, very likely I shall be found to say despite some criticism that I may 
 make upon so saying in advance, that notwithstanding the words "during the present 
 session," day after to-morrow or the day after that, if the majority then present in the 
 Chamber changes, that majority may overthrow all this proceeding, obliterate it, and set 
 up an organization of the Senate in conformity with and not in contradiction of the edict 
 of the election. 
 
 The presidential election he was referring to- 
 
 If an apology is needed for the objection which I feel to that, it will be found, I think, 
 in the circumstance that a majority, a Constitutional majority of the Senate, is against that 
 resolution, is against the formation of committees Democratic in inspiration and persua 
 sion, to which are to go for this session all executive matters. 
 
 The Senator has announced to-day that the majority on this side of the 
 Chamber was only temporary. He has announced over and over that it was 
 to be a temporary majority. I meet him on the fact. I say there are thirty- 
 eight members sitting in this hall to-day who were elected by Democratic 
 Legislatures and as Democrats, and one distinguished Senator, who was not 
 elected as a Democrat, but by Democratic votes, the distinguished Senator 
 from Illinois (Mr. Davis), has announced his purpose to vote with t 
 thirty-eight Democrats. Where, then, have I misrepresented? 
 true, and if those who were elected as Democrats are not faithless 
 constituency that elected them, you will not have the majority when 
 Senate is full. 
 
 Again, so far from charging the Senator from New York with 
 personal party to this arrangement, I acquitted him boldly and 
 for I undertake to say what I stated before, and I repeat it, to his cre< it, I 
 
716 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 is no party to an arrangement by which any man chosen by a Democratic 
 Legislature and as a Democrat is not going to vote for the party that sent him 
 here. Sir, I know too well what frowns would gather with lightning fierce 
 ness upon the brow of the Senator from New York if I were to intimate or 
 any other man were to intimate that he, elected as a Republican, because he 
 happened to have a controlling vote, was going to vote with the Democrats 
 on the organization. What would be insulting to him, he cannot, he will 
 not respect in another. 
 
 Now, sir, I say the Senator has been unjust in the conclusion which he 
 has drawn, because it necessarily makes somebody who was chosen as a Dem 
 ocrat ally himself with the Republicans, not on great questions of policy, but 
 on a question of organization, on a question of mere political organization. 
 I assume that that has not been done. No man can charge that I have come 
 forward and assumed that his fidelity was in question. I have assumed that 
 the Senator from New York was wrong in his statement. Why? Because 
 if any gentleman who was chosen to this body as a Democrat has concluded 
 not to vote with the Democrats on the organization, he has not given us 
 notice, and I take it for granted that when a gentleman changes his opinions, 
 as every Senator has a right to change his opinions, his first duty is to give 
 notice of that change to those with whom he has been associated. He has 
 not given that notice ; no Democrat of the thirty-eight has given that 
 notice to this side of the House. I therefore assume that no such change 
 has occurred. 
 
 But there is another obligation. While I concede the right of any 
 gentleman to change his opinions and change his party affiliations, yet I say 
 that when he has arrived at the conclusion that duty requires him to make 
 that change, he must give notice to the constituency that sent him here. I 
 have heard of no such notice. If the people of any of these Democratic 
 States, who, through Democratic Legislatures, have sent thirty-eight Demo 
 crats to this body and one more by Democratic votes, have received notice 
 of a change of party opinion or a change of party affiliations by any of those 
 they sent here, I have not heard of it ; the evidence of it has not been pro 
 duced. 
 
 Sir, I concede the right of every man to change his opinions ; I concede 
 the right of every man to change his party affiliations ; I concede the right 
 of any man who was elected to the high place of a seat in this Senate, as a 
 Democrat, to change and become a Republican ; but I deny in the presence 
 of this Senate, I deny in the hearing of this people, that any man has aright 
 to accept a commission from one party and execute the trust confided to 
 him in the interest of another party. Demoralized as this country has be 
 come, though every wind bears to us charges of fraud and bargain and 
 corruption ; though the highest positions in the land, we fear, have been 
 degraded by being occupied by persons who procured them otherwise than 
 by the popular will, yet I deny that the people of either party in this 
 country have yet given any man a right to be faithless to a trust. They 
 have given no man a right to accept a commission as a Democrat and hold 
 that commission and act with the Republicans. Manhood, bravery, cour 
 age, fidelity, morality, respect for the opinions of mankind, requires that 
 whenever a man has arrived at the conclusion that he cannot carry out the 
 trust which was confided to him, he should return the commission and tell 
 his constituents, " I have changed my mind, and therefore return you the 
 commission you gave me." Sir, I do not believe that a single one of the 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 717 
 
 thirty-eight gentlemen who were elected as Democrats, and whose names 
 are before me here, will hold in his pocket a commission conferred by 
 Democrats, conferred on him as a Democrat, and without giving notice to 
 his constituency, without giving notice to his associates, w fll execute 
 that commission in the interest of the adversary party and go and com 
 municate his conclusions, first of all, and only, to the members of the adver 
 sary party. 
 
 Sir, who is it that has changed ? Whom of these thirty-eight does the 
 Senator rely upon to vote with the Republicans ? That one has not notified 
 us ; he has not notified his constituency. Therefore I say it is not true, 
 and I cannot sit here quietly and allow a gentleman on the other side of the 
 Chamber, however distinguished, to get up here and assume and asseverate 
 over and over that somebody elected as a Democrat is faithless to his trust, 
 and not repel it. No, gentlemen, you are deceived ; you will be disap 
 pointed. I vindicate the character of American citizenship ; I vindicate 
 the honor of human nature when I say you will be disappointed, and no 
 man elected as a Democrat is going to help you organize the committees of 
 this Senate. I do not say so because I know. No, I have no personal in 
 formation, but I will stand here and affirm that no man who has been 
 deemed by any constituency in this country to be worthy of a place in this 
 body will be guilty of that treachery. And how is the Senator s majority to 
 come ? How many are there ? He has not told us. The papers said this 
 morning that there were two or three, and they named my good friend 
 from Tennessee (Mr. Harris). When I saw that, I knew the whole thing 
 was absurd. The idea that anybody in this world would ever believe that 
 my friend from Tennessee could possibly be guilty of such a thing, and my 
 colleague (Mr. Brown), also was named gentlemen who were born and 
 reared in the school of fidelity to their party. How many ? Have you one ? 
 If you have but one that was elected as a Democrat, and who has concluded 
 to go with the Republicans, then you have only half ; you have 38 to 38, 
 and I suppose you count upon the vote of the Vice-President. Has that 
 been arranged ? Sir, I will not blame you if you vote for voting according 
 to the sentiment that elected you, for voting according to the professions of 
 your principles which you avowed when you were elected. I deny myself 
 the right of the Vice-President to take part in the constitution and organi 
 zation of this Senate ; but I shall not make the question. If you have got 
 one, the vote will be 38 to 38. Who is the one ? Who is ambitious 
 to do what no man in the history of this country has ever done, to be the 
 first man to stand up in this high presence, after this country has reached 
 fifty million people, and proclaim from this proud eminence that he disgraces 
 the commission he holds ? 
 
 The Vice-President rapped to order. 
 
 Mr. IIill.~Who is it ? Who can he be ? Do you receive him wi 
 affection ? Do you receive him with respect ? Is such a man worthy 
 your association ? Such a man is not worthy to be a Democrat, 
 worthy to be a Republican ? If my friend from Illinois, my 
 Kansas, or my friend from New York, were to come to me holdi 
 publican commission in his pocket, sent here by a Republican Lej. ure, 
 and whisper to me, " I will vote with the Democrats on orgamzal 
 would tell him that if he so came, he would be expelled with ignominy 
 the ranks of the party. 
 
 And why do you beg us to wait ? If all who were elected as 1 
 
718 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 are to remain Democrats, what good will waiting do you ? You will still 
 be in a minority of two, the same minority you are in this morning. 
 
 Mr. President, I affirm that no man elected and sent here by a Demo 
 cratic Legislature as a Democrat, whatever may have been local issues, 
 whatever may have been the divisions of factions, and above all, no man 
 Avho professed to be a Democrat when he was elected and who procured his 
 election by professing to be a Democrat, in the name of Democracy and 
 Republicanism as well, in the name of American nature, I charge that no 
 such man will prove false to his trust ; and, therefore, why wait? Why 
 delay the business of the country ? Why should the nominations lie on the 
 table unacted on ? Why should we spend days and days here with the 
 party on the other side filibustering for time to get delay, to get a few 
 days ? Why should we do that when, upon the assumption that the Senate 
 is not to blush at an exhibition of treachery, the result will be the same one 
 week, two weeks, six months, two years from now that it is now ? 
 
 Sir, I know that there is a great deal in this question. The American 
 people have had much to humiliate them ; all peoples have much to humili 
 ate them. I know that the patronage of this Government has become very 
 great. I know that the distinguished gentleman who presides at the other 
 end of the avenue holds in his hand millions and hundreds of millions of 
 patronage. To our shame be it said it has been whispered a hundred times 
 all through the country by the presses of both parties until it has become 
 absolutely familiar to American ears that the patronage of the Federal Gov 
 ernment has been used to buy votes and control elections to keep one party 
 in power. It is a question that confronts every honest statesman whether 
 something shall not be done to lessen that patronage. I respond to the 
 sentiment of the President in his inaugural when I say there ought to be a 
 rule in even the civil service, by which this patronage shall be placed where 
 it cannot be used for such purposes. If it is not done, I do not know what 
 humiliations are in store for us all. 
 
 But, Mr. President, here are facts that no man can escape. Gentlemen 
 of the Republican party of this Senate, you cannot organize the Senate, 
 unless you can get the vote of some man who was elected as a Democrat. 
 You cannot escape that. Have you gotten it ? If so, how ? If you have, 
 nobody knows it but yourselves. How ? There is no effect without a 
 cause ; there is no change without a purpose ; there is no bargain without 
 a consideration. What is the cause ? If there has been a change, why a 
 change? How does it happen that you know the change and we do not? 
 What induced the change ? I deny that there has been a change. I main 
 tain that all the distinguished gentlemen who make up the thirty-eight Dem 
 ocrats on this side of the Chamber are firm firm to the principles that sent 
 them here, firm to the professions that sent them here, and firm to the con- 
 1 stituencies that sent them here. They were elected as Democrats. Now, on 
 the question of organization, which is nothing in the world but a pure polit 
 ical question, and a party question at that, they will act with the Democratic 
 party, and you, gentlemen, will be deceived if you calculate otherwise. 
 Therefore, there is no necessity for you to enter into all this filibustering 
 and producing this delay for the purpose of getting the organization. 
 
 Mr. President, as I said before, the Senate should be a place where there 
 should be no masquerading ; men should deal frankly with each other. If I 
 were to charge any gentleman on the Republican side of the Chamber who 
 was elected as a Republican, who professed to be a Republican when he was 
 
7//.S LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WHITINGS. 719 
 
 elected, with having made arrangements with the Democrats to vote with them, 
 I should insult him and he would resent it as an insult, and, gentlemen, excuse 
 me for repelling the charge which, if made against you, you would repel as 
 an insult, I repel as an insult the charge made against any Democrat that 
 he would be false to his colors and is intending to vote with you on the 
 
 organization. 
 
 Mr. Mahone. TA.T. President, I do not propose to detain you and the 
 Senate more than a few minutes. The distinguished Senator from Georgia 
 has manifestly engaged in an effort to disclose my position on this floor. 
 
 Mr. Hill I do not know what your position is. How could I disclose 
 it? 
 
 Mr. Mahone. Sir, the Senator might be a little more direct, as he might 
 well have been in the course of his remarks, in asking my position : and that 
 
 I-ll v if f 
 
 will give him. 
 
 Now, Mr. President, the Senator has assumed not only to be the custo 
 dian here of the Democratic party of this nation, but he has dared to assert 
 his right to speak for a constituency that I have the privilege, the proud 
 and honorable privilege on this floor, of representing without his assent, 
 without the assent of such Democracy as that he speaks for. I owe them, 
 sir, I owe you [addressing Mr. Hill], and those for whom you undertake to 
 speak, nothing in this Chamber. I came here, sir, as a Virginian to repre 
 sent my people, not to represent that Democracy for which you stand. I 
 come with as proud a claim to represent that people as you to represent the 
 people of Georgia, won on fields where I have vied with Georgians, whom 
 I commanded, and others in the cause of my people and of their section in 
 the late unhappy contest ; but, thank God ! for the peace and the good of 
 the country, that contest is over, and as one of those who engaged in it, and 
 who has neither here nor elsewhere any apology to make for the part taken, 
 I am here by my humble efforts to bring peace to this whole country, peace 
 and good will between the sections ; not here as a partisan, not here to re 
 present that Bourbonism which has done so much injury to my section of 
 the country. 
 
 Now, sir, the gentleman undertakes to say what constitutes a Democrat. 
 A Democrat ! I hold, sir, that to-day I am a better Democrat than he, infin 
 itely better he who stands nominally committed to a full vote, a free bal 
 lot, and an honest count. I should like to know how he stands for these 
 things where tissue ballots are fashionable. 
 
 Now, sir, I serve notice on you that I intend to be here the custodian of 
 my own Democracy. I do not intend to be run by your caucus. I am in 
 every sense a free man here. I trust I am able to protect my own rights 
 and defend those of the people whom I represent, and certainly to take care 
 of my own. I do not intend that any Senator on this floor shall undertake 
 to criticise my conduct by innuendoes, a method not becoming this body or 
 a straightforward legitimate line of pursuit in argument. 
 
 I wish the Senator from Georgia to understand just here that we 
 get along in the future harmoniously, that the way to deal with me 
 deal directly. We want no bills of discovery. Now, sir, you will bnd out 
 how I am going to vote in a little while. 
 
 Mr. Davis. Mr. President, during this temporary suspension 
 
 Mr. Mahone. I have not yet yielded the floor. I am waiting for a 1 
 order. 
 
 Mr. Davis. I wish to call the attention of the Chair to the disorder 
 
720 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 the Senate both when my friend from Georgia was speaking and now. I 
 believe it has been some time since we have had as much disorder as we 
 have had to-day in the galleries. I hope the Chair will enforce order. 
 
 Mr. Teller. I should like to say that much of the disorder originated in 
 the first place from the cheering on the Democratic side of the Chamber. 
 
 The Vice- President. The Chair announces that order must be main 
 tained in the galleries ; otherwise the Sergeant-at-Arms will be directed to 
 clear the galleries. 
 
 Mr. Mahone. I promised not to detain the Senate, and I regret that so 
 early after my appearance here I should find it necessary to intrude any 
 remarks whatsoever upon the attention of this body. I would prefer to be 
 a little modest ; I would prefer to listen and to learn ; but I cannot feel 
 content, after what has passed in this presence, when the gentlemen by all 
 manner of methods, all manner of insinuations, direct and indirect, has 
 sought to do that which would have been better done and more bravely 
 pursued if he had gone directly to the question itself. He has sought to dis 
 cover where the Democrat was who should here choose to exercise his right 
 to cast his vote as he pleased, who should here exercise the liberty of man 
 hood to differ with his caucus. Why, sir, the gentleman seems to have for- 
 fotten that I refused positively to attend his little love-feast ; not only that 
 refused to take part in a caucus which represents a party that has not 
 only waged war upon me but upon those whom I represent on this floor. 
 They have not only intruded within the boundaries of my own State, with 
 out provocation, to teach honesty and true Democracy, but they would now 
 pursue my people further by intruding their unsolicited advice and admoni 
 tion to their representative in this Chamber. Yes, sir, you have been noti 
 fied, duly notified, that I would take no part or lot in any political machin 
 ery. 
 
 Further than that, you have been notified that I was supremely indif 
 ferent to what you did ; that I had no wish to prefer, and was indifferent to 
 your performances ; that I should stand on this floor representing in part 
 the people of the State of Virginia, for whom I have the right to speak 
 (and not the Senator from Georgia), even of their Democracy. The gentle 
 man may not be advised that the Legislature which elected me did not re 
 quire that I should state either that I was a Democrat or anything else. I 
 suppose he could not get here from Georgia unless he was to say that 
 lie was a Democrat, anyhow. I come here without being required to 
 state to my people what I am. They were willing to trust me, sir, and 
 I was elected by the people, and not by a Legislature, for it was an issue in 
 the canvass. There was no man elected by the party with which I am 
 identified that did not go to the Legislature instructed by the sovereigns to 
 vote for me for the position I occupy on this floor. It required no oath of 
 allegiance blindly given to stand by your Democracy, such as it is, that 
 makes a platform and practices another thing. That is the Democracy they 
 have in some of the Southern States. 
 
 Now, I hope the gentleman will be relieved. He has been chassezing 
 all around this Chamber to see if he could not find a partner somewhere ; 
 he has been looking around in every direction ; occasionally he would refer 
 to some other Senator to know exactly where the Senator was who stood 
 here as a Democrat that had the manhood and the boldness to assert his 
 opinions in this Chamber free from the dictation of a mere caucus. Now, 
 I want the gentleman to know henceforth and forever here is* a man, sir, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 721 
 
 that dares stand up and speak for himself without regard to caucus in all 
 matters. Mr. President, pardon me ; I have done. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Mr. President. 
 
 The Vice- President.- -The Senate will be in order. Gentlemen on the 
 floor not members of the Senate will take seats. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Mr. President, I hope nobody imagines that I rise to make 
 any particular reply to the remarkable exhibition we have just seen. I rise 
 to say a few things in justification of myself. I certainly did not say one 
 word to justify the gentleman in the statement that I made an assault 
 upon him, unless he was the one man who had been elected as a Democrat 
 and was not going to vote with his party. I never saw that gentleman 
 before the other day. I have not the slightest unkind feeling for him. I 
 never alluded to him by name ; I never alluded to his State ; and I cannot 
 understand how the gentleman says that I alluded to him except upon the 
 rule laid down by the distinguished Senator from New York, that a guilty 
 conscience needs no accuser. I did not mention the Senator. It had befen 
 stated here by the Senator from New York over and over that the other side 
 would have a majority w r hen that side was full. I showed it was impos 
 sible that they should have a majority unless they could get one Demo 
 cratic vote, with the vote of the Vice-President. I did not know who it 
 was ; I asked who it was ; I begged to know who it was ; and to my 
 utter astonishment the gentleman from Virginia comes out and says he is 
 the man. 
 
 The Senator from Virginia makes a very strange announcement. He 
 charged me not only with attacking him, but with attacking the people of 
 Virginia. Did I say a word of the people of Virginia ? I said that the 
 people of no portion of this country would tolerate treachery. Was that 
 attacking the people of Virginia ? I said that thirty-eight men had been 
 elected to this body as Democrats. Does the Senator deny that? Does he 
 say he was elected here not as a Democrat ? He says he was not required 
 to declare that he was a Democrat, and in the next breath he says he is a 
 truer, better Democrat than I am. Then I commend him to you. Take 
 good care of him, my friends. Nurse him well. How do you like to have 
 a worse Democrat than I am ? 
 
 Mr. Conkling and others. A better Democrat. 
 
 Mr. Hi!l.6\), a better ! Then my friend from New York is a better 
 democrat than I am. You have all turned Democrats ; and we have in the 
 United States Senate such an exhibition as that of a gentleman showing his 
 Democracy by going over to the Republicans ! 
 
 Sir, I will not defend Virginia. She needs no defense. Virginia has 
 given this country and the world and humanity some of the brightest names 
 of history. She holds in her bosom to-day the ashes of some of the nol 
 and greatest men that ever illustrated the glories of any country. say 
 the Senator from Virginia that neither Jefferson, nor Madison, nor^ 
 nor Washington, nor^Leigh, nor Tucker, nor any of the long 
 men that Virginia has produced ever accepted a commission to repre 
 party and came here and represented another. 
 
 Mr. Cockrell.I trust that those at least who are enjoying the privilege 
 the floor of the Senate Chamber will be prohibited from cheering. 
 The Vice- President. The Chair will state that the violation of 
 does not appear to be in the galleries, but by persons who have m i 
 minted to the privilege of the floor. The Chair regrets to clear 
 
722 SENATOR R II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 but if the manifestation is continued he will be obliged to do so. It is. a 
 violation of the rules of the Senate. 
 
 Mr. Mahone rose. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Does the Senator from Virginia wish to interrupt me ? 
 
 Mr. Mahone. I do wish to interrupt you. 
 
 The Vice- President. Does the Senator from Georgia yield? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Certainly. 
 
 Mr. Mahone. I understood you to say that I accepted a commission 
 from one party and came here to represent another. Do I understand you 
 correctly ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I understand that you were elected as a Democrat. 
 
 Mr. Mahone. Never mind ; answer the question. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Yes, I say you accepted a commission, having been elected as 
 a Democrat. That is my information. 
 
 Mr. Mahone. I ask you the question: Did you say that I had accepted 
 a commission from one party and came here to represent another ? That is 
 the question. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Oh, I said that will be the case if you vote with the Republi 
 cans. You have not done it yet, and I say you will not do it. 
 
 Mr. Mahone. If not out of order in this place, I say to the gentleman 
 that if he undertakes to make that statement it is unwarranted and un 
 true. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I should like to ask the gentleman a question : Was he not 
 acting with the Democratic party, and was he not elected as a Democrat to 
 this body ? Answer that question. 
 
 Mr. Mahone. Quickly, sir. I was elected as areadjuster. Do you know 
 what they are ? 
 
 The Vice- President rapped with his gavel. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I understand there are in Virginia what are called Readjuster 
 Democrats and Debt-paying Democrats, or something of that kind, but as I 
 understand they are all Democrats. We have nothing to do w T ith that issue. 
 We are not to settle the debt of Virginia in the Senate Chamber ; but I ask 
 the Senator again, was he not elected to this body as a member of the Na 
 tional Democratic party ? 
 
 Mr. Mahone. I will answer you, sir. No. You have got the answer 
 now. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Then I conceive that the gentleman spoke truly when he said 
 that I do not know what he is. What is he? Everybody has understood 
 that he voted with the Democrats. Did he not support Hancock for the 
 Presidency ? Did not the Senator support Hancock for the Presidency, I ask 
 him? [A pause.] Dumb! Did he not act with the Democratic party 
 in the national election, and was not the Senator from Virginia himself a 
 Democrat ? That is the question. Why attempt to evade? Gentlemen, I 
 commend him to you. Is there a man on that side of the Chamber who 
 doubts that the Senator was sent to this body as a Democrat ? Is there a man 
 in this whole body who doubts it ? Is there a man in Virginia who doubts 
 it ? The gentleman will not deny it. Up to this very hour it was not known 
 on this side of the Chamber or in the country how he would vote in this case, 
 or whether he was still a Democrat or not. I maintain that he is. The Sen 
 ator from New York seemed to have information that somebody who was 
 elected as a Democrat was not, and I went to work to find out who it was. 
 It seems I have uncovered him. For months the papers of the country have 
 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 723 
 
 been discussing and debating how the Senator would vote. Nobody could 
 know, nobody could tell, nobody could guess. I have been a truer friend to 
 the Senator than he has been to himself. I have maintained always that 
 when it came to the test the Senator would be true to his commission that 
 the Senator would be true to the Democratic professions he made when he 
 was elected. He will not rise in this presence and say he could have been 
 elected to the Senate as a Republican. He will not rise in the Senate and 
 say he could have been elected to the Senate if he had given notice that on 
 the organization of this body he would vote with the Republicans. He will 
 not say it. 
 
 The gentleman makes some remarks about the caucus. I have no objec 
 tion to a gentleman remaining out of a caucus. That is not the question. 
 I have no objection to a gentleman being independent. That is not the 
 question. I have no objection to a gentleman being a readjuster in local 
 politics. That is not the question. I have no objection to a man dodging 
 from one side to another on such a question. With that I have nothing to 
 do. That is a matter of taste with him ; but I do object to any man coming 
 into this high council, sent here by one sentiment, commissioned by one 
 party, professing to be a Democrat, and after he gets here acting with the 
 other party. If the gentleman wants to be what he so proudly said, a man, 
 when he changes opinions as he had a right to do, when he changes party 
 affiliations as he had a right to do, he should have gone to the people of 
 Virginia and said, " You believed me to be a Democrat when you gave me 
 this commission ; while I differed with many of you on the local question of 
 the debt, I was with you cordially in national politics ; I belonged to the 
 National Democratic party ; but I feel that it is my duty now to co-operate 
 with the republican party, and I return you the commission which you gave 
 to me." It the gentleman had done that and then gone before the people of 
 Virginia and asked them to renew his commission upon his change of opin 
 ion, he would have been entitled to the eulogy of manhood he pronounced 
 upon himself here in such theatrical style. I like manhood. 
 
 I say once more, it is very far from me to desire to do the Senator injury. 
 I have nothing but the kindest feeling for him. He is very much mistaken 
 if he supposes I had any personal enmity against him. I have not the slight 
 est. As I said before, I have never spoken to the gentleman in my life un 
 til I met him a few days ago ; but I have done what the newspapers could 
 not do, both sides having been engaged in the effort for months ; I have 
 done what both parties could not do, what the whole country could notdo- 
 I have brought out the Senator from Virginia. 
 
 But now, in the kindest spirit, knowing the country from which the hon 
 orable Senator comes, identified as I am with its fame and its character, lov 
 ing as I do every line of its history, revering as I do its long list of great 
 names, I perform the friendly office," unasked, of making a last appeal to the 
 honorable Senator, whatever other fates befall him, to be true to the trust 
 which the proud people of Virginia gave him, and whoever else may be dis 
 appointed, whoever else may be deceived, whoever else may be offended at 
 the organization of the Senate, I appeal to the gentleman to be true 
 people, to the sentiment, to the party which he knows commissioned him to 
 a seat in this body. 
 
 Mr. Logan.--WY. President, I have but a word to say. 
 to a very extraordinary speech. The Senate of the United States i 
 where each Senator has a right to a free voice. I have never known be 
 
724 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 a Senator, especially a new Senator, to be arraigned in the manner in which 
 the Senator from Virginia has been, and his conduct criticised before he had 
 performed any official act, save one, so far as voting is concerned. He needs 
 no defense at my hands ; he is able to take care of himself ; but I tell the 
 Senator from Georgia when he says to this country that no man has aright 
 to come here unless he fulfills that office which was dictated to him by a 
 party, he says that which does not belong to American independence. Sir, 
 it takes more nerve, more manhood, to strike the party shackles from your 
 limbs and give free thought its scope than any other act that man can per 
 form. The Senator from Georgia himself, in times gone by, has changed 
 his opinions. If the records of this country are true (and he knows whether 
 they are or not), he, when elected to a convention as a Union man, voted for 
 secession. 
 
 The Vice- President rapped with his gavel. 
 
 Mr. Hoar. If my friend will pardon me a moment, I desire to call the 
 attention of the Chair to the fact that there has been more disorder in this 
 Chamber during this brief session of the Senate than in all the aggregate of 
 many years before. I take occasion when a gentleman with whose opinions 
 I perfectly agree myself is speaking, to say that I shall move the Chair to 
 clear any portion of the gallery from which expressions of applause or dis 
 sent shall come if they occur again. 
 
 Mr. Logan.- -What I have said in reference to his record I do not say 
 by way of casting at the Senator, but merely to call attention to the fact 
 that men are not always criticised so severely for changing their opinions. 
 The Senator from Georgia spoke well of my colleague. Well he may. He 
 is an honorable man and a man deserving well of all the people of this coun 
 try. He was elected not as a Democrat but by Democratic votes. He votes 
 with you. He never was a Democrat in his life ; he is not to-day. You 
 applaud him and why ? Because he votes with you. You want his vote ; 
 that is all. You criticise another man who was elected by Republican votes 
 and Democratic votes, readjusters as they are called, and say that he has no 
 right to his opinions in this Chamber. The criticism is not well. Do you 
 say that a man shall not change his political opinions ? 
 
 The Senator from Georgia in days gone by, in my boyhood days, I heard 
 of, not as a Democrat. To-day he sits here as a Democrat. No one wishes 
 to criticise him because he has changed his political opinions. He had a 
 right to do so. I was a Democrat once, too, and I had a right to change my 
 opinions, and I did change them. The man who will not change his 
 opinions when he is honestly convinced that he was in error is a man who is 
 not entitled to the respect of men. I say this to the Senator from Georgia. 
 The Senator says to us "take him," referring to the Senator from Virginia. 
 Yes, sir, we will take him if he will come with us, and we will take every 
 other honest man who will come. We will take every honest man in the 
 South who wants to come and join the Republican party, and give him 
 the right hand of fellowship, be he black or white. VVill you do as 
 much ? >! 
 
 Mr. Hill. We have got them already. 
 
 Mr. Logan. Yes, and if a man happens to differ with you the tyr 
 anny of political opinion in your section of country is such that you 
 undertake to lash him upon the world and try to expose him to the gaze of 
 the public as a man unfaithful to his trust. We have no such tyranny of 
 opinion in the country where I live ; and it will be better for your section 
 
St8 LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 72 5 
 
 when such notions are driven to the shades and retired from th* , ,- * 
 your people. m tue action of 
 
 I do not know that the jrentlemin f , Vi, . 
 
 Republican. I have never hf ard h sav I& T " 1 ? tO , VOtC as a 
 here to-dav ; but I respect him for "St* I to tl,o s , ^ W , hat le has "& 
 he is tired of the Bourbon Democracy al if L"" 6 a " d tlle . col ">"7 that 
 country would be better off. The p^o pl * ^^^ . f > " 
 m your country, everywhere The en down 
 
 U/better it will be fl both siffCthe pTopTof ufe whl %%*" 
 
 is something I never witnessed before in this Chamber or 
 7d m 7 JUdment WaS " Ot U8ti 
 
 fTW ever 
 
 r. ^.-1 desire to say once more, what everybody in this aud 
 
 knows is true, that I did not arraign the Senator from Virginia. In the first 
 speech I never alluded to Virginia or to the Senator from Virginia 
 alludfd. L gan - Ever y ne in the Camber knew to whom the Senator 
 
 Mr. Hill I alluded to somebody who was elected as a Democrat and 
 who was going to vote as a Republican. 
 
 Mr. Teller. He was not elected as a Democrat. 
 
 ^~" T SS n J did not allude to the Senator from Virginia. 
 
 Mr Teller. The Senator said that thirty-eight members of the Senate 
 were elected as Democrats. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Certainly they were. 
 
 Mr. Teller. That is a mistake. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Certainly they were, and the record shows it. 
 
 Mr. tonklmg.M&y I as k the Senator a question ? 
 
 Mr. ffia.-lLet me go on and then you can follow me. I again say it is 
 trange that the Senator from Virginia should say I arraigned him ; and his 
 valiant defender, the Senator from Illinois, comes to defend him from an 
 arraignment that was never made. 
 
 Mr. Logan.Didi not the Senator from Georgia ask the Senator from 
 V irgmia m his seat if he was not elected as a Democrat ? Did not the 
 senator charge that a man was acting treacherously to his constituents ? 
 the Senator not make the most severe arraignment of him that he could 
 possibly make ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. If the Senator will allow me, I did that only after the Senator 
 from Virginia had arraigned himself. The Senator from Virginia insisted 
 hat I alluded to him when I had not called his name, and I had not alluded 
 to his State, and when I had arraigned nobody. 
 
 Mr. Logan. Will the Senator allow me to ask him this question : Did 
 he not have in his mind distinctly the Senator from Virginia when he made 
 his insinuations ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. I will answer the gentleman s question fairly. I did believe 
 that the gentlemen on the other side who were counting upon a Democratic 
 
 1 were counting upon the Senator from Virginia, but I equally believed 
 that they would be disappointed. I did not believe that the Senator from 
 Virginia was guilty, and I, in perfect sincerity and good faith, so far from 
 CTaigning him, intended to defend him from the foul suspicion, and my 
 honest repulsion of the insinuation, which was necessary in consequence of 
 
726 SENATOR B. II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 what they expected, was regarded by the Senator himself as an arraignment. 
 There is an anecdote told in the life of the great minister, Whitfield. When 
 he was speaking one day in the country to an audience, he described the 
 enormity of sin and the characteristics of sin ; he did it with wonderful 
 power. When he came out he was assailed by a gentleman for having made 
 a personal assault on him. " Why," said Whitfield, "I never heard of you 
 before ; I did not intend any assault upon you." He replied, " Well sir, 
 you told me everything I have been doing all my life." I frankly confess I 
 am not a man to dodge. The papers have justified me in believing, Senators 
 have justified me in believing, that you are calculating to get the Democratic 
 vote of the Senator from Virginia, whom the whole country has treated as 
 having been elected as a Democrat. I believed you would be disappointed ; 
 I believed that because you would be disappointed it was wholly unneces 
 sary to delay this organization. I did not believe the Senator would vote 
 with you, and in vindication of that Senator I will not believe it yet. He 
 has not said so. He has made the mistake, because of what the papers say, 
 of assuming that I alluded to him ; but I vindicate him vet. He said if I 
 
 j / 
 
 asserted that he was elected as a Democrat and would be false to his commis 
 sion, I said what was not warranted and what was untrue. I am glad he said 
 so. I did not say he would ; but I say you expected it, I say your papers 
 expected it, and I say it has been calculated on. I vindicate the Senator 
 from Virginia, and I hope he will vindicate himself by not doing what you 
 expect him to do. 
 
 The Senator from Illinois charges me again with criticising a man for 
 changing his opinion. I distinctly said that every man in this country has a 
 right to change his opinion. The distinguished Senator from Illinois has 
 changed his opinion. He says the country is tired of Bourbon Democracy. 
 He ought to know, for he used to be one of the worst Bourbon Democrats 
 this country ever saw. 
 
 Mr. Logan. That was when you belonged to the other side. 
 
 Mr. Hill.- -The first time I ever heard of that Senator was when I was 
 battling in the South for the good old Whig principles and he was an out 
 rageous Bourbon Democrat. That amounts to nothing. You had a right 
 to change, if you have changed ; I do not say you have. 
 
 Mr. Logan. I will only say, if the Senator will allow me, that when I 
 saw the light I changed for the righto The Senator saw the darkness and 
 changed for the wrong. 
 
 Mr. Hill. Ah, that is not argument. 
 
 Mr. Logan. It is true, however, just the same. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I hope the Senator will see more light and change again. 
 
 Mr. Logan. I do not think I shall. 
 
 Mr. Hill. He needs a great deal of light. 
 
 Mr. Logan. No doubt of that. I do not expect to get it, however, 
 from that side. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I object to this st}de of interruption ; it is unworthy of the 
 Senate. I am not here to indulge in such remarks. The Senator has a right 
 to change ; I have arraigned nobody for changing his opinion. If the Sena 
 tor from Virginia has changed his opinions he has a right to change them ; 
 I have not said he has not ; I do not deny his right. I admit that a man 
 has a right, also, to change his party affiliations if he is convinced he has been 
 wrong ; but a man has no right to hold a commission which was given him 
 while he was a Democrat and because he was a Democrat and given to him 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 727 
 
 as a Democrat, and change his opinions and act with the adversary party. It 
 is his duty to return that commission to the people who gave it and ask 
 them to renew it upon his change of opinion. That is all I ask. 
 
 Mr. Logan.- -Will the Senator allow me to ask him what right has he as 
 a Senator to undertake to dictate to the Senator from Virginia as to what shall 
 be required in his State ? 
 
 Mr. Hill.- -That is incorrect again. I have not undertaken to dictate to 
 the Senator from Virginia. The Senator from Virginia can do just as he 
 pleases ; but when the Senator from Virginia acts as a public man I have a 
 right to my opinion of his public acts, and I have a right to speak of all 
 public acts and their character. I will not deny his right ; I am not dictat 
 ing to him far from it. There is not in my heart now an unkind feeling 
 for the Senator from Virginia. I would, if I could, rescue him from the 
 infamy into which others are trying to precipitate him. That is what I 
 want to do ; I am not assailing him ; I am not arraigning him ; I am not 
 dictating to him. I know the proud nature of the Senator from New York. 
 I know if that Senator was elected to this body as a Republican, although he 
 might have been a Readjuster at the time, and if he should come to this 
 body and the Democrats should begin to intimate in this hall, and the 
 Democratic papers should intimate over the country, that he was going to 
 vote with the Democrats on the organization, he would feel insulted just as 
 my friend from Tennessee (Mr. Harris) justly felt by the allusions to him in 
 the newspapers. So with any other man on that side. If the Senator from 
 Virginia was elected as a Democrat I am right ; but if as a Republican, I 
 have nothing more to say. 
 
 Mr. Logan. Will the Senator allow me right there ? Is it not true that 
 the Democracy of the Virginia Legislature that elected the Senator now in 
 his seat from Virginia did nominate Mr. Withers as their candidate and 
 supported him, and was not this Senator elected by the opponents of the 
 Democrats of that Legislature ? Is not that true ? I ask the Senator from 
 Virginia. 
 
 Mr. Mahone. Substantially so. 
 
 Mr. Logan. Then if that be true, why say that he came here as the 
 representative of the Democracy of Virginia ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. My understanding is that the Democracy of Virginia is very 
 much like the. Democracy of other States, as Tennessee. We are divided 
 down there in several States on local questions that have nothing to do with 
 national politics. In Virginia the Democracy was divided between what are 
 called Readjuster Democrats and Debt-paying Democrats but all Demo 
 crats. 
 
 What was called the Republican party it was said, although ][ must vin 
 dicate many of the Republicans in the State from the charge, coalesced with 
 what are called the Readjuster Democrats. The late Senator from Virginia 
 was nominated by what are called the Debt-paying Democrats, and the pres 
 ent Senator from Virginia, as I understand it, was run against him as a 
 Readjuster Democrat. 
 
 Mr. Logan. Au& the Republicans all supported him. 
 
 Mr. Hill Certainly, because they always support a candidate who 
 
 ning against the regular nominee. I suppose the Republicans always go 
 
 M *_ * -,- * V m. L A U \J UXAV A X^ -tT, *-* *.W * _ - 
 
 for men who are not in favor of paying debts ! I had thought that 
 . licans professed to affiliate with those who would pay debts. But 1 h 
 nothing to do with that Question : it does not come in here. What I say, 
 
728 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 and what will not be denied, and I am ashamed that there is an attempt to 
 deny it is, and it is the worst feature of this whole thing, that anybody 
 should get up here and attempt to deny that the Senator from Virginia was 
 elected to the Senate as a Democrat ; should attempt to evade the fact that 
 he was a Hancock Democrat last year ; that he has acted with the National 
 Democracy all the time ; and that whatever might have been the local differ 
 ences in Virginia he has been a National Democrat every hour, held out to 
 the country as such. I say I am ashamed that anybody should attempt to 
 make a question of that fact. He was not only a Democrat, a National 
 Democrat, and voted for Hancock, but I remember the historical fact that 
 he had what was called his own ticket in the field for Hancock and voted for 
 it. He is just as much a Democrat, sent here as a Readjuster Democrat, as 
 the other candidate, the Debt-paying Democrat, would have been if he had 
 been elected. 
 
 Mr. Logan. The difference is, if the Senator will allow me, if the other 
 had been elected he would have been in full accord with the Democracj - 
 here. This gentleman does not happen to be, and therefore the criticism of 
 the Senator from Georgia. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I do not wish to do the Republicans of Virginia injustice ; I 
 do not wish to do anybody injustice. There are some Republicans in Vir 
 ginia for whom I confess, if reports be true, I have a profound respect. 
 AVhen a portion of the Democrats, under the cry of readjusterism, sought to 
 get the support of the Republicans of Virginia, there were manly Republicans 
 who refused to go into a coalition that would compromise the character of 
 the State on the question of its debt. I am told there are Republicans now 
 in Virginia who say that if Republicanism here means the Senator from Vir 
 ginia, and you accept him as a Republican, you must give them up as Repub 
 licans. I do not know how true it is. But this is unworthy of the Senate. 
 
 I repeat, the worst feature of this whole transaction is that anybody 
 should get up here and attempt to make an impression that there was a 
 doubt as to the Democracy of the Senator from Virginia heretofore. That 
 is an evasion unworthy of the issue, unworthy of the place, unworthy of 
 the occasion, unworthy of Virginia, unworthy of the Senator, unworthy of 
 his defenders. Admit the fact that he was a Democrat, elected as a Demo 
 crat, and then claim that he exercised the inalienable right of changing his 
 opinions and his party affiliations, but do not claim that he had a right to do 
 it in the manner you say he has done it. 
 
 Once more let me say, the Senator from Virginia ought to know that by 
 all the memories of the past there is not a man in this body whose whole soul 
 goes out more in earnest to protect his honor than my own. I would rather 
 lose the organization of the Senate by the Democratic party and never again 
 have a Democratic committee in this body than have Virginia soiled with 
 dishonor. I do not say that the Senator is going to do it, but I see the prec 
 ipice yawning before him. I see whither potential influences are leading 
 him. I know the danger just ahead. I would rescue him if I could. He 
 may say it is enmity ; he may say it is an unfriendly spirit ; he will live to 
 know the force of the words I am uttering. Men in this country have a 
 right to be Democrats; men in this country have a right to be Republicans ; 
 men in this country have a right to divide on national issues and local issues ; 
 but no man has a right to be false to a trust, I repeat it ; and whether the 
 Senator from Virginia shall be guilty or not is not for me to judge and I 
 will not judge. I say if he votes as you want him to vote God save him or 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 729 
 
 li^ is gone. If he comes here to illustrate his Democracy by going over to 
 that side of the House and voting with that side of the House, he will be be 
 yond my rescue. No, gentlemen, I honor you. I like a proud Republican as well 
 as I do a proud Democrat. I am conscious of the fact that some of the best 
 personal friends I have in this body sit on that side of the Chamber, men 
 whose high character I would trust anywhere and everywhere. Gentlemen, 
 you know your hearts respond to every word I am uttering when I say you 
 despise treachery, and you honor me to-day for making an effort to rescue 
 a gentleman, not from treachery, but from the charge of it. If the Senator 
 shall vote as you desire him to vote, he cannot escape the charge. 
 
 Mr. Mahone. Mr. President, I want to interrupt the Senator from 
 Georgia. 
 
 The Vice- President. Does the Senator from Georgia yield ? 
 
 Mr. Hill. Certainly. 
 
 Mr. Mahone. I cannot allow you to make any such insinuation. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I make no insinuation. 
 
 Mr. Mahone. You did emphatically, and it was unmanly. Now it must 
 stop. Let us understand that. 
 
 Mr. Hill. I repeat, I do not know how the Senator is going to vote, 
 believe he is not going to vote as you expect. I believe he is not going to 
 be guilty of being false to his commission. I will not charge that he will ; 
 I will not insinuate that he will. I have not insinuated it. The gentleman 
 must be his own keeper ; the gentleman must solve his own questions ; but 
 I repeat, I repeat as a friend, I repeat as a friend whose friendship will be 
 appreciated some day, that the Senator is in danger of bringing upon him 
 self a charge which he will never have the power to explain. 
 
NOTES ON THE SITUATION. 
 
 The following papers, called by the author "Notes on the Situation," were written 
 against the Reconstruction measures of Congress. Full reference has been made to them 
 in the body of the biographical sketch 1 ^* No political writings ever produced a pro- 
 founder impression or accomplished greater results. It is not extravagant to say that 
 they lifted our people out of the slough of despair in which their liberties were dying 
 and aroused them to heroic and united efforts resulting in deliverance from radical op 
 pression and the attainment of political regeneration. In bitter denunciation, scathing 
 invective, and logical force they will ever occupy a first rank in the world s political 
 literature. 
 
 NUMBER ONE. 
 tt 
 
 ~X~TEVER despair of the Republic " was a much lauded Roman maxim. 
 
 i\l But maxims never saved a country, and this one did not save Rome. 
 She was very great. The combined world was too weak to harm her. But 
 she fell -fell by her own hands and for centuries has remained fallen. 
 
 If good, liberty-loving Americans almost despair of their country, the 
 events of the last thirteen years would seem to be sufficient^) save them 
 from reproach. From the repeal of the Missouri Compromise until now, no 
 period in human annals of thrice the duration exhibits such deception among 
 leaders, such credulity among the people, such treachery by rulers, and such 
 energetic self-destruction by the nation. 
 
 The United States have done more in these years to weaken confidence 
 in free institutions, and have inflicted more injury upon their own people, 
 and created heavier burdens for their children and children s children than 
 the united armies and navies of the earth could have accomplished in fifty 
 years. Before these notes close I may undertake to show the real causes of 
 these evils. It is sufficient now to say that from 1854 a spirit which is en 
 mity to the life of the Constitution has been dominant. The government 
 has been in the keeping of its enemies. We read of a great man who, 
 while an infant, was nursed by a wolf. This may have been and may again 
 be possible ; but it never lias been and never will be possible for men of 
 extreme tempers and opinions to nurse a Constitution whose only life is 
 mutual concession for the common good. 
 
 The Southern people, greatly provoked and misguided, abandoned the 
 Union to preserve the Constitution. While the Northern people, less pro 
 voked but equally misguided, made war to preserve the Union, by placing 
 themselves under the lead of men who were the bitter, implacable enemies 
 of the Constitution, and who were foredetermined to destroy or reform it. 
 
 After four years of heroic struggle, the Southern people laid down their 
 arms because they were assured by their enemies, and taught by long-trusted 
 but faithless counselors and officeholders among themselves, that, by so 
 doing, they would be again in the Union as before. The many believed this 
 and withdrew their support and deserted their colors. The few who dis 
 believed were overpowered. But more than two years have passed more 
 thaM half the period of the actual conflict and the Southern people, now 
 
 730 
 
 -lf*?t>\ 
 
 f J/ 
 
 t#J7 
 
 ^ 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WAITINGS. 731 
 
 thrice deluded, have not enjoyed the blessings of the Union ! Why? 
 Because these leaders of the North true to their original hatred and per 
 fectly logical in that hatred declare the Union shall not be restored except 
 upon terms which practically destroy the Constitution, and which certainly 
 leave no Union except one founded in force. And thus far the North 
 ern people either have failed to comprehend or have consented to sustain 
 their treachery, and, to give the last development of this most remarkable 
 history, we see some of our Southern counselors, who urged us into seces 
 sion as the only peaceful method of securing our rights, who afterward led 
 us to subjugation as the only method of escaping military despotism, now 
 boasting of the great confidence heretofore reposed in their counsel, and ad 
 vising us to accept the proposed terms for a new Union ! 
 
 With such experience fresh and still increasing, how shall we wonder if 
 true men doubt, if brave men fear, and if good men despair? 
 
 For thirteen years the actual revolution has been right onward, and is 
 still onward. He is stupidly blind who does not see that the evils before 
 us are far greater than the evils present and behind us. Our people have 
 drank bitter cups, but they are as honey when compared with the cups they 
 must drink if the child is not taken from the wolf, if the Constitution is 
 not taken from the nursing care of those who hate it, if the government 
 shall continue to be administered by its enemies. 
 
 If anything I may say shall tend, however slightly, to avert the evils 
 which threaten the country, I shall not only be satisfied, but happy. I have 
 no party to serve and no personal ends to accomplish. 
 
 I frankly admit my opinions heretofore have not been accepted by a 
 majority of the people. I have never thought that what the majority be 
 lieved was, therefore, true ; or that what the majority did was, therefore, 
 right. My political life has been but a struggle against prevailing opinions 
 and policies. When policies have been adopted and fixed in spite of my 
 opposition, I have labored to work good results in spite of my convictions 
 that the policies were unwise. And when I see the ruin which has been 
 wrought, I can but rejoice in the recollection that I was not one of the 
 chosen architects. I do believe the people have mourned and still mourn 
 only because wicked men have ruled and still rule ; and I believe wicked 
 men have been chosen to rule only because they have made political issues 
 to foment popular passions, and have suited their conduct and opinions to 
 the popular passions so fomented. 
 
 These notes are, therefore, given to the public, claiming no title to con 
 sideration, except that they are written, not to please that public, but to ^ 
 aid in arresting the further progress of a revolution which has been so pro 
 lific of ruin in the past, and which is so fearfully pregnant with ruin for the 
 future. It may turn out that no man that no human power can arrest this 
 revolution. It may be that a change of government, through an ordeal of 
 anarchy, is inevitable. But this much every man can do : he can see to it 
 that, if this destruction must come, it shall not owe its coming to 
 sent. If 
 
 government 
 
 fore, patriotic , 
 
 others may do, you~will support the Constitution, and oppose whatever is 
 contrary thereto. For mark this : whatever else people and rulers 
 do, they cannot support or preserve the government by violating its funda 
 mental law. 
 
732 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 NUMBER TWO. 
 
 While these, or similar notes, may ultimately take a wider range, the 
 immediate purpose is to examine the pending feature of the revolution the 
 Military Bills, embracing what is called the Congressional plan of Recon 
 struction. I have given these measures full, fair, and mature consideration. 
 I entertain not the slightest doubt that the conclusions I have reached are 
 correct, and, that if those proposed measures shall become laws, the future 
 developments will most abundantly prove this correctness. Before proceed 
 ing with the analysis of the character of the bills, their effects, and the apolo 
 gies offered for them, I desire to announce the conclusions which the reason 
 ing will establish and the events will confirm, as the certain results of their 
 acceptance and of the incorporation of the plan and principles proposed into 
 the Federal Constitution and the State Constitutions of the ten States. 
 
 1. They will consummate the subversion of the Republic ; the destruc 
 tion of the Constitution ; the annihilation of individual liberty, and the 
 ultimate but complete change of all American government from the prin 
 ciple of consent to the rule of force. And the results will become perma 
 nent and absolute and irremediable. 
 
 2. Before this final consummation is reached, the country will pass 
 through an ordeal of anarchy. This ordeal will be prolonged, and the most 
 bitter of any in history because anarchy in a republic is like fever with an 
 individual, most violent with the most vigorous, will not cease until strength 
 is reduced or destroyed, and no people ever had such strength and material 
 prosperity for the prey of anarchy as have the people of the United States. 
 Besides, in the transition, two races will struggle for the mastery, greatly 
 increasing the horror of these writhings of liberty in her passage to death. 
 
 3. I need not, and I cannot it is beyond the power of the pen enumer 
 ate the terrible evils that will spread over all the land during this reign of 
 disorder, discord, and decay. Among them will be the prostration of com 
 merce ; the paralysis of all industrial agencies and pursuits ; the repudia 
 tion of all debts National, State, and individual ; the disregard of all legal 
 sanctions ; the removal of all restraints upon the wicked ; the withdrawal 
 of protection from the helpless and the good ; the demoralization of men ; 
 the prostitution of women ; the starvation of children ; the rise and fall of 
 factions ; the burning and sacking of cities, and the general devastation of 
 the country. Robbers will fill our mountains and forests ; assassins will 
 come boldly from all hiding places ; civil wars and insurrections will mul 
 tiply ; leaders and followers will slay and be slain ; clans of burglars and 
 thieves will hunt the rich as herds of buffalo hunt the green pastures, and 
 insatiate wickedness will rend and tear all that is pure and good, as the 
 hungry lion when fleshing his tooth in the young and tender fawn. 
 
 4. But there is one feature of this ordeal of anarchy one result of this 
 devilish device to destroy the Constitution by those who take solemn oaths, 
 and make saintly pretensions to preserve it which is distinct from all 
 others, involving hypocrisy without example, delusion without limit, and 
 cruelty without parallel, and which I cannot contemplate without feelings 
 of peculiar sadness. I mean, of course, the effect upon the African race. 
 
 A separate note must elaborate the point ; but as I am announcing gen 
 eral conclusions, I must not omit the result which will be, must be, the 
 most certain and inevitable of all. A^war of races will come, and come 
 early, in this hideous programme of ruin. * This war will be produced by three 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AXD WRITINGS. 733 
 
 chief causes : 1. The ignorant, vicious, imaginative, and exceedingly 
 credulous habits and passions of the negro. 2. The delusions practiced 
 upon this imaginative and credulous nature by emissaries from the North 
 aided by bad men at the South, some of whom will act from mistaken 
 notions of philanthropy, some with wicked purposes of selfishness, but the 
 most dangerous with views of party ascendency. 3. The protection to the 
 white race and to every interest of person and property and life, which this 
 nature, thus deluded, shall render absolutely necessary. The result of 
 this war will be the substantial extermination of the negro race in the 
 United States ; or its exclusion therefrom, and final barbarism ; or its 
 practical re-enslavement under the government of force which I have indi 
 cated. 
 
 The giddy and the foolish wall say this picture of results is overdrawn. 
 Such creatures never believe horrors will come till they are felt and are 
 past remedy. Some thoughtless good people will say God will interfere" 
 and spare us such evils, as though God ever interposed to save a people who 
 persisted in destroying themselves. 
 
 The ambitious politician who has determined to support these measures, 
 because they are proposed by the strong party, will close his ears and pass 
 on. He cares not for the sufferings of the people, or the subversion of the 
 government, so he may reap and rule. He was a traitor to the Union, a 
 traitor to the Confederacy, and w r ould sell the honor of the people who 
 trusted him all for greed and for place first, from his own people, and 
 then from his people s " oppressors." How can such a man be moved by 
 the voice of honor or be made to listen to the appeals of patriotism ? How 
 van he, who is a traitor to truth, be convinced by argument ? How can he, 
 whose ambition seeks only his ow r n good, be turned from his purpose 
 by the exhibition of wrongs to others ? The fiery flames of sulphurous hell 
 could not turn the lusts of power and pelf from the minds of ambitious 
 Lucifer and his fallen followers. How, then, can truth, [though naked 
 stripped ; or sarcasm, though born in gall ; or wooing appeals, though 
 they come from millions wronged, be expected to open the mind, or reach 
 the conscience, or shake the purpose of the hardened wretch this political 
 Lucifer who is willing to make a Pandemonium of his country because, 
 
 To reign is worth ambition, though in hell. 
 
 But the wise, the good, the patriotic, and the truly brave will take warning. 
 These alone can save the country. The thoughtless, the selfish, the fanati 
 cal, and the ambitious, are its destroyers. This mad attempt by military 
 measures to force an unresisting people into self-degradation for no purpose 
 but party aggrandizement, must produce fearful calamities which no pen 
 can describe. Actual events will shame my language for very weakness in 
 this feeble attempt to forecast the future. But from all these horrors there 
 is a way of escape. There is but one way. Trust to no party, listen no 
 longer to men who have deceived you ; who have been false to every prom 
 ise, faithless to every principle, and treacherous to every government. 
 Return, oh ! my deluded and prostrate countrymen, return to the Const! 
 tion ! It alone is safe. It is safe for all colors and safe from all dangei 
 Every blessing comes from its observance, every woe from its violation. 
 Let us all resolve to accept whatever is according to its provisions, and 
 ject everything that is contrary thereto, and then fear nothing. hey ah 
 are disloyal and traitors who violate the Constitution, and they the viles 
 
 mJ ^^ 
 

 34 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 of traitors who use the power of the government to aid and shield them 
 in the violation. 
 
 NUMBER THREE. 
 
 When any measure of legislation in America is presented for our accept 
 ance or approval, the first question should always be : Is it Constitutional ? 
 or, better phraseology would be : Is it authorized by the Constitution ? 
 For, in America, the distinctive, distinguishing feature of government, 
 State and Federal, is the written Constitution. This is the Alpha and Omega 
 of all true American statesmanship. It is also the only impregnable fortress 
 for American liberty. The written Constitution are words which should be 
 repeated by every citizen every day and every hour, and held as indispensa 
 ble to the preservation of American political life as is air, or water, or 
 meat and drink to the preservation of animal life. 
 
 In entering on the discussion of the Military Bills, the first remarkable 
 fact which strikes us is the general concession that they are not in accord 
 ance with the Federal Constitution. In the debates on the passage of the 
 Supplemental Bill, some of the advocates of these measures insisted upon 
 submitting to the people of the several States affected, to decide " for or 
 against " the State Convention through which the purposes are to be accom 
 plished, because if the people should vote for a Convention, and thereby 
 admit and approve the propriety and necessity for the measures, the whole 
 plan would be relieved of the unconstitutional objections. Thus even Rad 
 ical fanatics found it necessary to provide some excuse for their consciences ! 
 And this excuse consists in an attempt to secure the consent of the people 
 yea, of the people to be degraded to the scheme which is to degrade them, 
 and thus to rest the legality of the plan, not upon the Constitution, but upon 
 the consent of the people! And this consent is to be secured by disfran 
 chising intelligence by military rule, by threats, and last, though not least, 
 by bribery ! The negro race, duped by emissaries and aided by deserters 
 from their own blood, is to give consent for the white race ! 
 
 Mr. Stanbery, in his argument before the Supreme Court, though deny 
 ing the jurisdiction of the Court in the case made, felt it necessary to dis 
 claim any admission that the bills were Constitutional, but admitted the 
 contrary, and hoped, when the proper case should be made, which he ad 
 mitted could be made in many ways, the Court would discharge its duty. 
 
 It is true that Mr. Sumner, and such as he, claim that Congress has the 
 right, under the Constitution, to pass such bills, and for all the States, and 
 locates the power in two clauses of the Constitution : that which requires 
 the United States to " guarantee a Republican " government to each State, 
 and the latter clause of the fourteenth amendment, which authorizes Con 
 gress, " by appropriate legislation, to enforce " the emancipation of the slave. 
 
 But whatever may be claimed for Mr. Sumner otherwise, it is certain 
 he is not respectable authority on questions of Constitutional law. Xo 
 fanatical mind can be regarded as safe, or become respectable as an ex 
 pounder of law ; because fanatical minds will accept nothing as true except 
 what they desire to be true. But law is an inflexible rule, and none but in 
 flexible minds, rigid in spite of theories and hard cases, can either truly 
 learn, greatly love, or safely expound the law. 
 
 But even if Mr. Sumner and such as he had reputation as lawyers, such 
 reputation would be destroyed by the very positions assumed ; for no legal, 
 or logical, or well-balanced mind can say it is necessary or proper to dis- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 735 
 
 c 
 
 franchise white people ; to establish military rule ; to abolish the trial by 
 jury, and to suspend the privilege of habeas corpus in time of peace for all 
 races and colors, m order to guarantee republican government to the States 
 or to enforce the emancipation of the slave. 
 
 It may be safely assumed, therefore, that all respectable le<ral minds in 
 America, whether for or against these military bills as a plan of reconstruc 
 tion, admit that the bills are not authorized *by any provision in the Con 
 stitution. Indeed, the advocates of these bills find the authority for their 
 adoption, not in the Constitution, but in certain circumstances outside of the 
 Constitution in a condition of things not anticipated and not provided for 
 by the Constitution ; and some find the power in necessity, some in human 
 ity, and some in international law ! Before I conclude these notes, it is my 
 purpose to devote separate and special attention co each of the apologies for 
 these bills (for they are not arguments); but I wish to say now, that if these 
 positions, or any of them, be true, then Congress has found for itself a much 
 broader grant of power outside of the Constitution than exists inside of that 
 instrument. Indeed, they have found, outside, a power by which they can 
 destroy the Constitution, by which alone the Congress itself was created 
 and has being. If this be so, our fathers did a silly work in providing a 
 written Constitution. 
 
 Then we may safely say that what legal minds admit is true, to wit : 
 That these Military Bills are not authorized by any provision of the Con 
 stitution ; and, if justifiable at all, they must be justified by circumstances, 
 by some condition, by some authority outside of the Constitution. And 
 now, wise, prudent, patriotic readers, lovers of law and law s safety, pro 
 pound and answer this question : If Congress has a sphere, a dominion, an 
 existence, outside of the Constitution, whence did it come, where does it lie, 
 and what is its extent, its length and breadth ? Do you not know there is 
 no dominion outside of the Constitution and laws but the dominion of an 
 archy grim, bloody, lawless, thriftless, hopeless anarchy ? Do you not 
 know that the very definition of anarchy is, outside of the law, disregard of 
 law, abandonment of law ? Have not all people who have gone into an 
 archy, and reaped her riot of ruin, done so under the pressure of bad men 
 and circumstances? And will Americans, black or white, abandon the well- 
 defined boundaries, the safe expositions, the well-tried, ever sufficient and 
 glorious protection of a written Constitution, and rush into the wild outside 
 to find safety for persons, or for property, or for liberty ? 
 
 But the argument must not stop here. These Military Bills are not only 
 not authorized by, but are directly contrary to, the Constitution. They sub 
 ject citizens to trial for capital and infamous offenses without indictment by 
 a grand jury ; and this, the Constitution says, shall not be done. They 
 authorize trial without a jury, which, the Constitution says, shall not be 
 done ; and the Constitution, on this subject, is so tender of liberty lat 
 does not trust the matter simply to a prohibition, but it declares, with re 
 peated emphasis, the right : " The trial of all crimes, except in cases 
 of impeachment, shall be by jury." " In all criminal prosecutions, 
 accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impar 
 jury." 
 
 They suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus when there is 
 neither insurrection nor invasion, which the Constitution says shall m 
 done. 
 
 In these and other respects, then, these Military Bills are in direct 
 
736 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 flict with the plainest and most solemn injunctions and guarantees of the 
 Constitution. 
 
 But these bills not only thus most flagrantly violate the provisions of the 
 Federal Constitution, but they abrogate and destroy, in whole, the Constitu 
 tions of ten States formed by the people, and authorize a new people to 
 form Constitutions, not according to the wishes of either the new or the old 
 electors, but according to the wishes and under the direct dictation of the 
 authors of these Military Bills, not one of whom resides in either of the ten 
 States thus trampled on, or can be subject to the government of the Consti 
 tutions which they thus dictate. 
 
 Nor is all yet told. These bills not only violate and destroy govern 
 ments, but they destroy most ruthlessly destroy the very principles on 
 which all American Constitutions and Governments are based ; and^to secure 
 and perpetuate which Constitutions, State and Federal, were made. Magna 
 Charta ; Bill of Rights ; Petition of Rights ; the Settlement ; the glorious 
 principles of the Common Law the compact wisdom of centuries ; the fruits 
 of many bloody revolutions ; all the guards and guarantees which patriots, 
 statesmen, judges, and people, by sword and by pen, for eight hundred 
 years, have been providing and perfecting to build up and make immortal 
 that most wonderful blessing of human genius and power, the structure of 
 Anglo-Saxon liberty, are abrogated and withdrawn from ten millions of 
 people, of all colors, sexes, and classes, who live in the ten unheard and ex 
 cluded States ; and that too, by men, I repeat, who do not live in these 
 States, and who n.ver think of them but to hate, and never enter them but 
 to insult. 
 
 Surely this is enough, but the argument requires me to add that the body 
 of men who enacted these military abominations were not the Congress, and 
 had no authority to legislate. By the Constitution all Federal legislative 
 powers are vested in a " Congress of the United States." This Congress 
 " shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives." The House 
 " shall be composed of members chosen by the people of the several /States." 
 The Senate " shall be composed of two Senators from each (State." Now, 
 was the body of men who pretended to enact these bills so composed? If 
 not, they did not they could not be the Congress. Why were they not 
 so composed ? By their own act. Members to compose the Congress were 
 chosen by the people and all the States for the House and the Senate. But 
 the members from ten States were excluded from their seats by the members 
 of the other States, thus reducing what would have been a Congress to a 
 fragmentary conclave of members. No sophistry, no fanaticism, no ambi 
 tion, no perjury, and no force can escape the conclusion : These Military 
 Bills have no authority. 1. Because they are not authorized by the Consti 
 tution. 2. Because they are contrary to absolutely annul the Constitu 
 tion ; and 3, because they have never been passed by the Congress. Naturalists 
 tell us of a venomous reptile which sometimes becomes so furiously enraged 
 it sticks its fangs in its own flesh and dies of its own poison. And it does 
 seem fitting that these mad violators of the Constitution they were sworn to 
 support, these wild exterminators of States, these adroit but furious mur 
 derers of law and liberty, should first, by their own act, have destroyed 
 themselves in their preparation and desire to destroy others. 
 
 I do not shrink from, but do most heartily rejoice at the inevitable con 
 clusion to which the argument, nerved by the very sinews of logic and 
 warmed by the purest love of country, must lead ; and if American patri j 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 737 
 
 otism shall not finally and forever die, but shall wake from the trance into 
 
 which ambition and lust for place have thrown it, then will lines dark 
 
 lines yea, lines as black as unstarred night, be drawn, and with a power 
 nervous with indignation, around all the records and the bastard official 
 existence of these fragmentary conclaves of libelers of true Republicanism, 
 and all will be declared to constitute no part of authorized American law, or 
 of legitimate American will. 
 
 Time was ! Ah, yes, the time was when to say to an American citizen 
 a proposed measure was not authorized by the Constitution was enough. It 
 was rejected. And has the fierce power of war, or that power which, in 
 republics, is worse and mightier, and more to be avoided, than war- 
 which is the father of wars which begot our war, and which seems deter 
 mined, with an adulterous mania, to multiply its hell-visaged brood the 
 corruption of party manipulators, wrought so great a change? And has the 
 time alreadv come when Americans even Southern Americans can enter- 
 
 / 
 
 tain, as a question, whether they will accept, and, by that acceptance, make 
 valid, a proposition which is not authorized by the Constitution ; which is 
 contrary to the Constitution ; which destroys the Constitution ; which mocks 
 the very principles which made, which gave soul to the Constitution, and 
 which tramples thus on the Constitution in order to destroy existing Southern 
 State governments founded in the consent of the people, and to form others 
 not founded in the consent of the people ; and which, in forming these new 
 governments, disfranchises existing electors distinguished for intelligence, 
 and enfranchises new electors notorious for ignorance ; and which new gov 
 ernments so formed are not to suit either new or old, learned or ignorant, 
 black or white electors, who are to live under them, but must suit men who 
 never lived in these States, who never expect to live in these States, and who 
 forget their own oaths and the interest of their own people to indulge the 
 hatred by which they oppress the people of these Southern States? 
 
 And have we some of these same party manipulators who were born 
 under our skies, who have been trusted by our people, who boast of their 
 honors, who now advise and try, coax and labor to persuade, and by turns 
 threaten, deceive and slander, to compel us to accept this iniquity? 
 
 Oh, depths of infamy ! Open, open, far deeper depths, for the dwelling 
 of these coming monsters of treachery, that they shame not with their pres 
 ence the lowest of the damned spirits" which now inhabit your labyrinths ! 
 
 NUMBER FOUR. 
 
 Having shown what every fair mind admits, and what every legal mind 
 must conclude, that these military measures are subversive of the Constitu 
 tion and fatal to the very life of all American principles of government, let 
 us now proceed to examine the reasons urged to justify or induce their 
 acceptance by our people. After careful consideration find that all 
 reasons which I have heard or read are included in the following five propo 
 
 sitions and allegations : 
 
 1. We are helpless, it is alleged, and can neither resist nor prevent 
 
 adoption of these measures. 
 
 2. That if we refuse to accept this plan of Reconstruction, a worse 
 will be provided. An appeal to our fears, and therefore a strong < 
 fange/rous position. , 
 
 3. That if we reject this plan Congress will become more off 
 
738 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 will confiscate our property, and take the substance we have left. This is 
 an appeal to our avarice a very dominant passion of human nature. 
 
 4. That we of the South are a conquered people, and are bound to accept 
 the terms of the conqueror, and that these bills are the terms of the con 
 queror. 
 
 5. That the negro, being now free and made a citizen, is entitled both 
 for his own protection, and in accordance with the principles of popular 
 government, to political as well as civil equality with the white race, and 
 that civil equality will be idle without political equality. 
 
 This last position is urged chiefly by Northern supporters of these bills, 
 and has a semblance of consistency and principle, and I have, therefore, 
 included it in the list of arguments or positions to be answered. 
 
 I have no difficulty whatever in finding the most satisfactory replies to 
 all these alleged reasons. Indeed, I affirm, with absolute confidence, that all 
 the good which it is claimed will come of the acceptance of these measures, 
 will come and can only come of their rejection ; and that all the evils which 
 it is alleged will result from their rejection will necessarily and naturally 
 result from their acceptance. But I find it very difficult while writing, and 
 impossible while speaking, to exhibit what I do not feel ; and, while making 
 the analysis, it will be a task to exhibit respect either for these positions or 
 for those who use them. For the educated politician the man who has 
 experience in public affairs and who aspires and labors to be a teacher and 
 counselor of the people, and who urges these teachings and counsels, "I 
 am exceedingly filled with contempt," because I can but believe that such a 
 man consciously desecrates the truth, and recklessly, but with most concil 
 iating address, hazards every interest of the people only that he may take 
 the benefit of being " on the strong side." Alas, what pen shall ever be able 
 to recount the countless horrors which have resulted from been wrought 
 by that demoniac spirit of our political leaders to be on the strong side, 
 and to make issues and pander to passions " to keep the strong side." This 
 spirit made "bleeding Kansas"; rent the Union in twain; drenched the 
 country in blood, and clad the people with mourning ; demoralized, deceived, 
 and betrayed the most gallant people under the cycles of the sun to tlie 
 most humiliating subjugation, and now counsels, urges, threatens to compel 
 dishonor to a people who have nothing but honor left. 
 
 But I know there are many people who are honest, and even intelligent 
 on most subjects, who commit grave political errors and mistakes. It would 
 be strange if they did not when there are so many influences to deceive. In 
 popular governments, therefore, and more especially now, since so much 
 power is proposed to be given to so much ignorance, it is necessary to answer 
 the knave in his argument lest he make a fool of his hearer. 
 
 First, then, it is said we are helpless and cannot prevent the success of 
 these Military Bills. Well, if this is true, why ask our consent? If suc 
 cess does not depend on consent, why beg and coax and threaten to secure 
 consent? If we must be disfranchised and have an " enemy s government" 
 forced upon us, spare us the gratuitous dishonor of consenting ! If a fiend, 
 with the power, should come to burn your house, or rape your wife, or kill 
 your family, and should coolly ask your consent, saying you had better con 
 sent, for if you did not, he would burn or rape or kill anyhow, and perhaps, 
 being incensed by your refusal, do all would you consent? I like the spirit 
 of the old Roman centurion. A decemvir a ruler of the strong side 
 became enamored of the humble centurion s daughter, He first persuaded, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 730 
 
 but persuasion failing to secure consent, he resorted to his power, the power 
 of his office. When the hour of supposed helplessness was reached the 
 father snatched a knife and plunged it into the breast of his daughter 
 exclaiming, This is all, my dearest daughter, I can give thee to preserve 
 thy chastity from the lust and violence of a tyrant." And what was the 
 result in heathen Rome ? The soldiers and people honored the father, and 
 rose with indignation and abolished the decemviral power of Rome forever, 
 and the guilty decemvirs slew themselves. And to this day the thing is told 
 as a memorial of the noble father, and of the glorious army and people who 
 avenged him. And the daughter s name was Virginia. The virtue of all 
 our daughters and the pride of all our sons are secure only in our sense of 
 honor as a people. 
 
 But are we helpless? If we contemplate resistance by arms, I concede 
 that now we are helpless. But our strength is not in arms. Our strength 
 is in the Constitution. If the Constitution is strong we are strong, and if we 
 are helpless the Constitution is helpless. I have shown if these military meas 
 ures be forced upon us the Constitution is destroyed. On its parapets alone 
 let us mount our guns and fire on. The most startling evidence of our pro 
 gress toward anarchy, is the idea with some, I fear many of our people, that 
 the Constitution can do us no good. The very thought should alarm every 
 man on the continent who has property or liberty or peace, or who desires 
 to get or to keep either. The only possible hope I*have in the future for any 
 thing good or safe to the people of any section and of any color, is founded 
 in the belief that the Constitution is not dead is not helpless. It has been 
 sadly disregarded, abandoned, and trampled on, I admit. But its enemies 
 are too cruel. They insist upon dealing their blows too often, too quickly, 
 and too recklessly. Their motives are becoming manifest. The murderer s 
 intent is at last being seen. The people will come to the rescue ; they will 
 come in wrath, and these long rioting enemies will call on the very moun 
 tains to hide them. If I am mistaken if the Constitution is dead if the 
 people have lost the will to save it then patriots and Christians, and all 
 order-loving men have but one duty to perform. That duty is to pray- 
 pray earnestly pray unceasingly, that the Caesar of American history would 
 come and come quickly. 
 
 Our noble governor sought to test the Constitutionality of these measures 
 before the Supreme Court by a bill filed in the name of the State. I am 
 glad he did so. It was a manly effort, for which our children will praise 
 him. Besides, he gave the Court an opportunity of deciding an important 
 question which may be one day invoked. He failed to get the test, because 
 the Court was not able to decide that it had jurisdiction in the form in which 
 the question was made ; not because Georgia was not a State, but because 
 Georgia being a State, the question, as made, was political only. But the 
 humblest of the ten millions of the people of the ten States, whose rights 
 
 do most earnestly hope that every citizen whose property is seized or whose 
 person is arrested under pretense of these Military Bills, will promptly ap 
 peal to the law. I am aware that our people are attempted to be frightened 
 from this appeal to the Courts because they are told it will be years before 
 decision can be forced ! This is not true. A decision on a writ of habeas 
 vorpus must come at onw from the District Court, and in a short time from 
 
740 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 the Supreme Court. But if this delay is to defeat the application, would 
 not people for the same reason assert no right by the law, and thus submit 
 to all outrages or take the law in their own hands ? And must the right on 
 which all rights depend be abandoned because the law is slow? 
 
 But it is said, that while the Courts are waiting, the Congress will com 
 plete its work. But if the Courts finally hold that the work is completed 
 without any authority under the Constitution, will not all the work go for 
 nothing and our existing government be restored? 
 
 But suppose it will take one year, or five years, or ten years to " force 
 the Court to a decision." Would it not be better to brook the Court s de 
 lay for even ten years than to accept anarchy and slavery for a century ? 
 
 No, there is neither logic, nor sincerity, nor patriotism in this argument 
 or excuse, that we are helpless. If we consent to and accept these military 
 measures, then we are helpless, because they, by that consent, become valid 
 become our act. If we do not accept if we vote against a convention 
 they never can become valid. They can never be finally enforced. This is 
 the reason, and the only reason, why every means is resorted to to secure 
 our consent. Without that consent these acts have no vitality. There is 
 for these corrupt party manipulators and bribed deserters from their own 
 honor, no refuge from disgrace, but in the success of their scheme of ruin. 
 There is no possible way of success except by the people s consent to their 
 own ruin. Therefore it is, that emissaries come, and renegades labor, and 
 original secessionists become orthodox loyalists, and by persuasions and by 
 threats, by bribing some and alarming others and deceiving all, seek to get 
 the people to consent. 
 
 The wicked violators of the Constitution would cover their crimes by 
 calling it progress and getting the people to tread with them in their coun 
 try s death march. 
 
 The itinerant vender of his people s honor would escape the infamy of 
 his trade by inducing the people to join in the sale. 
 
 What ! will the people violate the Constitution to get strength, or aban 
 don the laws to find safety ? Then, is the mariner skilled who throws away 
 his chart and compass to find his way over the sea ; and the madman has be 
 come wise who forsakes his shelter to avoid the storm. 
 
 One of the banished crew, 
 I fear, hath ventured from the deep, to raise 
 New troubles. 
 
 NUMBER FIVE. 
 
 It is said, in the next place, that if we do not accept the present plan of 
 Reconstruction proposed in these Military Bills, another plan, more odious 
 and oppressive, will be provided. Further disfranchisement, it is said, of the 
 white race will take place, and, it may be, a total disfranchisement of all 
 but the blacks and their fellows in sufferings and former bondage the per 
 secuted loyalists and who alone will then have the government of the 
 State. 
 
 But if the present plan fails because it is unconstitutional, how can a 
 worse plan a plan still more unconstitutional succeed ? If it is not in the 
 power of Congress to disfranchise a few, how can it disfranchise all ? Con 
 gress can neither make nor unmake elector S, and every member of the Congress 
 knows it. And every act which seeks or pretends to make or unmake voters 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WAITINGS. 741 
 
 in a State is void and null, and will be declared so ; and every election held 
 or Constitution formed, or government organized by voters who are mado 
 voters only by Congress, is void and will be declared so. Every man who 
 is made a voter by the law of his State, and is denied that vote by Congress 
 is wronged, and every agent or officer of the Congress, or other person who 
 enforces the denial is & wrong-doer, and responsible in all the penalties and 
 damages prescribed by the State laws. The only danger possible lies in the 
 strange fear of the people to assert their rights, and the consequent disposi 
 tion to consent to the wrong. From consent alone can wrong derive power, 
 and when once consented to its power becomes irresistible. If thev did not 
 see, or think they saw, a fatal inclination in our people to yield, "Congress 
 and the renegades would not ask their consent, nor dare to inflict the wrongs. 
 For to attempt the wrong and fail (and withouc consent they must fail), can 
 only bring ultimate disgrace on those who make the attempt. When the 
 burglar knows the owner of the house is awake and determined to resist, he 
 will not dare enter ; but if he knows the owner is asleep or disposed to yield, 
 he is sure to enter ; he is invited to enter. A Congress or a fragmentary 
 conclave thereof, who breaks the Constitution to inflict wrongs on an unresist 
 ing people, is more criminal and far more cowardly than the burglar ; and 
 the man who is within who is of the people and who counsels submission 
 to the wrong, is far more to be despised than a burglar, or than even such a 
 Congress. 
 
 Of like character is the threat that, if we reject this plan, Congress will, 
 in a new plan, add confiscation. He is to be pitied for his simplicity who 
 does not know that Congress has no more power to confiscate the property 
 of a peaceful citizen than has a political meeting or a church mob ; and that 
 the very attempt would necessarily end the existence of the Congress 
 attempting it. 
 
 But unmanly and without foundation of either law or reason as are 
 these threats of further attempts at disfranchisement and confiscation, the} 
 are of surpassing importance in other respects, and demand the most^ serious 
 consideration of our people. The position urged upon us is this : We must 
 submit to a proposed wrong lest a greater wrong follow. We must surrender 
 our franchises, because, if we do not, our property will be taken also. Now, 
 the first point to which Tbeg attention is this : These positions admit that 
 the party (or power, if you please) which proposes the present wrong, has 
 already the will to inflict further wrong; that the Congress which requires 
 you to consent to the destruction of your franchise, has already the will to 
 rob you of your property. 
 
 Thus, you are asked to place your property for safety in the keeping 
 that power which already has the will to take it. You are importuned 
 escape the power of the lion by rushing to his embrace ; to avoid 
 of the serpent by placing your hand in his mouth ! 
 
 This is precisely the point. Will every man in the South ponder 
 repeat it never forget it ? Disfranchisement, confiscation, and 
 evils will not come, they cannot come, through our existing Mate gov 
 ment. Never! But they can come, and they will come through the gov 
 ment, which this plan of Reconstruction proposes to establish for ou 
 ini; State governments. Who, in all these States, favor or agitate for con 
 fiscation except the Northern emissary and Southern renegade, an 
 negro, when prompted and directed by these emissaries and re 
 Are we not warned ? Read the resolutions of negro conventions and when- 
 
742 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 ever you find one of these conventions in which these emissaries and rene 
 gades are the devilish prompters, you will find confiscation threatened, or 
 apologized for, or justified, or demanded. And these are the very men who 
 are to form, organize, control, and administer, and enjoy the offices under 
 these new governments proposed by these Military Bills. And when we 
 admit the power to abrogate existing governments and organize new gov 
 ernments to be composed of such men with such views and for such pur 
 poses, then abrogations and disfranchisements and new organizations will 
 continue until such men do effectually control, and such views and purposes 
 do effectually prevail. The whole purpose of these Military Bills is to add 
 these ten States to Radical party power ; nothing less than the complete 
 accomplishment of the purpose will be accepted. And this purpose can 
 never be accomplished but by disfranchising, impoverishing, destroying, and 
 driving off all the true, and noble, and manly, and country-loving of the 
 Southern people ; and delivering over our bright and beautiful land to the 
 riotous rule and miscegenating orgies of negroes, Yankees and base apos 
 tates from their own kindred, color, country, and blood. I would not fear 
 the docile negro, left to himself. He would soon know his true friends, see 
 his interest, and be useful. But the Africanized white man is an enemy to 
 the peace and interest of both races, and would be an admitted monster in 
 any age or country of barbarians. 
 
 I admit, then, that we are in danger of confiscation. Those who outlaw 
 patriotism and intelligence, would not scruple to rob. The representatives 
 who violate the Constitution they are sworn to support, in order to abrogate 
 State government, and reduce the people to military bondage, could not add 
 to their iniquities by taking the little property we have left. As a people 
 we have but little scarcely enough to prevent starvation. All the world 
 seems to be moving to send bread to keep us alive. What a curious people 
 we are ! fit objects of charity and fit subjects for confiscation ! The same 
 train brings the bread to feed, the officer to oppress, and the emissary to 
 breed strife and to rob ! Alas, we have been robbed robbed in war and in 
 peace, and by foes and by friends ! 
 
 A few are rich. They prospered while their victims were sacrificed 
 showed a talent to make money while their dupes showed a will to lose 
 blood. These might naturally dread confiscation, and, in view of the sacri 
 fices they made to get property, it may be reasonable they should make 
 great sacrifices to keep what they made, for what is honor worth to such ? 
 But even these should not altogether lose their reason. May they not be 
 nursing a power that may consume them? Thieves are not always to be 
 trusted, even by their friends and co-laborers. It is safer to avoid a danger 
 than trust to controlling it. 
 
 When we abandon the safeguard of the Constitution, and trust ourselves 
 -* to the magnanimity of its violators, we shall embrace the surest means of 
 
 -) procuring the loss of all things. But I scorn to pursue such a line of argu 
 ment. 
 
 ^, A people who are willing to sacrifice honor to avarice are beyond the 
 
 possibility of redemption. If the very statement of the proposition does 
 
 Jt not awaken a feeling of abhorrence, we are indeed in a sad condition. If 
 anything can be baser than degradation, it is such a motive for sinking to 
 it. Lost property may be recovered ;., burnt cities may be rebuilt ; devas 
 tated fields may bloom again ; even buried children, fallen for their country, 
 will live again in the quickened spirits of new generations. But as with 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 743 
 
 t individuals so with people and communities the sense of honor once lost is 
 
 I lost forever. Yea, more ; the history of human nature, singly and in com- 
 
 I munities, teaches, without exception of example, that when self-respect is 
 
 once lost, self-abasement once accepted, cities, lands, liberty, country can- 
 
 not be retained. 
 
 It is natural, too, that all others should lose respect for those who lose 
 respect for themselves. If we accept the humiliation proposed for us, all 
 mankind will be ashamed of us, our children will be ashamed of us, and our 
 very enemies, whose hatred prompted the shame, will mock and deride UH. 
 Even now I believe the impression which a few have been industrious to 
 produce, that our people are willing to reconstruct under these acts, has 
 damaged us more in the estimation of all honorable minds than anything 
 else that has happened. I do not know Gen. Pope, but if, as I assume, he 
 possesses the ordinary instincts of honor that belong to an American gentle 
 man, he must have felt an almost nauseating pity for the poor men who 
 gathered about him in Atlanta, and forgetting the history of their fathers 
 and the character of our institutions, welcomed in feasting and rejoicing 
 the inauguration of military depotism over one of the Old Thirteen, whose 
 sons were in the first revolution, and who holds in her bosom the ashes of 
 Pulaski ! A brave man loves courage in others, and despises sycophancy 
 which makes sacrifices to power to secure safety, perhaps patronage, for 
 itself. Heroism in defeat, patience in suffering, the preservation of honor 
 in the midst of misfortune, are the sublime virtues which everything on 
 earth admires and everything in Heaven rewards, and which never fail to 
 lift a people possessing them, however temporarily unfortunate, to final 
 prosperity and renown. And a people, however great, who propose dis 
 honor to the helpless, who would take advantage of misfortune to force 
 oppressions on the unresisting, will surely sink by the weight of their own 
 infamy to ruin, and everything virtuous on earth and in heaven will rejoice 
 at the fall. 
 
 I admit that I have often overrated the intelligence and virtue and en 
 durance of our people. Everything they have done, from the suicidal repeal 
 of the Missouri Compromise to the criminal and factious demoralization 
 which compelled our surrender, has been contrary to my wishes and against 
 my protests. But I do not believe they are so lost to every instinct of man 
 hood as to accept the plan of State destruction proposed by the fanatical 
 representative of other States, as contained in these Military Bills. Many 
 at first were taken by surprise, and were tempted with a desperate thought 
 lessness to yield. 
 
 But they will reject the hateful thing they had almost embraced. 
 
 NUMBER SIX. 
 
 Of all the pretexts which have been used to justify the oppression of the 
 Southern people, none is so faithless in character, or so destitute of 
 tion in truth and law, as the one that the Southern States and people, being 
 conquered, are subject to the will of the conqueror. It is time our people 
 fully understood this question. They need the information to protect 
 from the very deceptive purposes of their own active Southern-born coun 
 selors. We might be surprised at the ignorance, if we did not know 
 treachery of the motives of those who, in this day of civilization, labo 
 earnestly to fix in the minds of our people the idea that when one party 
 
744 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 yields to another in a war, the yielding party submits thereby all rights of 
 person and property and of political government to the will of the con 
 queror. And that such advice should be given by those among us who pro 
 fess to be actuated for our good can be explained only on the hypothesis 
 that the real purpose is to betray for a consideration. 
 
 The late war was either a rebellion, or it was a civil war, or it was a for 
 eign war. Each name has its advocates. Others, again, give the war either 
 or all these characters by turns, as the giving of either or all can be sup 
 posed to justify some oppression on the unsuccessful party to the conflict. 
 I shall not stop to prove that it was, what history can only call it, a civil 
 war. Whether it was the one or the other, there is no question in all inter 
 national or municipal law better settled, or settled on more manifest founda 
 tions of natural reason, social justice, and public faith, than is the question 
 of the rights and powers of the conqueror and the rights and obligations of 
 the conquered. 
 
 All conflicts, whether between a sovereign and his subjects, or between 
 two parties in a government or republic, or between two independent na 
 tions, are founded on some question, some difference, making an issue be 
 tween the parties which reason has not been able to settle. The parties 
 take up arms to solve the question and settle the issue between them. 
 
 Every war ends by compromise, or by one party yielding to the other, 
 either on terms or without terms. If the end is by compromise, the terms 
 of the compromise constitute the law of the peace. If one party surrender 
 on terms, the law of peace is the issue of the fight qualified by the terms of 
 the surrender ; if the surrender is without terms, then all the questions involved 
 in the issue are settled in favor of the conqueror, but no question not dis 
 tinctly involved is settled or affected. 
 
 Now, two things must be distinctly understood and fixed in the minds 
 of the reader. 
 
 1. Where must we look to find the terms on which the conflict ends, and 
 which make the law of the peace between the parties ? 
 
 2. At what time must these terms be made known or agreed upon ? 
 Wars between independent nations are usually ended by treaty, and, of 
 
 course, we must look to the treaty of peace to find the terms of the peace. 
 What is not found in the treaty is not settled. So also in civil wars- 
 treaties are sometimes made and have the same force and effect as when 
 made between independent nations. Usually, however, treaties are not made 
 between parties to civil war or a rebellion, because the sovereign or party 
 claiming to be the legitimate government will not treat with those whom 
 they persist in calling rebels, because to treat with them is to admit a sort 
 of implied independence or authority. In all such cases, in order to find the 
 terms of the peace, we must look to the causes or differences which actuated 
 the parties in taking up arms to the declarations and demands of the parties 
 at the time of beginning and during the progress of the struggle ; to the 
 promises made or assurances proclaimed by the victor to induce the adver 
 sary to lay down his arms, and to the negotiations and terms of the surren 
 der. Whatever is not there found is not settled, and forms no part whatever 
 of the terms of peace. I need not add that all the treaties, declarations, and 
 promises are to be interpreted, not according to the discretion of either 
 party, but in the light and according to the rules of the laws of nations and 
 the established principles of natural justice and good faith. 
 
 In the next place it must be stated, that whatever either party, in case 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 745 
 
 of a compromise or a treaty, or the victor in case of a surrender, intends to 
 demand as a condition of the peace, must be made known before or at the 
 time the treaty is made, or before or at the time the surrender is accepted 
 No party agrees to what is not made known, or surrenders to what is not 
 claimed. To demand new guarantees after a treaty has been made, is a 
 breach of the treaty ; and to prescribe new terms of surrender after the sur 
 render has been accepted, is deemed infamous by all mankind, and in both cases 
 is held to be a new and just cause of war. And when such conduct is exhib 
 ited toward an adversary who has given up his arms and submitted to the 
 victor, and is thereby unable to renew the war, the party guilty of it has no 
 claim to the confidence or respect of any people, for he brings the faith of 
 promises into disrepute. 
 
 The faith of treaties constancy in fulfilling our engagements is to be held sacred 
 and inviolable, and if mankind be not willfully deficient in their duty to themselves, in 
 famy must ever be the portion of him who violates his faith. 
 
 . . . And in general, the sovereign, whose word ought ever to be sacred, is 
 bound to the faithful observance of every promise he has made, even to rebels I mean 
 to such of his subjects as have rebelled without reason or necessity. . . . But tyrants 
 alone will treat as seditious those brave and resolute citizens who exhort the people to 
 preserve themselves from oppression, and to vindicate their rights and privileges. If a 
 good prince has justice and his duty at heart if he aspires to that immortal and unsul 
 lied glory of being the father of his people let him mistrust the selfish suggestions of 
 that minister who represents to him as rebels those citizens who do not stretch out tlir 
 necks to the yoke of slavery who refuse tamely to crouch under the rod of arbitrary 
 power. 
 
 And if there existed no reasons to justify the insurrection (a circumstance which, per 
 haps, never happens), even in such case, it becomes necessary, as we have above observed, 
 to grant an amnesty when the offenders are numerous. When the amnesty is once published 
 and accepted, all the past must be buried in oblimon; nor must any one be called to ac 
 count for what has been done during the disturbances. Vattel. 
 
 There are cases in which a party to a conflict may increase his demands 
 during the conflict, or he may make these demands during negotiations 
 for peace. He may demand the removal of the cause which, in his judg 
 ment, produced the conflict ; or he may demand securities for the observ 
 ance of promises ; or the expense of the war ; or any other terms which may 
 reasonably tend to make peace permanent. But in all cases such demand 
 must be distinctly made before the treaty is agreed to or before the surrender 
 is accepted. To make such demands afterward is a base treachery, of which 
 any power, great enough to be a victor, ought to be deemed totally incapa 
 ble. Even in cases of revolt, when the revolters are subdued and sue for 
 peace, the amnesty may except the authors of the disturbance ; but even 
 then only that they " may be brought to a legal trial and punished if found 
 guilty." 
 
 At the present day it seldom happens that either of the belligerents perseveres to the 
 last extremity before he will consent to a peace. Though a nation may have lost 
 battles she can still defend herself ; as long as she has men and arms remaining she : 
 destitute of all resource. If she thinks fit, by a disadvantageous treaty, to procure a 
 necessary peace if by great sacrifices she delivered herself from imminent danger o 
 total ruin the residue which remains in her possession is still an advantage 
 she is indebted to the peace ; it was her own free choice to prefer a certain and imme< 
 loss, but of limited extent, to an evil of a more dreadful nature, which, though ye 
 some distance, she had but too great reason to apprehend. Vattel. 
 
 But how does she have a " residue of rights remaining," according to 
 the terms of the peace, if new terms of total ruin may be prescribed after 
 
V4C SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 the peace ? How is the extent of the loss "limited 1 by the terms of her 
 surrender, if unlimited exactions may be made by the victor afterward ? 
 Whatever the conqueror demands lie must demand while his adversary has 
 " men and arms remaining." A conquered people are never " subject to the 
 will of the conqueror." None but very barbarous people and Northern 
 Radicals and Southern renegades ever said so. A conquered people are sub 
 ject to the terms of the conquest made known and demanded before or at 
 the time the conquest is admitted, and to no after-terms or will whatever ; 
 and none but a treacherous conqueror would demand more ; and none but a 
 more treacherous and very base conquered would concede more. Rapacity 
 only claims more than the bond. Servile cowardice alone consents to 
 more. 
 
 If an unjust and rapacious conqueror subdues a nation, and forces her to accept of 
 hard, ignominious, and insupportable conditions, necessity obliges her to submit ; but 
 this apparent tranquillity is not a peace ; it is an oppression which she endures only so 
 long as she wants the means of shaking it off, and against which men of spirit rise on the 
 tirst favorable opportunity. . . . Will any man pretend that a people so oppressed 
 would not be justifiable in seizing a convenient opportunity to recover their rights, to 
 emancipate themselves, and to expel or exterminate the horde of greedy, insolent, and 
 cruel usurpers ? No ! such a monstrous absurdity can never be seriously maintained. 
 Besides, were you to preach up the contrary doctrine, which is so repugnant to all the 
 feelings and suggestions of nature, where could you expect to make proselytes ? Vattel. 
 
 Must the answer to the question of this noble writer who lived in a 
 former generation and in the midst of European despotism be, that prose 
 lytes to a doctrine so repugnant to the feelings of nature are found here in 
 free America in proud Southern America. Yea, more ; that here, in 
 Georgia, men claiming to be leaders, favorite advisers of the people, long 
 trusted by the people, are to be found teaching the people that they are not 
 only bound to submit to hard and ignominous terms which they have ac 
 cepted, but they are bound to submit and ought to submit to such terms 
 when they have not accepted them, and that they are bound to submit and 
 ought to submit to whatever the will of a conqueror may demand after they 
 have laid down their arms ? Still more, not only submit, but consent to 
 accept and defend and justify such terms of the conqueror ! terms that 
 abrogate their governments, and adopt new governments made by their 
 former slaves, to please and suit only their oppressors ! 
 
 I wish to call the reader s attention to one rule to be observed in ascer 
 taining the terms of peace, and then we will proceed to apply the rules to 
 ascertain the terms of peace between the parties to our late civil war, and 
 what are the rights of the conqueror and the obligations of the conquered. 
 The rule is this : So far is it from being true that the will of the conqueror 
 is the law of the conquered, that all points of doubt, in ascertaining the 
 terms of the peace as fixed before the surrender, are to be construed against 
 the conqueror. 
 
 In case of doubt, the interpretation goes against him who prescribed the terms ; 
 for as it was, in some measure, dictated by him, it was his own fault if he neglected to 
 express himself more clearly, and by extending or restricting the signification of the ex 
 pression to that meaning which is least favorable to him, we either do him no injury, or 
 we only do him that to which he has willfully exposed himself ; whereas, by adopting a 
 contrary mode of interpretation, we would incur the risk of converting vague or ambig 
 uous terms into so many snares to entrap the weaker party in the contract, who has been 
 obliged to subscribe to what the stronger had dictated. Vattel. 
 
 So we see, in all Avars, the conqueror must not only make known his 
 terms before his adversary s surrender is accepted, and " while his men and 
 
HIS LIFE. SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 747 
 
 arms are remaining," but he must make known his terms distinctly, and if 
 he fails to be distinct, the injury shall result alone to the conqueror, because 
 a contrary rule would entrap the weaker party. What would become of 
 the wrecked party if the conqueror were not only relieved from the duty of 
 making known his terms beforehand, but were allowed to prescribe terms 
 according to his own will after the peace was declared ? The very thought 
 is horrible to all honorable minds, whether of the conqueror or the con 
 quered. 
 
 Whether the late war was a rebellion, a civil war, or a foreign war, the 
 terms of peace are not doubtful. They were prescribed by the conqueror- 
 the United States most solemnly prescribed, while the "arms and men" 
 of their adversary " were remaining." They induced thousands to lay 
 down their arms in advance ; even to desert their colors. They prevented 
 the independence of the Confederate States by giving strength* to internal 
 treachery, and now to insist upon other terms, having no law but the will of 
 the conqueror as expressed by a fragmentary conclave of Congressional 
 members, is to insist upon a treachery which would shame the tyrannical 
 conqueror of the unfortunate Montezuma. To these terms of peace the 
 reader s attention will be invited in the next note. 
 
 NUMBER SEVEX. 
 
 The late civil war did not end by any formal treaty of peace. The 
 United States, though recognizing, by all the departments of their Federal 
 Government, the Confederate States as a belligerent party, would not recog 
 nize the right of making a treaty by their enemy, lest a sort of separation 
 or independence should be implied. 
 
 We must, therefore, look to the grounds of difference which brought on 
 the conflict to the declaration by the United States of the purposes of the 
 war as made at the beginning and during the progress of the war, and to 
 the conditions or stipulations of surrender, for the terms of peace, and the 
 consequent rights of the victor and the obligations of the vanquished. For 
 we must admit that the doctrines of the issue, as insisted upon by the United 
 States, and the purposes and demands of the United States in making and carry 
 ing on the war, and the terms of surrender, were agreed to by us in the act 
 of surrender, and, therefore, make the law of the peace for both parties, 
 being thus demanded by one party and conceded by the other.* 
 
 * NOTE. The reader will observe that I do not claim the doctrines and purposes of 
 the Confederate States as constituting any of the terms of the pence. These were all de 
 feated in the fight, and were abandoned by the surrender. The official declarations and 
 purposes of the United States, as avowed before the surrender, were the terms to whirl] 
 the Confederate States agreed to submit by the surrender, and with which the 
 States are bound to be satisfied ; and thus they form the law of peas*. Yet, a G< 
 one boasting of tjie honors conferred on him by the people, in a late speech at Milledge- 
 ville. tells us we are out of the Union according to our own position ! 
 rendered, after a gallant fight, we were, upon our own deelaration, a conquered 
 State, subject to the will of the conqueror !" as though that very surrender did 
 feat our declaration, and make good the declaration of the conqueror, that our 
 was void, and that we were not and should not be out of tlie Union as a 1 
 One of our own teachers, who tells us his children are to live among us, making, i 
 same breath our will and the will of the enemy alike >/r law. if, by such CM 
 positions, he can harm us in both cases! Such perfidy is surpassed only by the 
 that Mr. Davis " made strong efforts to get a perpetual suspension of habea* corpn 
 by the littleness which quotes the conclusion of the petition for habea* corpui, I 
 
748 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 The Southern States insisted : 
 
 1. That the Federal Constitution was a compact to which the States 
 were parties, as separate and independent States ; and, therefore were 
 parties, with the right, by virtue of their separate sovereignty, of with 
 drawal from the compact when, in the judgment of the State withdrawing, 
 her interest or safety required withdrawal. 
 
 2. That the administration of the common government by a sectional 
 party sectional because organized on principles of avowed hostility to a 
 right of property held by the citizens of the Southern States ami recognized 
 in the Constitution would endanger the interest and safety of such State, 
 and, therefore, justified the exercise of the right claimed to withdraw. 
 
 Many in the South believed this right to withdraw would be conceded 
 by the party then coming into power in the United States, and that, there 
 fore, the secession would be peaceable. They Avere encouraged to believe 
 tins, because this doctrine, though now and for years advocated at the 
 South, did really originate in New England, and first came as a threat from 
 that quarter of the Union ; because, also, many of the prominent organs and 
 leaders of the new party did concede the right, and some declared if the 
 Southern States chose to exercise it, they should do so in peace. 
 
 But this impression proved to be a very fatal mistake ; and it is very 
 certain that the United States, and every department of their government, 
 in the beginning and throughout the duration of the struggle, and until 
 after the final surrender, did deny, in every official form, both the right of 
 withdrawal, the validity of the attempt to withdraw, as well as the suffi 
 ciency of the case made to justify the attempt. 
 
 Thus the right of a State to withdraw from the Union became the great, 
 leading question of difference between the parties to the conflict, as made by 
 all the official records, and was the main question to be decided by the con 
 flict. The South insisted the Union was dissolved ; the North denied it ; 
 they joined in battle to decide the question. Now let us see the official 
 proof that this was the original issue. 
 
 In Mr. Lincoln s first Inaugural Address we find the following language : 
 
 It follows, from these views, that no State, upon its own mere motion, can lawfully 
 get out of the Union ; that resolves and ordinances to that effect are legally void. . . . 
 1, therefore, consider that, in view of the Constitution and laws, the Union is unbroken, 
 and, to the extent of my ability, I shall take care, as the Constitution itself expressly en 
 joins upon me, that the laws of the Union shall be faithfully executed in all the States. 
 
 formal conclusion of all such papers, as evidence of humiliation or inconsistency on the 
 part of Mr. Davis ! And yet he exclaims, as if his motive was suspected and needed vin 
 dication, " What interest, then, can I have in misleading you ?" 
 
 A great writer gives us an account of a very similar speech which was made long ago, 
 by one who had been " often honored "; and after quoting the speech, adds this comment : 
 
 " So spake the false dissembler unperceived ; 
 For neither Man nor Angel can discern 
 Hypocrisy, the only evil that walks 
 Invisible, except to God alone." 
 
 But that speaker himself afterward, in a soliloquy, gave the explanation of all his at 
 tempts at deception. He said : 
 
 "But what will not ambition and revenge 
 Descend to ? Who aspires must down as low 
 As high he soar d ; obnoxious, first or last, 
 To basest things." 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AXD WHITINGS. 749 
 
 TT Q thi "-* are P^y. **^ ty the Executive power of the 
 
 United States : 1. That the Union is not and cannot be broken by the 
 separate States ; and 2. That this doctrine shall be maintained. 
 
 In July, 1861, the Congress of the United States, with almost entire una- 
 Dimity, resolved : 
 
 " That this war is not waged, on our part, in any spirit of oppression, nor 
 for any purpose of conquest or subjugation, nor purpose of overthrowing or 
 interfering with the rights or established institutions of the States, but to 
 defend and maintain the supremacy of the Union, and to preserve the Union 
 with all the dignity, equality, and rights of the several States unimpaired 
 and, as soon as these objects are accomplished, the war ought to cease." 
 
 Now, let us analyze this resolution, and we find that it asserts three very 
 distinct propositions : 
 
 1. It declares what is not the purpose of the war : It is not "in a spirit 
 of oppression," nor for any purpose of conquest or subjugation. 
 
 2. It declares what is the purpose of the war : "To defend and maintain 
 the Constitution, and to preserve the Union, with all the dignity, equality 
 and rights of the several States unimpaired" 
 
 3. It declares when the war shall cease : "As soon as these objects are 
 accomplished, the war ought to cease " : that is, as soon as the Constitution 
 is maintained and the Union preserved with the dignity, equality, and rights 
 of the States unimpaired, the war ought to cease. 
 
 Ten days afterward the Congress again declared, on motion of a New 
 England Radical, their "fixed determination to maintain the supremacy of 
 the Government, and the integrity of the Union of all these United States." 
 And, with the single exception of Mr. Breckenridge, this resolution was 
 unanimous in the Senate. 
 
 Quotations of like character could be multiplied until there should be no 
 end of the books that should be written ; but these which I have made are 
 so clear, so explicit, so official, and make the single purpose of the war on 
 the part of the United States so distinct, that I could not make it more ex 
 plicit by a thousand additional proofs. That single purpose, at that time, 
 was to defeat the validity of secession, and preserve the Union of all the 
 States. 
 
 Now, I have conceded, and here repeat, that either party, during the 
 struggle, may increase his demands or enlarge his purposes in waging the 
 war; and these additional demands or purposes being proclaimed and made 
 known to the other party before the surrender, while " his men and arms re 
 main," may be claimed as among the results decided by the war, and as mak 
 ing part of the terms of peace. Such demands, it is true, must be reasonable, 
 and such purposes must be within the laws of war. For instance, either 
 party, within the time prescribed, may demand the removal of the cause of 
 the war, so that it may not produce a renewal of the conflict ; or, in case of 
 an unjust war, or of unnecessary or unreasonable prolongation of the struggle 
 may demand the expenses of the war ; or, in case of rebellion, may insist on 
 excepting from the amnesty the authors of the disturbance to be brought to 
 legal trial ; or, if a cruel and barbarous nation were to give distinct notice 
 to rebels that they must expect no quarter that they must consider, incase 
 of surrender, that their lives or property or both are forfeited ; the world 
 might be shocked and humanity made ashamed, but the rebels ought not to 
 complain, for in that case they are notified they must submit to the declared 
 will of the conqueror, and ought to fight to extermination. But, as such de- 
 
v50 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 mands are unusually cruel, they ought to be made known before the surren 
 der, with unusual distinctness, lest the weaker party, relying on the law of 
 nature and humanity, to save something by not fighting to extermination, 
 should be entrapped into a surrender which accomplishes what they in 
 tended by surrendering to escape. 
 
 I repeat, the only demand made by the United States in the beginning 
 was that the people of the Confederate States should " lay down their arms, 
 retire to their homes, and obey the laws," because thereby the United States 
 sought to accomplish the only purpose of the war, to wit : the defeat of 
 secession and the preservation of the Union. 
 
 The question is, did the United States, during the war and before the 
 surrender, make other demands or avow additional purposes and make them 
 known to the Confederates ? 
 
 I have been unable to find any other, and believe no other man is able to 
 find any other, legitimate or official demands or purposes. 
 
 I tind many individual threats, and I find also acts of confiscation, sus 
 pension of habeas corpus, and such like acts ; but then they are declared to 
 be, what indeed their very nature makes them, war measures to end with 
 the war, and to make no part of the terms or law of peace. They were 
 adopted as means to accomplish the one great original purpose to force us 
 to lay down our arms, and thus preserve the Union. Mr. Lincoln did 
 promise a liberal exercise of the pardoning power, from which it may be 
 claimed to imply that he would except some from the amnesty, but he could 
 only except them for a legal trial, and I suppose even Mr. Lincoln did not 
 doubt the result of a fair legal trial, unless of some one who made war on 
 the United States before the secession of his State. For though the result 
 of the war did decide that secession was void, yet, as intent is the essence of 
 crime, it did not and could not decide that one who honestly believed that 
 secession was legal, was bound to know it was void before the decision 
 made it so. And though the result establishes that secession is and icas. and 
 
 O 
 
 must remain void, yet he who honestly believed, at the time, that secession 
 was either a constitutional or revolutionary right, or that his allegiance was 
 due to his State when secession was asserted, or who believed the coercion 
 of a State was a crime, could not become a criminal by acting on his honest 
 belief. But if a man, before the secession of his State, made war on the 
 United States by seizing her forts or otherwise ; or if, while holding an of 
 fice under an oath to support the Constitution of the United States, he used 
 the functions of that very office, by overt acts, to destroy the Union, such a 
 man was a traitor, and might, with some show of reason, have been excepted 
 from the amnesty and reserved for trial. I think, however, true wisdom and 
 a peaceful future required entire amnesty for the past, and careful abstinence 
 from all oppressive acts in all the future. 
 
 During the war, Mr. Lincoln, as President of the United States, issued 
 his proclamation, emancipating slaves in certain States and parts of States. 
 But this, itself, was declared to be a war measure only. Afterward the 
 Congress had proposed to the States an amendment to the Constitution, 
 abolishing slavery everywhere. But the States had not ratified it. It was, 
 therefore, only a proposition undetermined at the time of the surrender. 
 After the surrender the slave States accepted and ratified this proposed 
 amendment, and thus, by the act of the slave States after the surrender, this 
 amendment became a portion of the Constitution. Therefore, the abolition 
 Of slavery mav, in fact, though not in legal stqctn.ess, be coimtecl as on^ of 
 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 751 
 
 the things decided by the war, and as being part of the law of peace. It is 
 a noticeable fact, also, that although Mr. Lincoln included the acceptance of 
 emancipation as part of the terms at the conference in Hampton Roads, yet 
 neither he nor Gen. Grant, nor any other power, alluded to this as part of 
 the terms during the negotiations for, nor at the time of the acceptance of, 
 the surrender. The only conditions of the surrender were to submit to the 
 laws, and not take up arms again against the United States. 
 
 What, then, did the war decide, and what, by that decision, is the law of 
 peace? Here it is, and here is all: 
 
 Secession is void ; the Constitution is maintained ; the Union is preserved 
 with all the dignity, equality, and rights of the several States unimpaired, 
 with the single exception of the abolition of slavery through the consent of 
 the original slave States. 
 
 And when our people, after the surrender, took an oath to support the 
 Constitution of the United States and the union of the States thereunder, they 
 swore to support the above decision, and nothing more. 
 
 The meeting of the Conventions in these States, to conform their Con 
 stitutions and laws to the change brought by the abolition of slavery, was 
 proper, and a result of the agreement to emancipate. The appointment of 
 provisional civil officers by the President to enable these conventions to be 
 called and to act, was proper machinery to accomplish the end. Further 
 than this, no reconstruction was ever needed, or was legal or proper. But 
 for the abolition of slavery the States would have been restored to their old 
 Constitutions and government, as they existed at the time of secession. 
 
 Every proposition in these Military Bills has been originated since the 
 war ; not one of them was demanded during the war, or was made a condi 
 tion of the surrender. There is not a respectable publicist or law-writer, 
 ancient or modern, heathen or Christian, which can be quoted to sustain 
 them. 
 
 By every such author the attempt to prescribe new terms after the sur 
 render is infamous is a breach of the peace is anew declaration of war, and 
 is a most perfidious abandonment of the most sacred of national obligations 
 in the face of mankind. 
 
 Nay, more : these Military Bills are disunion bills. Those who propose 
 them are disunionists ; those who advocate them are disunionists ; those who 
 consent to or accept them are disunionists. And they are disunionists, too, 
 not like the secessionists, on a principle asserting a simply doubtful right ; 
 but they are disunionists in the teeth of the very decision of the war itself, 
 and disunionists who do not seek to accomplish their ends in an open, manly 
 way, but who destroy the Union under pretense of preserving it 
 trample on the Constitution under oath to support it ; who continue t 
 war after resistance has ceased ; who fight an unarmed people, and re 
 own impoverished victims. 
 
 NUMBER EIGHT. 
 
 Even, then, if we are really a conquered people, I have shown that by 
 the well-established rules of the laws of war and of nations, we 
 " subject to the will of the conqueror," except as that will 
 before the surrender, and, therefore, agreed to by the surrender, 
 shown that any terms prescribed after the war is over, and alter a su 
 is accepted, are not only not binding on the conquered, but 
 
752 SENATOR B. R. HILL, OF GEOlt&TA. 
 
 the conqueror, and amount to a new declaration of war against those who 
 were entrapped into laying down their arras, and who are, therefore, for the 
 time being, helpless. And whether the Congress or the Executive, or both, 
 as is variously claimed, or whether the President and the Senate (as is the 
 truth), be the peace-making power of the United States, I have shown from 
 the official records of each and all, that the only conditions demanded of the 
 Southern people, in laying down their arms, were the preservation of the 
 Union under the Constitution, with the single change of the abolition of 
 slavery, which single change was very doubtfully and imperfectly demanded, 
 but was very promptly and cheerfully yielded. 
 
 No principles than those I have announced, are better settled, or more in 
 consonance with natural reason and public justice ; no terms were evermore 
 distinctly declared as the purpose of waging the war, or more sacredly prom 
 ised as the conditions of the peace ; and no surrendering people ever did 
 more promptly, more absolutely, more submissively, or with one-tenth the 
 sacrifice of property and hope and pride and feeling, comply with all the 
 terms demanded on their part, than did the Southern States and people. 
 They laid down their arms ; they gave up the great principle of govern 
 ment which their fathers taught them never to yield, and to maintain which 
 they had fought so long and endured so much ; though already impover 
 ished they gave up four billions more of property the descended patrimony 
 of centuries ; they struck the fetters from their slaves by their own con 
 sent, and, with words of encouragement and hope, gave the freed slaves, 
 by their own laws, absolute civil equality with their former owners ; they 
 abided, without complaint or claim for damages, the burning of their cities, 
 the devastation of their homes, the destruction of the food for their wo 
 men and children, and a thousand other acts of war which no civilized code 
 will justify, and no civilized precedent will mitigate ; they changed their 
 organic laws and redigested their municipal codes to conform them to the 
 new order of things. They repudiated the obligations and contracts they 
 had assumed to their own people and to mankind to secure help in what 
 they had deemed a struggle for liberty and life. They hazarded a social 
 revolution and a paralysis of every form of labor, which might well have 
 awed the most thrifty people and the most firmly established society. All 
 these things they did and suffered to show good faith in fulfilling the obli 
 gations of their surrender, to maintain the Constitution and preserve the 
 Union ! 
 
 Yet two long years have elapsed, and they have not been permitted to 
 enjoy a single privilege, nor suffered to escape a single burden of that 
 Union ! Nay, while waiting to receive what was so earnestly, so sacredly 
 promised their recognition as continuing equals in the Union they have 
 seen swarms of agents of the United States permeating every neighborhood 
 of their land, and stealing, in the name and by the permits of the Govern 
 ment, and carrying away their cotton arid other remaining means with which 
 they had hoped to begin the recuperation of their condition ; and they see 
 continued among them a hybrid institution, born in war and unknown to 
 the Constitution, with a crowd of officers to execute its functions, many of 
 whom make companions of their former slaves to foment hatred to the 
 Southern whites, and some of whom find mistresses among their former 
 slaves and use their offices to levy blackmail on all classes for their sup 
 port. And all these things, and more, our people bear, and speak about 
 only in whispers, lest by resisting and resenting the outrages of even rob- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 753 
 
 bers and vagabonds, they furnish to those robbers and vagabonds the pre 
 tense for the charge of a lingering spirit of rebellion against the Govern 
 ment ! 
 
 And now we are told, by these Military Bills, that the very Constitutions 
 and governments we so promptly and so submissively framed and organized 
 in order to fulfill all the possible obligations of our surrender, must be abro 
 gated and annulled ; that new Constitutions must be framed and ne\v gov 
 ernments must be organized, in which our former slaves are all to partici 
 pate, and from which every intelligent and virtuous man whom our people 
 have deemed worthy of trust and confidence at any time during his whole 
 life, shall be forever excluded. To this new government the negro race is 
 to consent for the white race, and by it the emigrant robber and vagabond, 
 with their bribed Southern coadjutor, are to rule both races. And until 
 this oppression shall be fixed upon us, and made part of the irremediable 
 law of the land, and shall receive the approval of the authors of these bills, 
 who are never to be subject to the government they thus dictate, our peo 
 ple are to live under military surveillance, subject to charge without crime ; 
 to arrest without warrant ; to warrant without oath ; to trial without jury ; 
 to imprisonment without remedy for release ; to robbery without appeal for 
 redress, and to death without any process of law. 
 
 Even this bitter cup of hellish ingredients might be drank, but for the 
 nausea which makes us vomit when we see it commended to us urged upon 
 us by some who were born among us who have been often trusted and 
 honored by us ; nay, by those who hurried us into secession to get our 
 rights, to save our honor, and " ta avoid equality with the negro"; wh<> 
 assured us secession would be peaceable, and who, after secession, did all 
 they could to provoke a war ; who pledged us the " last man and the last 
 dollar " if the war should come, and who employed their talents in discourag 
 ing the men, in quarreling with ourselves and im making money when the 
 war did come ; who bravely promised us that no enemy should invade our 
 soil without " marching over their dead bodies," but who, when the enemy 
 came, only betrayed us to subjugation ; who now inform us of their con 
 fidential receptions into the counsels of our oppressors, and can bring from 
 those counsels only the assurance that unless we drink this cup, one more 
 bitter shall be provided. And, as evidence of fidelity, wisdom, and kind 
 ness, in all this, they are willing to submit to their own disfranchisement, 
 and, therefore, can have no possible motive but our good! 
 
 The Constitution is violated ; the laws of nations are defied ; the pledged 
 faith of the nation is mocked ; an unresisting people are warred on ; a < 
 armed people are insulted ; an impoverished people are oppressed 
 ing people are betrayed ; the Union is rent wider and wider, and ever wid< 
 asunder, and all, all by those who load the weary air with constant 
 proclaims that they alone are loyal, or wise, or true ! 
 
 Alas ! our country sinks beneath the yoke ; 
 It weeps, it bleeds : and each new day a gash 
 Is added to her wounds. 
 
 NUMBER NINE. 
 
 The time has not come to write Confederate history. Passions control 
 men. Falsehood and slander are more acceptable than truth to the 
 revenge. Truth would shame revenge, but falsehood grati 
 
754 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 the most important Confederate archives, containing the reason, the phil 
 osophy, the explanations of Confederate actions and history and motives, 
 are not accessible. It may be proper to add, I do not know where they are. 
 They have not come to light, and it were well for some, who seem to be in 
 high favor witli themselves and the deluded people, if they never do come 
 to light. I arn no Sadducee, and, however the wicked flourish now, I have 
 firm faith in the resurrection of the just. 
 
 But many will write. Confederate histories, biographies, memoirs, recol 
 lections, etc., etc., etc., are getting to be plenty as blackberries in June, but 
 not so valuable. I have tried to keep up with these premature births, but 
 find it difficult. I have seen enough to know that nearly all of these books 
 are written either by, or under the immediate supervision of, those who were 
 chiefly intent during the struggle in making war on the Confederate adminis 
 tration. They were, therefore, excluded, or excluded themselves, from the 
 Confederate councils, and really know less than most people ; and the little 
 they do know, or think they know, they received through a very jaundiced 
 medium, which gave it very horrid colors. Some of them seem, at last, to 
 be discovering, what unselfish patriots always knew, that, in making war 
 upon, and in breaking down the people s confidence in the Confederate 
 administration, so unjustly and so falsely too, they made war upon and 
 broke down the Confederate cause. They fear the world will find this out. 
 
 / 
 
 Conscience being thus troubled and reputation in danger, they become rest 
 less and cannot wait. They rush forward, like most criminals, to justify 
 before they are formally accused. Others write to get pay, and say any 
 thing to fill a book. Hence, these works are generally self -vindications, or 
 self-eulogies, or miserable libels and perversions, and are not only unworthy 
 of credit, but should he held as insults to an unfortunate but gallant people. 
 General Early s book is an exception. He writes of what he saw and did, 
 ancl writes like a patriot. His work will be valuable to the historian, here 
 after. There may be a few other exceptions, but I do not now think of 
 them. Some others of like character are said to be preparing, which I hope 
 will appear. 
 
 But the fiercest storms exhaust themselves, and so will even this storm of 
 the American passions. Revenge cannot always rule. The full truth will 
 appear and impartial history will be written. In that day, I venture now 
 to say, no fact will be brought out more clearly than this : .The Confeder 
 ates were not conquered by either the skill, or the power, or the numbers of 
 their armed enemies. The Confederacy was crushed by ideas, and not by 
 bayonets. And the ideas were very few indeed, may all be embraced in 
 two ; and neither had the slightest foundation in truth. They were born 
 of treacheiy and disappointment, and nurtured by those worse than Gor 
 gon whelps ambition, selfishness, and revenge. 
 
 Here are the ideas : 
 
 1. That the Confederate Government had become, or would become, a 
 permanent military despotism. 
 
 2. That our people had but to lay down their arms, and they would be 
 restored, at once, to all their rights in the Union. 
 
 There were several considerations which made our people peculiarly 
 liable to be entrapped into believing these ideas. In the first place, the 
 masses of the Southern people really loved the Union according to the Con 
 stitution. In truth, they were the most faithful and devoted friends that 
 Union ever had, or, I fear, ever will have again. It required many years of 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 755 
 
 slander and intermeddling and threatened aggressions and bad faith on the 
 
 T -_. 1 1 i.i 1 1 > i it* \* < 1 1< i 
 
 consent to leave the Union, the great actuating motive in going was to save 
 the guarantees and principles of the Constitution, which they were per 
 suaded could not be preserved by remaining in the Union. And they were 
 assured by the extremists, North and South, they could go peaceably. 
 
 Again : while many of our intelligent men and counselors were actuated 
 with sincere convictions, and did honestly believe a division must come 
 sooner or later, and that the sooner it came the better for all sides; vet, 
 there were others who had far other motives. These last did not act from 
 convictions, but from desires. Therefore, they were very noisy and clam 
 orous. They abused everything in the North, and denounced as traitors 
 and submissionists and cowards those of our own people who did not believe 
 the Union ought to be dissolved for existing causes, or could be dissolved 
 at all peaceably. As light things rise when the air is stirred, so in the ex 
 citement of passions these men became favorites. They expected to be the 
 founders of a new government, and go down to posterity as the Washingtons 
 and Jeffersons of a republic. 
 
 But the war came, and that portion of the masses who were most anxious 
 to secede, were disappointed. Secession was to be peaceable. 
 
 So the high offices in the new government were filled, and alas ! how 
 many of the noisy and self-sufficient were disappointed ? Republics were 
 ungrateful and the people strangely thought it was necessary to select con 
 siderate men to make Washingtons ! 
 
 As the war progressed, hardships increased. These hardships caused 
 some to grow unwilling, and the Confederate Government was driven, as 
 have been all people who go to war, to employ harsh measures to make the 
 unwilling do their duty. These harsh measures required agents, and 
 agents, as agents often do, became exacting and oppressive. These harsh 
 measures were seized upon by the disappointed politicians, and used as 
 pretexts to make the people believe their government intended to establish 
 a military despotism. In the mean time, speculation became riotous ; the 
 example being set by some in high places ; others, also, thought it no harm 
 to use their "God given talents to make money." These evils multiplied 
 the necessities for harsh measures to support the army, and the harsh meas 
 ures increased the noise of the politicians and the consequent demoralization 
 of the people. 
 
 While this internal treachery was doing its work, the United States, in 
 every form, and by every department of their Government, were 
 
 *: J . i . 
 
 to till them. Emissaries came from the North under the pretense of being 
 driven here as Southern sympathizers, and joined our malcontents to < 
 seminate these two ideas. Treachery became bold, and desertion became 
 respectable. 
 
 In this way the masses of the Southern people were conquered, and 
 remnant of patriots were overpowered. 
 
 The actual statistics show that during the two last years of the war, 1 
 
756 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 every one of our soldiers whom the external armed enemy killed, disabled, 
 or captured, the internal unarmed enemy induced three to desert. And this 
 work went on, too, in the face of the fact that General Grant s only policy 
 for defeating General Lee was in wearing out his army ; and also in the 
 face of the fact that Mr. Lincoln, in his last annual message, declared the 
 hope of suppressing the rebellion consisted in the abandonment, by the 
 Southern people, of their President or Chief. 
 
 Therefore, I affirm, the treachery within was thrice as strong as the 
 power without in subduing the Confederates. 
 
 Thus, some of those who were most active in destroying the Union, were 
 also most active in destroying the Confederacy. And these are now the 
 favorites in the South with the Radicals of the North. They are received 
 into the counsels at Washington ; and they are cheek by jowl with Wilson 
 and Sumner and Stevens in their efforts to destroy the Constitution. Men, 
 who I know made bitter secession speeches, have been traveling through the 
 North proclaiming their sufferings as " persecuted loyalists " ; and seeking 
 to rouse this fragmentary conclave of a Congress to secure measures to dis 
 franchise those whom they denounced as traitors, because they opposed 
 secession, in order that they may get the offices of these States as rewards 
 for their "devotion to the Union! And the poor, deluded, helpless 
 Southern people are thus bespattered with their own tilth ! 
 
 These facts suggest several points which deserve the most serious con 
 sideration of the Northern people. 
 
 1. The first is that they are under the most solemn obligation possible 
 to recognize these States as existing members of the Union, with no diminu 
 tion of their rights, except as to slavery. This was the avowed purpose of 
 the war. This was the promise to the Northern people by their government 
 to encourage them to fight ; and this was the pledge to the Southern people 
 to induce them to cease fighting. 
 
 2. That this purpose has been defeated ; this promise has been violated ; 
 this pledge has been broken by their Radical leaders, with the clear and 
 unmistakable intent of destroying the Constitution ; and that in this work 
 they are now joined and aided by the most vindictive, the most active, and 
 the most unscrupulous of the original Southern secessionists. 
 
 3. That the Southern people became weak in prosecuting the war only 
 because they listened to this pledge, and laid down their arms only because 
 they believed it. That though this generation may be helpless because 
 they were entrapped, the next will refuse to believe and will remain strong 
 invincible. That these deceptions can breed nothing but distrust ; that 
 these oppressions can produce nothing but hate ; that oppressed and op 
 pressors can never live together in peace, and that our children and chil 
 dren s children will be the victims of this Typhoean union of the Northern 
 Radicals and the Southern Secessionists, with no gain to either section but 
 " havoc and spoil and ruin." 
 
 NUMBER TEN. 
 
 But it is said the negro race is now free, and made citizens by our laws, 
 and, therefore, are entitled to political as well as civil equality. 
 
 It is idle to reason with a fanatical mind. A fanatic is a lunatic. The 
 conclusions of such are never founded in reason nor affected, by experience ; 
 they are founded in feeling and live only on passion. We must appeal, and 
 still appeal, and not cease to appeal to the rational American mind, and, by 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 757 
 
 reason, and the experience of mankind, save, if we can, our country from 
 the awful, indescribable horrors which must result, and result soon, from the 
 crazy domination of men who make " liberty and equality " the touchstones 
 of political wisdom. This mad theory is nothing but war upon the teachings 
 of reason, the experience of all ages, and the law of God. It was never the 
 doctrine of any but the agents of revolution, and it never bore for any 
 people any fruits but anarchy and blood, and the evils that follow in the 
 train of unrestrained passions. 
 
 But suppose, as an abstract proposition, we concede that the negro race 
 is entitled to political equality; how does that justify these Military Hills? 
 Does the negro s right to vote authorize a violation of the Constitution by 
 Congress ? If it is right to enfranchise the negro, is it right to disfranchise 
 the whites ? 
 
 No principle is better or more universally conceded in American politics 
 than that the people of the States alone must regulate the political franchi^^ 
 of their citizens each State for itself. If this principle is to be rejected 
 then no other need be respected. The first great question we must deter 
 mine is this : Do we mean to support the Constitution, or do we mean to 
 violate it? Do we mean, when we swear to support the Constitution, to 
 vote for that which violates the Constitution and justify our perjury by 
 some vagary about abstract right? I press the question to every man s 
 conscience. Have you obtained your consent to disregard the Constitution? 
 Don t dodge, or explain, or qualify ; answer the question. Have you 
 obtained your consent to disregard the Constitution? Have you obtained 
 your consent to swear to support the Constitution, and then flippantly write 
 or say, " T/ie Constitution is dead! 1 If dead, why swear to support it? 
 If not to be regarded or respected or observed, why swear to support it? 
 The Military Bills are conceded to be unconstitutional. Whether we be 
 States, or Territories, or Provinces, Congress is forbidden by the Constitu 
 tion to deny trial by jury, or to authorize a warrant without oath, or put 
 upon trial without indictment, or suspend habeas corpus except during 
 insurrection or invasion, or establish military rule over citizens in time of 
 peace, anywhere in any, single foot of land State, Territory, or Province. 
 These, these, oh, my deluded countrymen ! these are the Constitutional shield, 
 and buckler, and helmet, and breastplate of every American citizen of every 
 
 of the State or Territory in which he dominates 
 
 I ask again and again, and I beseech all men to ask ; it is the earnest, 
 anxious, piercing appeal of the dying hope of liberty : Are you wtikng to 
 violate the Constitution? Are you willing to swear to support it, with \ 
 intent, at the time of swearing, to violate it? Then, I proclaim- pos 
 terity will proclaim your hell-mortgaged conscience will never cease 
 proclaim : you are perjured, and perjury is not half your crime- 
 perjury in order to become a traitor! 
 
 And now mark this : The very oath which you take to regisi ?qu 
 you to swear to support the Constitution, and if you take that oath am 
 vote for a convention to carry out these Military Bills, or aid in carryi 
 them out, you vote to accept, to approve, to establish that which 
 tion of the Constitution, and just so sure as passion shall subside, and rea 
 return to our people, and sober, oath-observing patriotism 
 
758 SENATOR B. 11. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 in the land, so sure will you be branded, and justly branded as a felon, and 
 whipped throughout the land with the stinging, ceaseless lashes of public 
 infamy, because you took an oath to support the Constitution, with intent 
 to violate it ; because you committed perjury in order that you might help 
 to destroy your country. And in vain will you hunt excuses to palliate 
 your changeless infamy. The malignity which now makes you call patriots 
 rebels ; the cowardice which continues a war upon the unresisting whom you 
 induced, with the most sacred pledges, to lay down their arms ; the mean 
 ness which devises oppression for the helpless ; the vileness which presses 
 dishonor on those you have entrapped into your power ; the worse than 
 hypocritical statesmanship which disfranchises white men in order to en 
 franchise black men ; the criminal philanthropy which provides for the sure 
 destruction of the deluded negro race under pretense of elevating it all 
 these will only rise up to mock and laugh at you then. Like the hell-hounds 
 which "death, by rape begot of sin," when Heaven s Almighty hurled down 
 to hell those who, by deceit and force, sought to destroy His supremac} r , 
 these very pretenses which hate begets of hypocrisy, in this attempt to 
 destroy the Constitution, will become "yelling monsters" in the political 
 hell into which the genius of Constitutional liberty will cast you, and will 
 " kennel in the womb that bred them," and " howl and knaw," and " vex 
 with conscious terrors " forever. 
 
 I know how fallen is human nature ; I know how nations and peoples 
 have often become the mere prey of bad, ambitious rulers ; I know the 
 streams of blood with which hypocrisy, under pretense of saintly purpose, 
 has often flooded mankind ; I know how countries have often been de 
 stroyed, that a few wicked men might continue in power. But can it be 
 that our people have become willing to violate our Constitution for our own 
 dishonor and destruction ? Will they take an oath to get a chance to violate 
 it, in order that they may degrade the white race, and ultimately destroy 
 the black race ? 
 
 How many will thus violate it ? How many will stand by it, LIVE WITH 
 IT, or DIE FOR IT ? That is the next count. 
 
 NUMBER ELEVEN. 
 
 In all ages governments have been overturned by men who made great 
 professions of patriotism and good intentions. The serpent induced Eve to 
 eat the forbidden fruit by flattering her, and declaring his counsel would do 
 her good. He greatly desired, he protested, to improve her condition. 
 From that day to this traitors have been unable to find any better method 
 of accomplishing their purposes. Ignorance is more easily duped than in 
 telligence, and, therefore, knaves have always been advocates of conferring 
 power on fools ; and so, fools have generally thought knaves were their 
 be*st friends. For this very reason commonwealths free countries have 
 produced more demagogues, and have become more fearfully the prey of 
 anarchy than any other forms of government. The people generally mean 
 well. They think they follow friends when they follow those who flatter 
 them, and they follow with " cheers and a tiger." They go, like the fatted 
 ox with pretty ribbons streaming from his horns, frisking to their own 
 slaughter ! 
 
 Were not they glorious Southern leaders who established the right to 
 carry slaves to Kansas ? What if God had declared slavery could not pros- 
 
LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 756 
 
 per there, and our fathers had agreed it should not go ? Who cared for 
 God and oar fathers, if their decrees and compacts stood in the way of -our 
 rights! Oh, how good theories and fair promises have wrecked hopes de 
 stroyed prosperity, and subverted governments ! Every command in the 
 decalogue has been violated in the name of God, and every precept of the 
 Saviour has been trampled upon under pretense of promoting religion 
 
 Never at any period of human history, have bad men, or traitors or 
 devils undertaken to accomplish a wicked work, with greater professions of 
 good will, or with circumstances more favorable for exciting the confidence 
 of the people in the sincerity of their professions, than those by which and 
 under the influence of which, these radicals have undertaken to* destroy the 
 Constitution of the United States and the principles of free government in 
 America. With sincere convictions of right and necessity, but in a suicidal 
 way, the Southern States and people seemed to place themselves in an at 
 titude of hostility to the Constitution. And these Northern traitors who 
 provoked the South to her folly for the very purpose, have ever since been 
 enabled to tickle and divert the minds of the Northern people with the flip 
 pant cry, of "rebel" and "traitor," and thus, not only unperceived, but in 
 the midst of the wild cheers and mad aid of the giddy, foolish masses, have 
 given the Constitution a thousand stabs. And still the arch-leaders give out 
 the key-note, rebel ; and the Babel crowd catch up the refrain, and fools in 
 oflice cry, rebel ; and knaves trying to get office cry, rebel ; preachers of 
 lies and hate from pulpits cry, rebel ; lunatics in schools cry, rebel ; and, 
 foulest of the foul, Southern renegades cry, rebel ; and the traitors thank 
 God for the wild distemper of the people, and stab on ! And the poor out 
 raged Constitution, under which our common fathers lived and loved and 
 prospered, and which would gather all, black and white, "even as a hen 
 gathereth her chickens under her wings," bleeds and reels, and no one will 
 hear her cries or heed her tottering ! 
 
 Equally insane, but equally favorable to the purposes of the Radicals is 
 the hypocritical pretense of elevating the black race. All wise or good men 
 everywhere, and more especially those in the South, desire to elevate the 
 black race, but Radical traitors and their Southern tools alone desire to de 
 grade the white race. By whatever other means the work may be done, it is 
 certain the black race cannot be secure in privileges or rights by taking away 
 from the white race these same privileges and rights. Whether either 
 race, and which, shall finally gain the mastery ; or, whether both races can 
 live and rule together as equals and in peace, are questions which good men 
 may discuss, and about which, possibly, even true men may differ ; but one 
 thing is very certain, neither race separately, nor both races together can 
 rule or be ruled, wisely or peacefully, or with safety to life, property, or 
 franchise, by violating and trampling upon the Constitution the funda 
 mental law for all. He who would, therefore, be a friend to either race 
 must first be a friend to the Constitution. lie who violates the Constitution 
 is an enemy to both races. He who observes the Constitution is a friend to 
 both races. 
 
 The very reverse of all this plain reasoning is every principle which can 
 be adduced to support these Military Bills. These bills violate the Consti 
 tution. These bills degrade the white race. Those bills trample on 
 rights of both races ; and all these things these bills do under pretense ofele 
 voting the black race ! The work is absurd and impossible, 
 proposed cannot accomplish the end professed. Both races must go to- 
 
760 SENATOR R II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 gether, or the greater must control the less, or the two must collide. And 
 when the two collide, the less must perish, or be driven away, or be brought 
 under control, however the greater race may suffer by the collision and the 
 struggle. 
 
 And the Radicals know this ; and, therefore, the means they propose are 
 not intended to accomplish the end they profess. The real end is to secure 
 these ten States to keep the Radical party in power in the approaching 
 Presidential election, and this they seek to do reckless of consequences to 
 black or white, to the Constitution or Government. The traitors are seek 
 ing to retain, by this fraud and force at the South, the power they are losing 
 by the detection of their treason at the North. They annul the Constitution 
 in the name of loyalty ; they exterminate the black race in the name of phil 
 anthropy ; they disfranchise white men in the name of equality ; they pull 
 down all the defenses for life and prosperity in the name of liberty ; and 
 with blasphemous hosannahs to the Union, they are rushing all sections and 
 all races into wild chaotic anarchy ; and all, all, that traitors may hold the 
 seats of the power they desecrate, and riot in the wreck of the prosperity they 
 destroy ! And will the Southern people, whom they have so long slandered 
 and oppressed, take them up, as the Northern people, whom they have so 
 long flattered and deceived, are casting them away ? 
 
 It was my purpose to discuss at length the questions of civil rights and 
 political trusts, and by what means the first could be safely secured, and in 
 and by whom the last could be wisely reposed and exercised ; with the view 
 of showing how illogical and contrary to human nature and experience and 
 safety, is the dogma that political equality is a right of citizenship, or neces 
 sary to the enjoyment of civil equality. But why labor and worry the 
 printer and weary the reader by proving that untrue which none but fan 
 atics are unblushing enough to pretend is true. Why labor to prove these 
 Military Bills will not work good to the negro, when they do not intend 
 good to the negro are not adapted as means to secure good to the negro ; 
 but are intended simply to add ten States to party power ! The negroes 
 are enfranchised because it is believed they will vote for the Radical party, 
 and the whites are disfranchised because it is believed they will not vote for 
 the Radical party. If the belief were reversed, the rule would be reversed. 
 The object is not to punish disloyalty, and the proof is found in the fact 
 that the most bitter original Secessionists are at once received into Radical 
 favor by agreeing to support the Radical party, and the most unscrupulous 
 is always received with the greatest marks of favor, because such are the 
 most congenial and best suited for the work of destroying the Constitution 
 under pretense of preserving the Union ; and preserving the Radical party 
 under pretense of loving the dear people ! 
 
 It is proper, without fully elaborating the argument, to suggest a few ele 
 mentary principles which all our people ought, in these times, to keep con 
 stantly before them. 
 
 In all society or government are rights to be enjoyed, burdens to be borne, 
 and trusts to be discharged. 
 
 Among the rights are the right of property ; theright of locomotion ; the 
 right to appropriate and dispose of the proceeds of our own labor ; the right 
 to worship according to conscience ; and the right to protection from society 
 in the enjoyment of all these rights, and the right to have all the legal pro 
 cesses and remedies provided to make this protection effectual. These arc 
 called civil rights, and when we speak of civil equality we mean that these 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 70 1 
 
 rights belong alike and equally to all citizens, to all classes, to all colors, to 
 all sexes, to all ages, and to all grades of intellect, society, and worth. These 
 rights necessarily attach to and become conditions of free citizenship. The 
 negro is entitled to all these rights. And being now deprived of the pro 
 tection which, as a slave, he received from his owner, all good men ought to 
 rejoice that he can still be safe under the protection of the law, and being 
 unaccustomed to assert his rights a work which was formerly performed by 
 his master all true men ought to be ready to aid him in that assertion. And 
 all but Radicals and renegades are willing to aid him, but they seek to use 
 him under pretense of aiding him. 
 
 Among the burdens of society and governments I may mention : workiiiw 
 the public highways ; providing public buildings ; paying the public taxes; 
 defending the public safety, etc., etc. These burdens ought to be borne by 
 all according to fitness and capacity, for these burdens constitute the con 
 sideration we pay for the protection we get. Women and children, lunatics 
 and idiots do not work the highways or defend the society with arms, be 
 cause their positions or capacity forbid ; but they are all citizens or mem 
 bers of the society and pay taxes. These are called burdens because they 
 are borne, not for ourselves only, but/or others for the public. 
 
 Lastly, in every society or government there are trusts to be discharged. 
 Offices are to be filled ; laws are to be made, executed, and administered, else 
 there could be no rules or process for protection ; and agents are to be se 
 lected for all these purposes. The whole business of selecting agents to dis 
 charge duties, as well as the discharge of the duties themselves, comes under 
 the head of trusts. They are called trusts because they are powers exercised 
 not for one s own good but for the good of others for the public. The au 
 thority to vote is, therefore, a trust reposed, and the exercise of the author 
 ity is the exercise of a trust the trust of selecting agents to provide and ex 
 ecute the laws by which rights are to be protected. All men are born to 
 rights which are personal affecting each person only ; but no man is born 
 to a trust to a power which affects all other members of society. You had 
 as well say a man is born to an office as to say he is born to a vote for that 
 office. So, again, all trusts imply capacity and integrity. No man has a 
 right to be intrusted to discharge a duty affecting others who does not un 
 derstand that duty, or who has not integrity to be trusted with its faithful 
 exercise. 
 
 How can the rights of the members of society be safe if the protection for 
 those rights is to be provided or applied by ignorant or vicious agents 
 And how can ignorant and vicious agents be avoided if ignorant and vicious 
 persons are born to the right to select them ? 
 
 Rights are personal born with persons belong to the person, and affa 
 the person ; but trusts are relative and born with society- -belong to society 
 and are for the good and under control of society. :Iow is any mi 
 born with a right to take my rights, or to select another to 
 
 rights ? 
 
 Suffrage, then, is not a right it is not a privilege it is a trust, and a 
 most solemn and sacred trust. It is the trust of preserving >ty, < 
 curing rights, of protecting persons. 
 
 Would you select an ignorant, or vicious, or untrustworthy man asyc 
 trustee, or {he trustee for your wife or your child in the smallest concerns 
 life ? How, then, would you make a trustee of an ignorant or vicious 
 
762 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 to discharge these great duties, on the wise and faithful discharge of which 
 all rights, and all protection, and all things depend? 
 
 The burdens of society are light or heavy according as the trusts of 
 society are wisely or unwisely, faithfully or unfaithfully discharged. The 
 heavy taxes under which America groans, spring alone from the unfaithful 
 and wicked execution of the trusts of our people in selecting agents, and of 
 the agents in discharging their duties. 
 
 Universal, indiscriminate, ignorant, vicious white suffrage has buried a 
 million of victims, slain by each others hands, destroyed the peace and 
 prosperity of the country, and saddled an innocent and unborn posterity 
 with burdens too grievous to be borne. 
 
 Will it be wise to extend the sacred but desecrated trust of suffrage to 
 more ignorance, to more vice, and at the same time withdraw those trusts 
 from intelligence and worth ? 
 
 Men are born with a ri^ht to vote as thev are born to breathe the air, or 
 
 CT 1 / 
 
 enjoy the proceeds of their own labor ! Then, why is it that women and 
 children and lunatics and idiots are not allowed to vote? They breathe and 
 eat and pay taxes. 
 
 It is, therefore, the right of society to decide upon whom shall be de 
 volved the trust of preserving society and administering protection to rights. 
 And it is the duty of society to withhold these trusts from the ignorant and 
 vicious since the ignorant and vicious should never be intrusted, and have 
 no right to be intrusted, with the exercise of a power by which they may 
 rob or kill or torture others. 
 
 And it follows that every society must determine this matter for itself, 
 for it alone is to be affected by the exercise of the trusts created. It is 
 flagitious ; it is mean ; it is cowardly ; it is treason to the very framework 
 of society to say that Massachusetts, or a fragmentary conclave of per 
 jured Congressional traitors from other States, shall determine who shall be 
 intrusted with the great duty of preserving society in Georgia ; and lan 
 guage breaks in the vain effort to express the contempt and scorn I feel for 
 the dastard Georgian who would consent for Massachusetts or that frag 
 mentary conclave to so determine. 
 
 The negroes in Georgia are citizens of Georgia. They are free and have 
 equal rights, and shall enjoy them. They will be required to bear the 
 burdens only in proportion to their capacity. They will be empowered to 
 discharge the trusts when time and experience shall show they " are capable 
 and worthy," and the good of society will be promoted thereby ; and this 
 Georgia will determine for herself, and not to please enemies or to keep 
 traitors in party power. 
 
 NUMBER TWELVE. 
 
 I have now shown that the Military Bills are unconstitutional. There 
 can be nothing clearer than this, for they are in the most direct conflict 
 with the very language and purpose of the Constitution, and the position 
 is conceded. Of course there can be no possible good reason for violating 
 the Constitution, for to say so, is neither more nor less than to say the 
 Constitution is wrong, and the Government organized under it ought to be 
 subverted! And this is exactly what every man who voted for or approves 
 these bills did say and does say ; and every man who votes to carry out these 
 bills, votes to set aside the Constitution and subvert the Government ! I care 
 not what his mouth says, or his lips profess, about loyalty, his heart is far 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WllITL\08. 763 
 
 II . . . -^ -- *JV T i^yi I41lcir< l I V. 
 
 n plain words, the question who is " for a Convention " and who is " a< ainW 
 a Convention," means precisely " who is against the Constitution," and " who 
 is for the Constitution." 
 
 But I have shown that all the excuses or apologies made for these bills 
 are, like the bills, also unconstitutional ; and are untrue in themselves ; are 
 contrary to the laws of every civilized war, and are founded in false pre. 
 tenses, and are insincere in purpose, and really tend and intend to subvert 
 the government and degrade the white race in order to prolong the existence 
 of the party that is thus faithless, deceitful, oppressive, and dishonoring to 
 both government and people, and to their own pledges. 
 
 If, in the face of this plain statement of the issue, the correctness of 
 which statement no true man can gainsay, and no honest mind will gainsay, 
 there is still to be found a man in America who can see in these Military 
 Bills any safety for property, or life, or liberty ; or any protection in the 
 enjoyment of either ; or any elevation for the black race ; or anything in 
 government but anarchy, with its long ordeal of blood, and robbery, and 
 factions, and havoc, and spoil, and waste, and crime in every form and grade, 
 until power or powers shall arise and proclaim the peace to a deluded, ex 
 hausted, and ruined people through an empire or empires, a despotism or 
 despotisms ; such a man is simply given over " to believe a lie that he may 
 be damned " ; yes, and to act a lie that his country may be damned ! 
 
 The next question, in the natural order of argument, is this : In what 
 way shall these bills be resisted, or by what remedies shall their enforcement 
 and final establishment be prevented ? I enter upon this branch of the dis 
 cussion with pain and pleasure with pain because I shall consider it my 
 duty to declare some grievous errors committed by friends of our side of 
 the Constitution ; errors, too, which surrender the most effective remedies 
 against these measures ; and with pleasure because I can still see remaining 
 to us remedies ample to save the Constitution, the country, and lil>erty, if, 
 as rulers and people, we still have even a moiety of that glorious moral 
 courage which makes us not afraid to tell the truth and defend the right. 
 Never, never had any people in any age of the world such an occasion- 
 such necessity for moral courage as have now the people, not only of the 
 ten States oii which rape is being perpetrated, but of the United States, 
 who are all involved in the crime, and must pay its penalties. 
 
 That devilish spirit of treason, which comes not with arms and open, 
 manly warning, but creeps and hides itself in some unsuspected, yea, trusted 
 form, is nmo in our political Eden, and with artful words, and with the pres 
 tige of authority, and assurances of safety and blessmg and greatness, is 
 persuading our people to eat that forbidden fruit of using force to preserve 
 a government of consent, and of making^y statute, that like and equal 
 which GOD by nature made unlike and unequal, and in so doing to disobey 
 the commands of the Constitution ! And some are already persuaded, and 
 lustily cry, " It is true, let us disobey, and taste, for we shall thereby be great. 
 And if our people awake not now to their danger, and drive this modern 
 political Satan of Radicalism, with scourging and hissing, from their hen 
 tage, then death political death will come, and quickly, fiercely come, 
 with blighting curse, all over this last and noblest domain of freedom, and 
 
764 SENATOR . H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 doom ourselves and our children to the " blood and sweat of despotism 
 forever ! 
 
 Oh, that some voice would rise whose thrilling notes of patriotism could 
 cover all the land, and, hushing this Bedlam din of sectional crimination, 
 distrust, and oppression, inspire the people to unite and make one more 
 manly national effort to save the Constitution, and stop the deep and ever 
 deepening stabs which treachery, through force and perjury, is madly 
 making at the very vitals of liberty ! We need a fearless Hercules strong 
 in moral courage and a universal country-wide patriotism to kill this 
 Nemsean lion ; to burn to the roots the more than hundred heads of this 
 Lernaean hydra ; to clean this Augean stable, whose fierce rapacity, and 
 prolific terrors, and boundless filth are all combined in this destroyer of 
 States, this assassin of written Constitution, this more than brutish defiler 
 of its own race modern Radicalism ! 
 
 The framers of the Constitution doubtless supposed they had provided, 
 or left existing, ample remedies for all violations of that instrument ; 
 both preventive and curative remedies, whether those violations should be 
 made by the government, or by the States, or by the people; and had also 
 provided for the amendment of the Constitution in a proper manner, to suit 
 it to such unanticipated necessities as the future might develop. These 
 remedies were distributed some being lodged in the different departments 
 of the Government and some left under regulations with the people. 
 
 These remedies should always be applied in their proper order, according 
 to the nature and source of the violation. 
 
 In my opinion, the first remedy against these Military Bills was with the 
 Executive department of the Government. 
 
 The Government is divided into three departments, and separate powers 
 given to each department for the great purpose of providing mutual checks 
 and balances, so that no one department shall be able to destroy the Gov 
 ernment. 
 
 Now, if either department can, by any means, absorb to itself the 
 powers confided to the other departments, or of either of the others, it, by 
 that means, gets to itself powers which it was not intended it should exer 
 cise ; and can, by reason of this increase of powers, accomplish what the 
 division of powers intended to prevent destroy the Government. So, if 
 either department, instead of thus absorbing to itself the powers of the 
 other department, can, in lieu thereof, adopt some means by which it can 
 compel or induce the other departments, or either of theln, to execute its 
 unlimited will, it can thus as effectually, and perhaps more conveniently, 
 accomplish the forbidden end destroy the Government than if it had ab 
 sorbed the powers to itself ; because the department so compelled or in 
 duced to serve, ceases to be a check or balance to prevent destruction as was 
 intended, but degenerates into a mere tool or aider and abetter in the work 
 of destruction. 
 
 Here right here is precisely the process by which this fragmentary 
 conclave of a Congress is destroying the Constitution and the Government 
 under the Constitution. 
 
 They first excluded from both Houses all the representatives of ten en 
 tire States, because they were supposed not to be willing to the schemes of 
 the majority making the exclusion ; and, to make the exclusion effectual, 
 they denied the right of representation to the ten States, all, in the teeth of 
 the most explicit and positive provisions of the Constitution, declaring how 
 
IIIS LIFE, SPEECHES, *JW WRITINGS. 765 
 
 the Congress shall be constituted, and of what the two Houses shall be com- 
 posed. 1 hey next, under various transparent pretenses, excluded obnoxious 
 members from other States. 
 
 This process of exclusion continued until two-thirds of those remaining 
 were of one evil mind. The Executive Department, though earnestly d- 
 nouncmg the body as not organized as the Constitution required, vet recog 
 nized this fragment as the Congress. Thus organized and thus recognized, 
 this fragaraentary conclave now become very bold and dictatorial began 
 to absorb to itself the powers and functions of both the other department* 
 of the Government, and to threaten impeachment and remodeling and non- 
 appropriation of salaries, if the other departments should presume to form 
 checks upon its will. The President sent back, with his now ineffectual 
 objections, the several steps of this conclave in the work of destruction, and 
 accompanied those objections with an earnest patriotism and a fervor of 
 meaning which have not been excelled. But why talk patriotism to traitors, 
 or address reason to fanatics, now conscious of their power to destroy, and 
 of safety to themselves in the work ? They would laugh and grin, and pass 
 the bills to destroy the Constitution with "the glee of the cat which plays 
 with the contortions of its captured, dying mouse. In an evil hour the 
 President consented agreed it was his duty to execute as law whatever 
 two-thirds of this fragmentary conclave might desire, declare, or order ! 
 
 Then I, and you, and all of us fell down 
 Whilst bloody treason flourished over us. 
 
 I have no doubt the President acted, in this matter, from the purest and 
 most patriotic motives. His course was advised and commended by men 
 distinguished for ability. He is surrounded by circumstances peculiarly re 
 sponsible and embarrassing, and every desire of my heart is to help him and 
 not to say anything that may weaken any man s faith in him. But the 
 country is passing through a most fearful ordeal. Everything we all have 
 or can hope for is involved. Errors may ruin though motives be angelic. 
 On questions of policy or expediency, I love the yielding, conciliating spirit. 
 I despise, from my heart, the bigot or the fanatic. But a principle a vital 
 principle should never be abandoned for temporary relief, nor yielded to 
 conciliate an enemy. The Constitution ought to be administered in a spirit 
 of concession, but no man intrusted to administer it should allow its destruc 
 tion upon any pretense. I do believe the idea that the President is bound 
 to execute whatever a two-thirds majority of Congress may declare is the 
 most fatal and dangerous error of this generation, not excepting secession, 
 or coercion, or even fanaticism itself the hideous mother of both secession 
 and coercion. It is the error which, being committed, will be the greatest 
 lever of strength to fanaticism, and which, not having been committed, 
 would have been the death-blow to fanaticism and to all its hellish brood of 
 horrors. I am not writing to please any man. I see have no doubt, I see 
 -unprecedented evils ahead of us. I firmly believe there is no way to 
 escape these evils but by cleaving to the Constitution. In this crisis, I love 
 all who cleave to the Constitution as I love my property, my life, my liberty, 
 and the peace and happiness of my children, for by that Constitution alone 
 can these blessings be enjoyed. I hate all who violate the Constitution as 
 I hate the thief who steals my property, the tyrant who fetters my liberty, 
 the murderer who seeks my life, or the monster who would destroy all 
 hope for my children ; because, in the destruction of the Constitution by 
 
766 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 force and fraud, all these curses will come. If the Constitution needs 
 amendment, let us all all the States amend it ; if free government has 
 failed, let us admit it and form another, like men of reason and honesty. 
 But whatever government and laws we have let us obey them while we have 
 them, and not seek to evade them by fraud, or overturn them by force, for 
 then we have anarchy, which means the utter absence of all safety and 
 hope, and the actual presence of every danger, for person, property, liberty 
 and life. Of all the enemies to individuals, to society, or to government, 
 he who deceives and takes advantage of trusts reposed, or power conferred, 
 to injure, slander, or betray, is the meanest, the most cowardly, and the 
 most dangerous. Therefore I denounce the Radicals and all their disciples. 
 I know the President is a patriot, but his error threatens to place him and 
 his country in the unrestrained and vengeful power of foresworn enemies, 
 and he who believes it is an error, owes it to his country to say so and give 
 his reasons for his belief. 
 
 In the construction of all human instruments there must arise questions 
 on which men will honestly differ. These doubtful questions have arisen 
 under the Constitution. It was anticipated they would arise, and arise, too, 
 between the Executive and Congress, and the method of settling such dif 
 ferences was provided. When the President thinks a bill presented to him 
 is unconstitutional, he must return it with his objections. Congress must 
 reconsider it, and if two-thirds differ with the President, the bill becomes a 
 law, notwithstanding the President s objections. Now, that this refers to 
 cases of mere honest differences as to what is the meaning of the Constitu 
 tion to cases of doubt is very clear from the deliberation which is re- 
 
 \> 
 
 quired of all parties. The President is required to send his objections to 
 Congress. The objections must be in writing. The House to which the 
 objections are sent must enter them on their journal, and then proceed to 
 reconsider. If two-thirds differ with the President, the bill and objections 
 must be sent to the other House. The other House must also reconsider, 
 and if, after all sides are fully heard, and the matter has been considered and 
 reconsidered, two-thirds of both Houses differ with the President, the bill 
 shall become a law. That is, in these doubtful questions, if two-thirds of 
 both Houses, after full consideration of all sides, shall be of one opinion, and 
 the President and one-third shall be of another opinion the opinions of the 
 two-thirds shall prevail. Such were the Bank and Tariff and Internal Im 
 provement questions, and many others. In all such cases it is very manifest 
 the President must execute the law until the Judiciary shall pronounce 
 against it. The President cannot, himself, become the Court, or absorb to 
 himself the functions of the Court. 
 
 This is the whole extent of the doctrine of the President s obligation to 
 execute the laws. No more, no less. 
 
 Does this give two -thirds of the Congress power to subvert the Govern 
 ment, and is the President bound to help them subvert it? The Constitu 
 tion, in separate clauses, defines what Congress may do, and then, by other 
 clauses, declares what Congress shall not do. Doubts naturally arise in 
 ascertaining the extent of the meaning in those clauses which seek to define 
 what Congress may do. But suppose Congress undertake to do that which 
 the Constitution says Congress shall not do? How then? If two-thirds 
 say they will do it anyhoic, is the President bound to execute it ? 
 
 The Constitution says : " No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall 
 be passed" Suppose two-thirds pass a bill of attainder, is it a law f If so, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 767 
 
 two-thirds of the Congress can annul the Constitution. If so the will of 
 two-thirds of Congress, and not the Constitution, is the supreme law But 
 the President is not bound to execute that which is not a law The Presi 
 dent admits the Sherman Bill is a bill of attainder against nine millions of 
 people ! How, then, can he be bound to execute that which the Constitu 
 tion says shall not be done. 
 
 Suppose two-thirds of this conclave shall declare that the present patri 
 otic Governor of Connecticut was not properly elected, because the colored 
 citizens of that State were excluded by the laws thereof from votino- in the 
 election ; and should then declare the government was provisional, and send 
 a military commander there to govern the people until they should change 
 their laws and hold another election, in which the colored citizens should 
 participate ? Must the President execute this order ? 
 
 Suppose this two-thirds shall declare that all elections, State and Federal, 
 of persons not of the Radical or Republican party, are void, because such 
 persons are not loyal, and shall reduce the people guilty of such disloyal 
 elections to military subjection must the President execute the mandate ? 
 
 Suppose two-thirds of the conclave shall declare that the President is 
 disloyal, and he is, therefore, not a legal President, and is removed or not to 
 be obeyed ; must the Executive department execute its own demolition ? 
 Suppose they say the Supreme Court is an obstruction to progress and is 
 abolished ; yea, more suppose they shall declare, what they have often said, 
 that the Federal Constitution " is a covenant with hell .and a league with 
 the devil," and that no State Constitution is republican in form, and that all 
 shall be set aside, or declared only provisional, and the whole country shall 
 be placed under military rule with commanders subject to the orders of this 
 conclave, until new Constitutions, State and Federal, shall be approved by 
 them and in making which, all who agree with them shall be enfranchised, 
 and all who differ from them shall be disfranchised, must the President be 
 bound to execute this revolution or quietly look on and see the Government 
 destroyed ? All these things some of this conclave have declared ought to 
 be done, and have threatened to do ! More than all these they have done, 
 and are now actually doing for ten of the States. Why may they not do so 
 for all ? The power is the same overall that it is over one. They OUGHT to 
 do so for all or for none. They send a single officer to Virginia, who is not 
 even a resident of the State, and claim for him power to repeal the laws 
 passed in the days of Washington and by the votes and approval of Jeffer 
 son, Madison, Monroe, and Marshall ; and a similar non-resident individual, 
 by his own irresponsible edicts, sets aside whole constitutions and codes in 
 the States of Macons and Pinckneys, and proclaims others in their stead, in 
 a manner more summary and arbitrary than any monarch in Europe dare ex 
 hibit ! All this is admitted to be plainly, grossly unconstitutional, but it 
 must be done, and the President is bound to see to it that it is done, because 
 two-thirds of this conclave savs it must be done ! 
 
 Thus, not only two- thirds "of a Congress, but of a fragmentary conclave 
 of members who secure that two-thirds by unlawfully excluding from their 
 seats those members who are not willing to commit perjury to destroy the 
 Government become not only greater than the Constitution, not only have- 
 power to destroy the Government, but can command, order, compel every 
 other department of the Government to aid in the destruction. Was ever 
 conclusion so lame, heresy so dangerous, or patriotism so self-destructive 
 
 Henceforth, not the Constitution and the laws passed in pursuance 
 
768 SENATOR B. If. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 thereof but the will of the two-thirds of Congress, or of a conclave taking 
 forcible possession of the Capitol, shall be the supreme law of the land. 
 Would it not be well to require us all, from the President down, to take an 
 oath to support that will, instead of requiring ns to swear to support the 
 Constitution, and then compelling us, by the higher power of this will, to 
 violate our oaths? 
 
 No Congress, not even a legitimate Congress, by even a unanimous vote, 
 has power to destroy States, to pass laws forbidden by the Constitution, 
 nor to subvert the Government ; and when they undertake it, and in the 
 meanest and most dangerous of all ways under cover of oaths and office- 
 it is as much the duty of the President to suppress them as it is his duty to 
 suppress an insurrection or an invasion. The contrary doctrine is a procla 
 mation to Radicalism, that it shall be aided in its work even by the friends 
 of the Constitution. It is a license to propagandism to bring all Constitu 
 tions, governments, and people into complete subjection to its will. 
 
 Alas ! our country sinks for want of nerve in its defenders. Truth is 
 weak only because its dis&ples will not support as well as assert it. Radical 
 ism is strong only in its sense of impunity. Unlimited, it loses all conscious 
 ness of guilt, and throws away all restraint upon its will. Assured of 
 assistance from its enemies there is no excess at which it will hesitate. But 
 boldly and fearlessly opposed, and denounced and treated as the most dan 
 gerous enemy of all government and law, its own conscience will at once 
 become its fiercest accuser ; it will grow weak, will tremble like the detected 
 thief, and will soon sink beneath the weight of its own sins, abandoned by 
 the selfish and despised by the good. But now such men as Stevens and 
 Sumner, seeing how timid and indifferent and unnerved the friends of the 
 Constitution have become, encourage the hesitating of their party in the 
 same spirit with the bloody Lady Macbeth, when urging her faltering 
 husband to his crime : 
 
 When in swinish sleep 
 TJieir drenched natures lie, as in a death, 
 What cannot you and I perform upon 
 The unguarded Duncan ? What not upon 
 His spongy officers, who shall bear the guilt 
 Of our great murder ? 
 
 NUMBER THIRTEEN. 
 
 I have said in all cases of doubtful constitutionality, the Executive 
 department could not become a court or judge in the matter. Neither can 
 Congress be a court. But it was necessary there should be a final arbiter, 
 and, therefore, the Constitution provided a third department of Government 
 called the Judicial. This Judicial power is expressly declared to extend to 
 all cases arising under the Constitution, the laws of the United States, and 
 treaties, etc., etc. But here again differences have arisen, and it has been in 
 sisted that the word " cases" has a legal technical signification, and must be 
 confined within it, and, therefore, that the Judicial power does not extend 
 to all questions arising under the Constitution. This position was a favorite 
 one with persons of the strict Construction State Rights School. 
 
 When South Carolina declared the Tariff Act plainty and palpably un 
 constitutional, she refused to refer the question to the Court, but proceeded 
 to nullify the act in her borders. The Union men and Federalists insisted 
 that she should refer the question to the Supreme Court as the final arbiter. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 769 
 
 but South Carolina refused to do so, insisting that that State was an inde- 
 pendent, separate sovereignty, outside of the express powers granted to 
 Congress-that this was a political question, affecting her separate sover 
 eignty, and that she would not permit any other power to sit in judgment 
 upon questions involving her sovereignty ; that in this respect South Caro 
 lina stood to the United States as she did to France or England 
 
 It was supposed that the peculiar doctrines of State Righto had been 
 decided by the war against the position taken by South Carolina, and that 
 hereafter the Supreme Court would become what the old Union men 
 always contended it was intended to be the final arbiter upon all questions 
 arising under the Constitution, so as to leave no excuse or necessity for an 
 appeal to arms to settle controversies between the General Government and 
 the States. 
 
 Georgia and Mississippi were the first to act on the new idea. They 
 did what South Carolina refused to do. They applied to the Supreme 
 Court (in, I think, a proper case made) to enjoin the enforcement of bills 
 palpably unconstitutional admitted to be so in their borders. The reply 
 was, the question made is apolitical question, and not a judicial case. The 
 Supreme Court refused to entertain the jurisdiction, and thus simply 
 affirmed whut was called the ultra State Rights doctrine of South Carolina. 
 I am glad the question was presented. I am especially glad they were pre 
 sented by the Southern States, showing a disposition thereby to abide the 
 decision claimed to have been made by the war, and to recognize an arbiter 
 of future disputes, short of arms. 
 
 These decisions, therefore, so far from showing there is no remedy 
 against these Military Bills, show clearly the reverse. They proceed on 
 the very basis that the States are still separate political communities, and 
 as such it necessarily follows that their internal domestic governments can 
 not be abrogated, regulated, or interfered w r ith \>y Congress. Hence the 
 way is clear for every State, citizen, and corporation to make a case and 
 test these Military Bills, when any person, by their authority, shall inter 
 fere with a right of property, or of person, or of liberty. 
 
 I, therefore, beg every citizen, black and white, even the humblest of 
 the ten millions who inhabit these ten States, to remember never forget 
 that it is his right his glorious, unpunishable, unimpeachable RIGHT to 
 resist every interference by any officer, high or low, with his property, or 
 his person, or his liberty, under these Military Bills ; and that each citizen 
 owes it to every other citizen and to his State, and to posterity and Con 
 stitutional liberty to assert the right boldly and fearlessly against every 
 such interference. Nor have military officers in such cases one particle 
 more of protection from such resistance than civil officers. The law is 
 superior to all is master of all ; and the strength, the majesty, and the 
 merit of the law make the citizen s panoply in this issue. Hear what a dis 
 tinguished American writer says on this subject : 
 
 It is now settled in England and the United States, that an officer of the forces who 
 executes the unlawful order remains personally answerable. If the highest in comma 
 the British monarch himself, order, contrary to law, an officer to quarter hi* soldier 
 t^ citizens to annoy and oppress them, as Charles I. did, the officer remains respons 
 in the fullest sense of the term, to the law of the land. All that has been gainn 
 arduous and protracted struggle which began to show itself most signally under < 
 I., may be summed up in the few words, that tlie law shall be *///* fifff to all and er 
 ttd every branch of government that there is nowhere a mysterious, supr 
 
770 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 tainable power, which, despite of the clearest law, may still dispense with it or arrest its 
 course. This is the sum total of modern civil liberty, the great, firm, and solid com 
 mons liberty. 
 
 Our Constitution our supreme law, which no Congress, nor President, 
 nor other earthly power can violate or authorize to be violated with im 
 punity is our ruler, our only ruler, and all the highest office-holders civil 
 and military are but its servants, and bound, under penalties, to obey its 
 commands. 
 
 Our Constitution declares : 
 
 The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall iwt be suspended, unless, when in case 
 of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it. 
 
 No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed. 
 
 The trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury. 
 
 No soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house without the consent of 
 the owner. 
 
 Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or of the press. 
 
 No citizen " shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime, unless 
 on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury." 
 
 No warrant shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation. 
 
 These are the commands of the only imperial power in America the 
 Constitution. They are so plain that a wayfaring man, though a fool, 
 cannot err in reading them. They cover every State, and territory, and 
 province, and foot of soil over which the jurisdiction of the United States 
 can possibly go. Yet every one of these positive commands, and others 
 besides, are violated and ordered to be violated by these Military Bills. 
 They are, therefore, assaults unmistakable, traitorous assaults upon the 
 Constitution ; and every man, woman, or child, or officer, civil or military, 
 in the United States, who votes for these bills, or approves them, or accepts 
 them, or executes them, or passively submits to them, is an enemy of the 
 Constitution and an enemy of every citizen whose rights are protected by 
 the Constitution. I care not what excuses are made, nor what pretenses 
 are whined out about the power of Congress and the progressive Radical 
 party. Such pretenses only show cowardice or the treasonable intent in 
 those who use them. The only way to crush the Radical party is to bring 
 down upon it that power which is greater than the Radical party the 
 Constitution. If the President is a slave and bound to execute the orders 
 of traitors, the people are freemen and entitled to resist. The only ques 
 tion, and, therefore, the only danger, is, have they the courage to resist ? A 
 freeman should know no master but the law, and bend the knee to no earthly 
 power but the Constitution. 
 
 As the result of reason and settled authority I affirm : 
 
 That every officer, high or low, who seizes the property of a citizen under 
 ? these Military Bills, is a trespasser, subject to indictment and suits for dam 
 ages as an individual. 
 
 That every such officer who arrests a citizen under these bills is guilty 
 of false imprisonment, and subject likewise as an individual, and amenable 
 to the writ of habeas corpus before any Court, State or Federal, having 
 jurisdiction to issue the writ. 
 
 That if a single citizen, white or black, is tried by a military commis 
 sion and executed, the officer ordering the court, the individuals composing 
 the court, the counsel prosecuting the case, the officer approving and exe 
 cuting the sentence, up to and including the President, each and all are 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WHITINGS. 771 
 
 guilty of murder, and indictable in the county where the crime is com 
 mitted. 
 
 And I again beg our citizens everywhere to assert these remedies and 
 assert them fearlessly. Do not be prevented by the sickly, cowardly 
 criminal statements that the courts are prohibited from taking jurisdiction! 
 1 his is the poor defense with which those authorizing the crimes have sought 
 to shield those silly creatures who may obey them, and is itself unconstitu 
 tional I he power which cannot violate the law, cannot annul or escape the 
 processes, or remedies and penalties of the law. 
 
 Sue in damages for every injury ; indict for every crime. Be sure and 
 include the thieving Treasury agents who were lately stealing your cot 
 ton or other things. Sue or indict in the county where the injury was or 
 may be done, or the crime was or may be committed. Whether the de 
 fendants are present or absent, get the true bills. Don t let lapse of time bar 
 you. Whenever you see me at a court, understand I will aid you without 
 fee or reward. The written Constitution is my client, and the preservation 
 of its protection the only fee I shall ask. The time for the law s triumph 
 over passion will one day come. If our people will now, everywhere, assert 
 these rights, not by again abandoning the Constitution, but by claiming its 
 remedies, that time will come quickly ; and then we shall demand the crim 
 inals wherever found and they will be delivered. If the President himself 
 should commit murder in the manner I have indicated, I do not hesitate to 
 say that I would urge a true bill against him and demand him for trial when 
 his term has expired. We owe it to ourselves, to our children, to free in 
 stitutions, to teach all, however high or low, who take advantage of degen 
 erate times like these to violate the great guarantees of the law, and 
 trample on the rights of the citizen, that when the political spasm is over 
 they can find no hiding place from the law s avenger nor take shelter from 
 its penalties anywhere in the jurisdiction of the Constitution. 
 
 Let this generation teach this lesson now, and teach it faithfully and 
 well, and we shall have no return of such periods of sorrow and crime for us 
 or for our children. If we do not teach this lesson, then sorrow and crime 
 will increase their coming and prolong their stays, because rogues will steal ; 
 tyrants will oppress ; little officers "will cut fantastic tricks "; and traitors 
 will use fraud and force to perpetuate their power, just as often and as long 
 as they think they can do so with impunity. 
 
 I also earnestly hope the people of each of the ten States will go boldly 
 forward, and preserve and continue their existing State governments, and 
 hold all elections in the manner and at the time prescribed by existing State 
 Constitutions ; will chose officers qualified according to existing State Con 
 stitutions and laws, and by voters qualified according to existing State 
 Constitutions and laws. If any citizen or officer shall be interfered with in 
 exercising his rights under these laws, or in discharging the duties of any 
 office to which he may be chosen, let him make the issue fearlessly. 
 
 I would have them continue this until, and even after, pretended Consti 
 tutions may be formed by deluded negroes and their designing inferiors 
 under these Military Bills ; and if any attempt were made to displace exist 
 ing Constitutions and governments by pretended Constitutions so formed, 
 and officers chosen thereunder, I would indict every officer so attempting to 
 subvert existing legal State governments, and I would then have our gov 
 ernors, or the Legislatures (if in session), make application to the President, 
 under the Constitution, to protect existing State governments " against do- 
 
772 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 mestic violence," and thus compel the President to decide whether he is 
 bound to displace by force what he admits to be existing legal State Con 
 stitutions and governments, for those he admits to be illegal, unconstitu 
 tional, and tyrannical. 
 
 I will add two important considerations why our people should thus re 
 sist, and never consent to, these usurpations : 
 
 In the first place, if we once allow these new governments to become 
 legally fixed on us by our consent, we can never get rid of them. The 
 power will be in the hands of those who make and administer them ; and, 
 though destroy as they will, they will hold on to their iniquity. It will also 
 require three-fourths of the States to concur in the adoption of the odious 
 Constitutional Amendment, but, if adopted, it will then require three-fourths 
 of the States to get rid of it. 
 
 But, in the second place, if, as is clear, these bills are so grossly uncon 
 stitutional, then they can never be legally established if we continue to resist 
 them. Let us commence cases now, and continue cases as fast and as often 
 as they arise, and if, even after these military Constitutions are framed and 
 organized, and have oppressed an unwilling people for years, the Court 
 finally decide the acts authorizing them to be unconstitutional, then, unlike 
 a case of arms between belligerents, everything done under them will be de 
 clared void the wicked governments will be displaced, every man who has 
 administered them will be a criminal, and our existing State Constitutions 
 will be restored to us. 
 
 Then will patriots meet again at Washington and at every State capitol, 
 and, gathering the records of these Radical traitors, and of all their State 
 subordinates together, will do, as our fathers in Georgia did when corrup 
 tion had usurped power and soiled our honor as a people once before we 
 Avill catch fire from Heaven and burn them up. 
 
 If, then, we yield now, our remedies are gone and we are conquered for 
 ever ; but if we refuse to yield, our remedies will continue, and we can 
 never be conquered. 
 
 NUMBER FOURTEEN. 
 
 But if this generation shall do its full duty, we must do more than simply 
 rescue the country from impending evils. The causes which produced those 
 evils must be understood and corrected. The people must see how and by 
 what means, and for what purpose, they have been so sorely afflicted. If 
 this be not done, then, though we may arrest the revolution for a time and de 
 feat the treasonable iniquit} of these Military Bills, yet in some other form 
 these same evils will come again. This is the people s government. All the 
 evils which have befallen us have been accomplished through the people, and 
 the final, the complete, the permanent remedy must come from the people. 
 He will be entitled to be called the father of his country, far above Wash 
 ington, who shall be able to lay bare to popular comprehension the agencies 
 by which the people of America have been made to cut each other s 
 throats, Destroy their common prosperity, and blight the hopes of their 
 own children. 
 
 My pen is not sufficient for the task, and these Notes are already too ex 
 tended to undertake it now. But I shall allude to these agencies here, and 
 in the future may return to the subject. 
 
 These agencies seem to be many, but there are really two, and from 
 these all the others spring. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 773 
 
 1. Deniagogism, or thirst for office, including all the appliances for 
 gratifying it. 
 
 2. Fanaticism, or the bigotry of extreme opinions, which has existed in 
 all sections, and has been developed on various even antagonistic sub 
 jects. Ignorance, credulity, and want of virtue among the people have 
 been the food for both agencies. 
 
 One of the most learned and profound judges of men and governments 
 says : In the birth of nations, the chief men make the institutions, but in 
 the sequel the institutions make the chief men." This single sentence em 
 braces all the philosophy of the rise and fall of free institutions in the 
 United States. 
 
 The chief men of that day made the Constitutions State and Federal. 
 They were patriots, and were made great and prominent by leading their 
 country to independence. Of course, as long as these men lasted they were 
 the chosen administrators of the institutions they had formed. They could 
 have no other desire or higher ambition than to make those institutions pro 
 mote the good of the people. And, therefore, no result could follow but that 
 which did follow : The American people rushed to prosperity with a rapidity 
 and to an extent which was and must remain the marvel of human ex 
 perience. But these fathers of the republic passed away, and so next did the 
 generation which was born in their day, and taught by their immediate ex 
 amples and influences. After this new rulers had to be chosen, and the 
 necessity of choosing was frequent, according to our institutions. Every 
 man was equally entitled to be chosen. The people were the choosers, and 
 to please the people was the way to be chosen. Aspirants soon discovered 
 that the majority of the people were more easily pleased by flattery than by 
 reason, by promises than by admonitions. All men had passions and preju 
 dices, but all men did not have enlightened consciences or informed judg 
 ments. Therefore, passion and prejudice formed the more inviting, because 
 the more available, field for those w r ho sought office. Then means were 
 adopted to combine and make effective the efforts of these office-seekers. 
 Parties w r ere formed and caucuses invented. Subjects were proposed and 
 issues presented which could excite the most passion and operate upon the 
 largest amount of prejudice. Platforms were built, not to expound the 
 Constitution, but to please the greatest number. As sectional prejudices 
 were the most powerful, so subjects and issues that were most sectional were 
 preferred. It was in this w r ay that slavery was brought into politics, and it 
 is, and always has been, my firm conviction that Southern pro-slavery polit 
 ical agitators were more efficient in the destruction of slavery than the 
 Northern fanatics. The agitation was settled and unsettled, and again 
 settled and unsettled, just as often as manipulating party leaders thought 
 the question of settling or unsettling could be made available as a party 
 issue in a Presidential contest. 
 
 By this process, honest men, who acted from convictions found 
 principle, were gradually excluded from the public councils, and 
 offices, State and Federal, were filled with mere party managers, preji 
 engenderers, and passion-panderers. We have many men who are m 
 but not one in five who deserves to be known. Such men were never 
 able. They could be bought to any party with the chance of 
 This is why most of our public men have belonged to all parties, have be 
 bitter aspirants in all, and have made earnest harangues on all 
 most all important questions. They went with the current becaus. 
 
774 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 desired to ride on the current. They could not afford to cleave to principles 
 in minorities. These men brought the country to revolution, have kept it in 
 revolution, and are unable to get it out of revolution. 
 
 But the chief agency of destruction extreme opinions, all of which vari 
 ous kinds I include in the generic term fanaticism has been, from the begin 
 ning, enmity to the Constitution. Mutual concession for the common good 
 is the soul, the very being, of the Constitution. It is the breath which was 
 breathed as life into it. By concession alone it was formed, and in that 
 spirit alone can it ever be safely or peacefully administered. But extreme 
 minds never concede. They hate concession and trample on compromises. 
 Therefore these extreme minds at the North denounced the Constitution as 
 "a covenant with hell and a league with the devil"; and extreme men at 
 the South denounced the Union as the source of all evils to the South. 
 
 These men were much more numerous at the North than at the South, 
 but, left to themselves, they would have remained powerless in both sec 
 tions. But they adroitly watched every opportunity to get control of the 
 great office-seeking parties of the country. And the managers of the parties 
 corruptly pandered to the respective extreme opinions to get their help in 
 securing the offices. The repeal of the Missouri Compromise furnished the 
 long-desired occasion to segregate the sections. The extreme men of the 
 South took charge of the Democratic party to bring about secession. The 
 extreme men of the North organized and took charge of the Republican 
 party to destroy or bring about a reformation of the Constitution ; and the 
 politicians our so-called great men were perfectly willing to be taken 
 charge of, if thereby they could be placed in the offices, and did not care, on 
 either side, one fig whether slavery was extended or not extended, destroyed 
 or not destroyed, so they could keep the offices ! The majority of the peo 
 ple of the South were made perfectly crazy with the idea of their great right 
 to carry slaves to Kansas, and the majority of the Northern people were made 
 equally crazy with the alleged bad faith of the aggressive spirit of slavery. 
 The minority in each section, who declared that this whole agitation was a 
 "pandora box " opened upon the country, leaving scarcely hope behind, 
 were laughed at as visionary. So fanaticism bought up demagogism with 
 the offices, and the two together rushed the country into civil war. These 
 are the chief men whom our institutions have produced ! And what are the 
 results ? Instead of honor, prosperity, and independence, we have humilia 
 tion, pauperism, and disfranchisement ; instead of a union of harmony and 
 good-will, and the spirit of concession, we have a despotic, fragmentary 
 conclave ruling with Cerberian hate. We have slain a million of whites and 
 doomed four millions of heretofore happy, contented blacks to starvation, 
 barbarism, and death ; and to accomplish this work we have destroyed prop 
 erty and expended money more than sufficient to have bought the whole Af 
 rican race in America three times over, at open market value ! And are 
 they statesmen, and philanthropists, and patriots, who are known by suck 
 works ? No, no ; they are the double-shaped monsters which the dema 
 gogue and the fanatic have begot by seduction of the people, and by rape 
 upon the Constitution. 
 
 The art of deceiving the people so as to get their votes has been the chief 
 means by which nearly all the politicians, who have become prominent dur 
 ing the last twenty-five years, have been enabled to succeed, and get the 
 names and places of leading men. This man Butler, of Massachusetts, be 
 came known throughout the country before the war almost entirely because 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WHITINGS. TT". 
 
 of his success, with the aid of one other, also from that State, in building 
 platforms for his party, which could be construed to suit every section, every 
 opinion, and every prejudice. Yet this man was not one whit more unprin 
 cipled in political morals, nor any farther below the standard of a true 
 statesman, than were the many all through the land who availed themselves 
 of his deceptive work to get the offices. He is as guilty who uses a fraud, as 
 he who originates it. As deceptions brought on the collisions between the 
 sections, it is not at all wonderful that deceptions prevailed throughout its 
 progress and still continue. The leaders have professed to desire what they 
 did not intend should be accomplished. The people listened to the profession 
 and could not be made to see or believe the intention. Therefore the people 
 of America have been made to do, with energy and great sacrifice, those 
 very things which, of all others, they most hate. They have been made to 
 cut their own throats under the belief it was the only way to save their own 
 lives ; to use force to preserve a union of consent ; to indulge feelings of 
 hatred and distrust as the only means of preserving harmony ; and now the 
 proposition of these Military Bills is to trample on the Constitution as the 
 only way to peace and safety ; to disfranchise and humiliate the white man 
 as the only way to enfranchise and elevate the black man ; to rush into an 
 archy as the only way to find security for person and for property, and to 
 subvert the Government as the only means of preserving it. The authors 
 and defenders of these Military Bills are wise like the daughters of Pelias, 
 who insisted that by cutting their old father in pieces, they could renew his 
 youth ; and our people will prove to be as foolish as was the old man, who 
 consented, when they consent to these destructive Military Bills as the means 
 of entering the Union and of preserving written Constitutions. 
 
 Of all delusions of the revolution, the greatest was that of supposing that 
 either party to the late conflict was fighting to preserve the Union under the 
 Constitution. This delusion was embraced by many in the North amUiot a 
 few in the South. There has never really been a war to preserve the Union. 
 The masses of the people North thought so because their leaders professed 
 so. But the extreme men of the North naturally took charge of the conduct 
 of the war, and they never intended it should end without a reformation or 
 destruction of the Constitution. They had long before declared the old 
 Constitution to be a covenant " with hell and a league with the devil," and in 
 the debate on the Civil Rights Bill, old man Stevens confessed that, from his 
 youth, he had longed for the occurrence of some great convulsion, under the 
 influence of which the Constitution could be changed? Is he, therefore, 
 laboring to preserve that Constitution which he has longed from his youth 
 to change change violently, under the influence of convulsion? he pi 
 tense to the people, during the war, was to preserve the Union because 
 people loved the Union ; the purpose of the pretenders was to 
 the Constitution because they hated the Constitution, 
 the preservation of a territorial Union, but the utter destruction of 
 tutional Union. Consent was the beauty of the old Jmon ; fc 
 power of the new. The proof that the Radical leaders were not e 
 when they professed to wage the war to preserve the 1 j nion, is i 
 when the war has ended they will not admit the Union is preserved, 
 of them proclaim that the war ended too soon ! V hy ended 
 cause they are afraid the excitement of the convulsion wi 
 its influence, they can complete the long desired work of defl 
 forming the Constitution. If the people of the North could only be mad 
 
*776 SENATOR R II. IIILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 to see the clearest truth of the revolution, to-wit : that their leaders have 
 used them to destroy the Constitution by appealing to their love of the 
 Union, all would be safe. 
 
 The great difficulty, heretofore, has been that patriotic, conserva 
 tive men in both sections have been unable to make the people of 
 either section see that the extreme men of the two sections had a 
 common end. The people could not see this, because these extreme 
 men seemed to be fighting each other, when, in truth, both were 
 fighting the Union. The extreme men saw that love of the Union 
 was the only feeling with the people of either section, which was 
 or could be made stronger than the love of section. Pro-slavery was 
 the great question which it was thought could concentrate all feeling at the 
 South, and, therefore, the extreme men assumed to be the peculiar exclusive 
 friends of slavery, and all men at the North were declared to be its enemies, 
 and all the South who differed with them were denounced as traitors to their 
 section. Anti-slavery was the great feeling at the North, and there the ex 
 treme men assumed to be the only true defenders of the North from 
 the wild aggressive spirit of slavery, which was represented as seeking, with 
 the master s lash, to control the whole country. The people of both sec 
 tions listened until they believed, and sent the extreme men in stronger and 
 stronger force to Washington, who made the national capital but a theater 
 for sectional bullies ; who reduced all eloquence to sectional billingsgate, and 
 whose only statesmanship consisted in engendering sectional hate. The nat 
 ural result was war, but a sectional war, and a war in which the triumph 
 of either party was the triumph of an enemy to the Union under the Con 
 stitution. And this is the only war which has been waged, and this is the 
 only final triumph which will be achieved if the people do not open their eyes 
 in both sections and make a united war against their common enemy these 
 extreme men. It was with these views that I so earnestly begged the South 
 in 1860 not to secede, because she would thereby be only furthering the pur 
 pose of the common enemy of the South and the Constitution would thereby 
 throw all the power of the Union into the hands of that common enemy, 
 which power would be used, first to crush the South, and then to destroy the 
 Constitution. It was because of these convictions I went with my section, 
 and never felt I made war on the Union, although I saw the Union was 
 being crushed between two antagonistic forces. And it was because of these 
 convictions I was willing every hour of the struggle to stop the fight and ne 
 gotiate, feeling that, if either party yielded to arms, common equal confeder 
 ation would be impossible. But we never could negotiate, for the plain 
 reason that in that way the Union might be preserved, and this the leaders 
 of the North never intended to permit. They determined to continue the 
 convulsion to enable them to destroy all hope of Constitutional Union, and 
 now they fear the war has ended too soon to enable them fully to accomplish 
 their work. It was therefor I urged the South never to yield, but to fight 
 to extermination rather than be subjugated, for subjugation of either section 
 was the greatest possible obstacle to future peace and Union, as well as to 
 honor and independence, for either section. But slavery has been destroyed, 
 and divisions between the extreme men of the North and South are no 
 longer promotive of the common end. The common end was, not to pre 
 serve or destroy slavery, but the common end was to destroy a Constitution 
 founded in mutual concession for the common good, and to which extreme 
 opinion is and must be enmity. Slavery was only used as an exciting sectional 
 
SIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 777 
 
 means to accomplish the work. The pretense for difference between the ex- 
 ,remes has been removed, but the common purpose remains. And what is 
 the result? hese extremes are getting together. I believed and declared 
 in advance they would unite. It is natural and logical that they should 
 unite. When division promoted a common end, it was natural to divide but 
 when union can promote that same common end, it is natural consistent to 
 unite Stunner and Stevens, and Brown and Holden, are not accidents nor 
 are they original characters. They have figured in all mad revolutions from 
 the fall of Greece and the destruction of Jerusalem to the present day 
 Such men have ever been treacherous to principle, faithless to trusts, and de 
 ceived in profession, but always consistent perfectly consistent in the 
 common end of destruction to government. And, as these Military Bills have 
 no character but opposition to all the provisions and principles of the Con 
 stitution, and can have no end but its utter and final destruction, such men, 
 and all their ilk in both sections, will unite in their support. 
 
 The unscrupulous portion of the secession leaders those who never 
 acted from conviction of right and the Northern Radicals are making 
 friends and shaking hands, like Pilot and Herod, for the final crucifixion of 
 the Constitution. Can it be, can it possibly be, that the American people, 
 like an inflamed foolish rabble, will still cry, crucify him, crucify him ; give 
 us Barabbas ; give us Barabbas give us anarchy, give us anarchy ! 
 
 Now, then, the duty of all patriots is plain. The enemies of the country 
 are united. ^ Their platform is these Military Bills. Let the friends of the 
 country unite. Let our platform be the Constitution. There is no longer 
 any excuse to be deceived. If we want peace, if we want safety, if we want 
 liberty, if we want prosperity, if we want hope for our children, if we want 
 Union, if we want written Constitutions, we must unite all patriots, every 
 where, must unite. We must crush out these real authors of all our sorrows ; 
 we must declare that the will of two-thirds of a fragmentary conclave of 
 Congressional members is not, and shall not be the supreme law of the land, 
 but that the Constitution and the laws passed in pursuance thereof are, and 
 shall be, the only supreme law for the freemen of America. 
 
 For the present, at least, these Notes will end. It was my original purpose 
 to apply the reasoning I have employed to the history of former revolutions, 
 for the purpose of showing that the monsters of revolution in all ages have 
 acted in like spirit, with like purposes, and with like treachery as those who 
 dominate in this country and seek to overturn our institutions ; and also the 
 impossibility, according to unbroken human experience, of forcing, by statute, 
 the black race and the white race to equality in government. And to show 
 that all the consequences which I have declared will result from the 
 efforts now being made to subvert the government by force and fraud, have 
 resulted invariably resulted from similar causes in all the past. 
 
 But those who can believe that good, and not evil, will come of violating 
 our Constitution, of trampling upon our laws, of disregarding plighted faith, 
 of degrading the white race, of fomenting hatreds between different races, 
 and of keeping up continual sectional strife, would not hear reason from the 
 living or the dead ! All such will take an oath to support the Constitution 
 when they register, and then violate the Constitution and that oath by voting 
 " for a convention," and feel no compunctions. But all who love the law 
 and its safety, the truth and its rewards, the country and its peace, our 
 children and their prosperity, and liberty and its guarantees, wi register 
 and vote against a convention, and never cease to resist, in all forms and on 
 
778 SENATOR P. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 all occasions, this sum of American oppression, this embodiment of American 
 treason, this aggregate of American dangers, these Military Bills enacted to 
 keep their authors in power. 
 
 I beg to express, in this manner, my grateful acknowledgment of the 
 many warm and earnest expressions of appreciative approval which I am 
 daily receiving of my humble efforts to wake my countrymen to their 
 dangers and their duty. I cannot write a personal answer to each one, but 
 I feel none the less thankful for such comforting encouragement. 
 
 I have sought only to write the truth, only to discharge a duty, only to 
 serve the country, but I love, and hope I shall ever love, the approval of the 
 wise and the applause of the good. 
 
 NUMBER FIFTEEN. 
 
 Since the publication of the last Note, two events have occurred which 
 may be properly noticed : 1. The so-called Congress has assembled and 
 passed, by the usual process, another Supplementary Military Bill. 2. Ex- 
 Governor Joseph E. Brown has published what he calls a review of the 
 " Notes on the Situation." 
 
 I propose, first, to notice Governor Brown s articles, and, then, to pass to 
 the Bill of the fragmentary Congress, a proper analysis of which is, in my 
 judgment, exceedingly important. 
 
 The plan of argument adopted by Governor Brown is wholly unknown 
 to any established method of ascertaining truth, and has never been practiced 
 by any respectable debater who desired to promote the right. It is a favor 
 ite plan, however, in all times of unhealthy political excitement with those 
 who seek to obtain place or favor by pandering to the passions and mislead 
 ing the judgment of the ignorant multitude. 
 
 The points which I sought by the "Notes "to establish were, among 
 others : 
 
 1. That the Military Bills were^contrary to the Constitution, and destruc 
 tive of all the principles and guarantees of free government in America. 
 
 2. That they were contrary to every code of civilized nations, and infa 
 mous bad faith to the terms of the fight and the conditions of surrender. 
 
 3. That the reasons urged to justify these measures such as a desire to 
 restore the Union, elevate the black race, secure guarantees of future peace, 
 etc., etc., were utterly untrue, inconsistent, and insidious mere pretexts to 
 cover the only real purpose, which was to perpetuate the power of the Radi 
 cal part}^. 
 
 4. That the acceptance of the plan proposed by these bills could only 
 result in a permanent subversion of the Government, in the degradation of 
 the people, in a long and bloody reign of anarchy, with social, civil, and 
 agrarian wars, resulting, after unparalleled horrors, in despotism for the 
 whites in the whole United States, and in the extermination, exclusion, or 
 political re-enslavement of the African race. 
 
 5. That the only remedy for these evils, both threatened and existing, 
 was a speedy return, by the people of all sections, to the Constitution, and a 
 vigorous enforcement of its remedies against all its violators. 
 
 These are the great, all-absorbing, leading questions that I discussed, 
 and sought to establish by argument, by precedents, by authorities, and by 
 history, and sought to enforce by appeals to the good and by denunciation 
 of the wicked. 
 
JIIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 779 
 
 And how wonderfully important are these great questions to every crea 
 ture of every race on the continent, either living O r yet to live ! And how 
 imperative is the duty of every man who enters the discussion to see to it 
 that his whole powers be employed to promote their correct and proper 
 solution And how does this ex-Governor-so proud of having been so of ten 
 chosen by the people come to the review of these questions? Reader 
 anxious reader, how ? 
 
 1. By writing my biography ! Well, suppose I am as unimportant and 
 l i?^ 01 2r y aS 6 Governor desires me to be, does that make the Militaru 
 Mills Constitutional? Would it negative a single position urged in the 
 argument ? 
 
 2. Next he devotes three-fourths of the balance of his review to show 
 that I have often been inconsistent in my life, and am inconsistent in the 
 argument presented in the " Notes " and in the Atlanta speech. 
 
 Well, suppose he is right ; suppose I have contradicted myself in 
 every line, and turned a somersault every hour in my life, would all that 
 prove a right in Congress to violate the pledged faith of the nation, to sub 
 vert the Federal Government, to abrogate States, and deny to freemen trial 
 by jury and all the other glorious provisions of the Bill of Rights incorpo 
 rated in the Constitution ? 
 
 3. Then he attacks my motives, and says my only desire is to get office, 
 and my only real objection to the plan of reconstruction is that I am disfran 
 chised by it. Well, suppose this is all true ; will that justify the Radical 
 party in desecrating the Constitution to perpetuate a new party in power? 
 Will that lessen the horrors of anarchy, or soften the fetters of despotism 
 to us and our children ? 
 
 Some, doubtless, would excuse me if I were to write, in turn, the Gov 
 ernor s biography. Some, indeed, may expect it and desire to relish the pro 
 duction. But I cannot consent, in a crisis like this, so to lose my sense of 
 self-respect nor to soil white paper. I can neither retaliate, however tempt 
 ing the materials under proper circumstances ; nor can I, under any circum 
 stances, imitate the plan and style of his so-called argument. I will not 
 myself be diverted, nor, if I can prevent it, will I permit the public mind to be 
 diverted, from the vital and momentous issues now pressing us for solution. 
 
 If our liberties are to perish ; if our Constitution is to be abandoned ; if 
 a corrupt Radical will is to be our only law, and a proscribing Radical oli 
 garchy our only government : what can honest men care for office, or decent 
 men for place, or sensible men for biographies ! Who cares to boast of the 
 number of times he has been the chosen leader of the people, if he lead them 
 to ruin ? Who should desire to be known to posterity as being among those 
 who destroy 
 nothing but 
 far better, t 
 were hanged to our necks and we be cast into the sea ! 
 
 The man who can care for himself while his country is perishing ; who 
 hunts an office while liberty is dying ; who advises his people to accept dis 
 honor because reckless power demands it ; who joins, with intent to aid a 
 party seeking to perpetuate its power by disfranchising intelligence and 
 enfranchising ignorance, in violation of the written Constitution ; who would 
 accept an office by the votes of the negro race, with threats to oppres 
 rob the white race ; who praises the bayonet that pierces the Constitution, 
 and approves the arbitrary will which strikes down the supremacy of 
 
780 SENATOR B. If. HILL, OF GEORGIA 
 
 law ; such a man would have administered the hemlock to Socrates because 
 the mob desired it ; would have executed Sidney because power decreed it ; 
 and esteemed Barabbas honored above the Saviour because the rabble, by 
 overwhelming majority, elected him ! Such a man could stand on the bleed 
 ing corpse of the Constitution and, amid its death-throes, flatter its mur 
 derers for favor ! 
 
 For myself, my resolution is taken, my course is fixed. I feel that my 
 views are correct. I trust I may be mistaken. I believe unparalleled evils 
 impend, and will come upon us all of us unless the people awake. I am 
 willing to be decreed a fool, if thereby the evils can be averted. I am will 
 ing that my worst enemy shall be covered with glory shall have an imper 
 ishable monument lifting its summit till it catch perpetual sunlight, if his 
 counsel shall avert the evils. I deplore now, as never before, the feebleness 
 of my powers. But with an absolute consciousness in my heart, that I have 
 no purpose but to aid in rescuing, if they can be rescued, the Constitution 
 from further desecration, the Government from subversion, the country 
 from anarchy, and all sections, races, and colors from ruin, I cannot be 
 alarmed by the threats of power, nor tempted by the offices of usurpers, nor 
 disturbed by the slanders of the mean, the designing or the jealous. . My 
 humble letters and speeches, however feeble, are too many, too plain, and 
 too earnest to be perverted by mutilated quotations. Always I besought 
 our people not to provoke war, not to abandon the Constitution, but if war 
 must come, let it find them battling for their rights in the Union and under 
 the Flag. But when extreme men in both sections forced a sectional war, 
 and it was section against section, as I believe, every impulse of my heart, 
 and every act of my life was with and for my own people ; and I despise 
 the man who, looking from my standpoint, could condemn me. But the 
 sectional war is over, and yet extreme men are still refusing to let the Union 
 be preserved, and still insist on keeping alive hatred and strife and distrust. 
 Their conduct will breed a hundred wars. I earnestly desire to aid in avert 
 ing wars, by exposing and defeating their wicked schemes against the Con 
 stitution ; but if war must come, I beg, now as in the beginning, that our 
 people will find and keep their only true place in the fight in the Union, 
 under the Flag and for the Constitution. And I plead for this the more 
 earnestly for the future, since our people are able to see the evils which be 
 fell them by pursuing the contrary course in the past. From this great 
 purpose I can neither be driven nor seduced. And while I scorn the men 
 who, in face of the fact that their counsels have always misled the people 
 heretofore, still thrust themselves forward as the only worthy advisers, and 
 not ashamed of having guided the people to ruin, still insist upon urging 
 them to dishonor ; yet I have no time or spirit to enter into mere personal 
 controversies. Whatever may have been a man s errors or mistakes in the 
 past, I am willing to forget them and love him as a brother, if he only 
 will now help to save the manhood of our people and the Constitution of 
 our country. If our country can be saved, in that fact alone I shall find re 
 ward enough. If the country must be lost, I pray that I and mine may be 
 crushed by its fall, and may sleep, forgotten, beneath its wreck rather than 
 live to prey on its carcass and be honored by its destroyers. 
 
 Some learned critics tell us that a writer s heart can always be discovered 
 in his writings in spite even of any effort at concealment. I believe this is 
 true, and I care not what enemies may say, or troubled apostles may write, 
 I know my heart is in what I write, and I know every sensible man will 
 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WHITINGS. 781 
 
 see it, and every honest man will admit it, and every true man will ap 
 prove it. 
 
 There are many who know I was drawn into politics in 1855, contrary to 
 all the plans of my life, only to aid in averting evils which I sincerely be 
 lieved would result from the repeal of the Missouri Compromise. I had 
 again made up my mind to ignore politics. But I desired to have peace 
 myself and see the country have peace. When these Military Bills passed 
 I desired fully to comprehend thorn in meaning, purpose, and tendency. I 
 saw have no doubt I saw as I have announced, that every interest* and 
 all hope was destroyed and blighted, if these Bills succeeded. Yet I saw 
 many honest, good men accepting them. I saw they were accepting them 
 from the most laudable notions. They were tired, despondent, and anxious 
 for peace. They were told these measures would bring peace. I believe 
 they were deceived fearfulh- deceived. I believe they were leaping into 
 the fire to escape the burning; sailing into anarchy to find safety; com 
 mitting suicide to end trouble. I became painfully convinced that the 
 Military Bills were in violation of the Constitution ; of the laws of nations ; 
 of the terms of surrender ; and of every hope of peace and union. 
 
 With such views silence would have been a crime. My purpose was to 
 show these conclusions by argument, and to accompany the argument with 
 strong but logical warnings to the mistaken, and with denunciations of the 
 designing. I neither felt nor intend mere personal unkindness to any living 
 thing. So far from deprecating replies I coveted them. I earnestly desired 
 to see if I could be wrong, determined, if convinced, frankly to admit it. I 
 would love the man who could show the argument unsound. The Radical 
 press anonymous scribblers, and the many wounded, have let loose all 
 their wrath upon me, but have not touched the argument. Lastly the ex- 
 Governor entered the lists with a formal review. But he has scarcely said 
 anything but rehash editorials. I have not seen his sixth article, but in all 
 the others I have been unable to find that he has even taken issue on the 
 very first point in the discussion. He has not even said whether, in his 
 opinion, the Military Bills are Constitutional. Has he ever said it? Will 
 he ever say it ? Dare he put himself on record as saying either that the 
 bills are Constitutional or un-Constitutional ? They must be one or the 
 other. Stupid followers of this political Rabbi, anxious inquirers for peace 
 and safety, will you make him tell you his opinion on this point ? 
 
 Instead of argument I find my insignificant self most untruthfully 
 assailed ; quotations made from utterances I have never spoken ; sentiments 
 ascribed to me at war with my whole life and nature ; my sentences cut in 
 twain ; different sentences taken from their contexts ; and words changed 
 and added so as to reverse my meaning. For the sake of truth I am mort 
 fied, but for myself not at all disturbed by such work. Will not editors, 
 scribblers, and reviewers all see that in such writings they are only reveal 
 ing their hearts, their purposes ? Do they not perceive that in every 
 they justify my denunciations and are making startling confessions 
 kind that they* are deliberately stabbing the vitah of liberty in the name 
 equality ; are subverting the Government under hypocritical preter 
 loyalty, and are destroying the Constitution under cover of 
 port it ? 
 
 I desire only to warn-not to threaten ; with the kindest motives ea 
 estly to arouse and not simply to denounce. And in this spirit 1 
 what I believe, what I am prepared to demonstrate with the most 
 
782 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 argument, that these bills are not only unconstitutional and illegal, but they 
 embody crimes high crimes against " the good order, peace, and dignity 
 of the State," and all of the States crimes against the dead, against the 
 living, and against coming millions ; crimes compared with which the con 
 spiracy of Catiline was respectable, and the treason of Arnold was insignifi 
 cant and harmless ! 
 
 How, with such conviction, can I turn aside for a mere personal contro 
 versy ? I scorn such work. 
 
 But Governor Brown has made some statements and disclosures which 
 I think will enable the people still more clearly to see the truth of all I have 
 said touching these Military Bills and the purposes of the Radical party, 
 and these I shall deem it my duty briefly to notice. 
 
 NUMBER SIXTEEN. 
 
 So far from feeling any desire to do injustice to Governor Brown, I have 
 examined anxiously for something by which to explain his singular reason 
 ing, and still more singular conduct. He advocates doctrines and announces 
 views which are denounced by the most respectable writers as " infamous," 
 and " inhuman," and " contrary to all reason and justice." Yet he announces 
 such views with frequent readiness and against his own people. His writ 
 ings exhibit no familiarity with history, or standard authors, or great princi 
 ples, and he may not know the ground he is treading on. Yet he has a natu 
 ral vigor of intellect which alone ought to protect him. So he resorts to ar 
 guments which even ignorance ought to see are unsound. To illustrate my 
 meaning with a few examples : 
 
 1. He twits us for opposing the Convention called by Congress because, 
 as is admitted by its authors, it is unconstitutional, after submitting to a Con 
 vention called by the President, which he alleges was equally unconstitutional. 
 The answer is so plain as to render the position ridiculous. Even supposing 
 our people did submit to one unconstitutional exaction, is that a reason why 
 they should submit to another? But the plans are wholly unlike. The 
 President did not qualify or disqualify voters contrary to the laws of the 
 State. He called on the voters qualified by the State to adopt a Constitu 
 tion for themselves through their own delegates. He told them what, in his 
 opinion, were the issues settled by the war and terms of the fight, and ad 
 vised them to conform to them. He says he intended this only as advisory. 
 Any power even Russia or India might propose to the qualified voters of 
 any State, through their proper officers, the propriety of holiding a convention. 
 If the qualified voters in the forms prescribed by their existing fundamental 
 law adopt the proposition, it becomes their own. Is this the plan of Con 
 gress ? Existing governments are set aside, old electors are disfranchised, 
 new voters are qualified and ordered to form Constitutions to suit a set of 
 men who are never to live under them. And force and fraud are actually 
 employed, and confiscation and further oppression threatened, to compel 
 compliance. Could a fair mind find resemblance in these plans ? Other 
 differences are equally striking, but I will not notice them. 
 
 2. So Governor Brown says we, as I wrote, "promptly and cheerfully 
 yielded slavery," and, therefore, why object to yielding our franchises ? 
 Well, I answer, suppose we did give up property, is that a reason why we 
 should yield honor also? Would a magnanimous people demand it? Do 
 they offer us back the property which they say we illegally yielded to 
 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 783 
 
 them, and, in lieu thereof, demand our franchise ? No ; they keep the first 
 and demand that we yield also the second ! a meanness of which no 
 highway robber was ever guilty ! But Governor Brown thinks as we 
 yielded property, we ought readily to yield, what he seems to cons ider all 
 lesser things. In my opinion, it was better to yield property than honor 
 and better to give up slavery than permit to be governed by the negro race* 
 Of a people, who promptly and cheerfully yielded so much to show good 
 faith in submitting to Union, no honorable people would exact more. What 
 a singular argument because we yielded one right, therefore we are bound 
 to yield all ! True, the spirit of yielding generally begets a spirit of exact 
 ing. Let our people remember this. 
 
 3. So he argues it is inconsistent to charge perjury in supporting the Mil 
 itary Bills, after having supported the conscript bill and divers other mc:i>- 
 ures which he and others said were unconstitutional? But did I not draw 
 broadly the distinction between supporting measures of merely doubtful con 
 struction and measures of admitted unconstitutionality. The authors of the 
 Military Bills admit they are not authorized by the Constitution, and even 
 Governor Brown will not say they are Constitutional. Yet he and they ad 
 vise our people to carry out these unconstitutional bills under oath to support 
 the Constitution. 
 
 4. But it is Governor Brown s doctrine (as it is certainly his argument), 
 that if a man swears falsely once he ought to do so again. It is upon this 
 theory that he feels justified, after having helped to pull down the Union, and 
 then the Confederacy, now insist upon pulling down our State governments 
 and the white race. 
 
 He says I advise the people to renew the fight ! Renew ! Did I use 
 that word ? That could only mean the secession fight. "What a dark motive 
 is here revealed ! Yet all I have written is directly to the contrary ; and 
 the very sentence which he cuts in two to get his idea says, " Do not talk or 
 think of secession or disunion, but come up to the good old platform of our 
 fathers the Constitution." Is Governor Brown opposed to fighting for the 
 Constitution "if need be?" I suppose he is he always has been : his record 
 is against the Constitution and that is precisely why he is helping the Radi 
 cals. He knoics they are destroying the Constitution. 
 
 5. Governor Brown warns the poor people that I am not only opposed 
 to extending suffrage to the negro, but am in favor of taking it from the 
 poor whites ! And is it not the very purpose of every note I have written to 
 preserve our existing State Constitution? And will preserving that take suf 
 frage from the poor whites ? Poor man ! Poor thing ! Yet not so poor, either ! 
 
 6. He next seeks to impair the effect of my humble efforts with the 
 Northern people by telling them I advocated a war to burn their cities and 
 take them in the Confederacy as "hewers of wood and drawers of watt-r, 
 
 etc." He pretends to quote from some Savannah speech. I made no speed 
 in Savannah at the time referred to except to a serenading party the 
 night I was in the city a few minutes before leaving. I never 
 word of the speech never saw a report of it. I do not know what I said 
 or what was reported, but I do know I never spoke or cutiM-taim-d Mich id< 
 as Governor Brown has represented with the meaning he has given the 
 I do not remember my sentiments at that period of our history, 
 anxious to avert war." I was especially anxious that our people shoulc 
 begin it, nor provoke it ; and one of the chief obstacles in the way of keepi 
 
 was this very man Brown who, Governor, was at that time seizing 
 
 the 
 
 peace was tnis very 
 
784 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 Northern vessels in the port of Savannah, issuing inflammatory appeals, and 
 doing all he could with the executive power of the State to provoke war. 
 The proof that I was earnestly opposed even to fire on Sumter is of the 
 highest character. But if war was forced on us by the North I desired our 
 people to meet it like men conscious of right motives, and I frequently, at 
 that day, gave the opinion that slavery would not be an elternent of weak 
 ness but of strength in the war, and that a slave-holding people were always 
 powerful in a war. 
 
 While I have always endeavored to be true to our people, in what I 
 believed their rights at the time, it is a singular phase of evolution that 
 this man Brown should be a witness against me with any portion of the 
 Northern people who really love the Union under the Constitution. True, 
 "a fellow feeling makes us wondrous kind," and, therefore, he may be 
 esteemed far above me by the Northern Radicals ; for he, like them, has 
 been always against the Constitutional Union of the States, and I have no 
 faith whatever in him or them. The people (I pray before it is too late) 
 will one day discover very plainly why these men, who, so late, were so 
 fierce against each other, have now linked themselves so lovingly together. 
 Like Sin and Satan, they have discovered their affinity for each other in their 
 common hatred to the Constitution, and at once they sink " in melting mood 
 Avith honeyed phrase" into each other s arms to beget its death! 
 
 But the Governor knows that his arguments are unsound, and he seems 
 to think that all articles written for political effect are, of course, " intended 
 to mislead and deceive." Applying his own rule to himself, he may feel 
 justified. This idea of political morals was but too common in party days 
 in the very worst of which days the Governor rose and flourished, and by 
 using with effect this very rule. Many have so become prominent in the 
 corrupt days of party availability, like sores which swell from the surface of 
 the human body where the blood is impure. I fear too many have become 
 running sores which can never be healed until the life of the nation is ex 
 hausted, and sores and liberty disappear together. 
 
 Pardon me, kind reader ; but I thought it best, as illustrative of their 
 character, to notice thus much which may be called the Governor s argu 
 ment, in contradistinction to his personal allusions, which I have declined 
 to notice. I will next notice some disclosures which he made, which, if not 
 authoritative for his party, are, at least, very significant. 
 
 NUMBER SEVENTEEN. 
 
 No nation or people ever realized, during the descent, how rapidly they 
 were rushing to destruction. If people could only be made to see whither 
 they were hurrying they would not go. Those who do see and raise a voice 
 of earnest warning, are generally considered as excited sometimes as mad. 
 People will not believe their own leaders will sell them or betray them until 
 the bond is executed or the treachery is complete. Here is the trouble with 
 our Northern friends. The masses love the Union and the Constitution. 
 They have shown that love. But they will not see that the very men they 
 send to Congress are trampling on the Constitution and forever destroying 
 the Union. Those who undertake to lay bare to a people the corruptions of 
 their own leaders assume a task as difficult as it is dangerous. The wicked 
 become their enemies and use every means to destroy their power, and the 
 good will not believe their revelations or heed their warnings. Yet no man 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WR1TIKU8. 785 
 
 who ever undertook such a task was ever able to tell all the real truth The 
 realities of national misfortune and downfalls are always far greater than 
 the descriptions of those who, by warnings, sought to prevent them. So th 
 measures which produce national ruin are never fully understood until 
 
 rnin ic hoTrnnH *Aw4w4v T^~ Ai. 
 
 now delay to do so. 
 
 The Military Bills will furnish one of the most striking proofs, in the 
 future, of the truths I have uttered. I am denounced as a calumniator be 
 cause of what I have said of these measures and their authors and support 
 ers, lime wi prove my language to be tame and feeble. Every day 
 something is developed which gives them a more infamous character than 
 was even suspected before. I have denounced these measures as being 
 contrary to the Constitution ; as abrogating State government ; as degrad 
 ing the white race ; as calculated inevitably to beget a war of races ; as de 
 structive of all Constitutional liberty ; as being enacted in fraud, executed 
 by force, and consummated by perjury. 
 
 Can anything be worse ? you will ask. I reply, yes, these very bills are 
 infinitely worse. I find I have never fully indeed, but vaguely compre 
 hended their turpitude. I have all along supposed that, odious as they 
 were, the people a people were, at least, allowed a semblance of right to 
 reject them ; and, of course, by rejecting them escape the purposes and ob 
 jects of the measures. I had frequently called attention to the fact that 
 Congress had devised a scheme of relieving themselves of the odium of 
 these measures by at least seeming to submit to some people the privilege of 
 accepting or rejecting them. This, I supposed, also exhibited a lingering, 
 though farcical respect for the once pure and great idea that the people at 
 least some people should have a government founded in their consent.- 
 And this I supposed was the reason for permitting the voters to express 
 their approval or disapproval of the scheme by indorsing on their tickets 
 "for a convention " or "against a convention." But in this I have been 
 greatly mistaken. The whole country has been mistaken. What I have 
 been laboring so earnestly to prove was a cheat turns out to be a trap a 
 snare a downright pitfall ! This is one of the remarkable disclosures 
 made in Governor Brown s last article reviewing the " Notes." Hear him : 
 
 If we reject and vote down the Convention, when Congress again meets in December, 
 it will pass an act extending the disf ranchisement to every man wlw wtes against the OH* 
 mention, whether white or black, and probably to all others who voluntarily aided in the 
 rebellion. 
 
 If Congress never intended to abide the decision of its own selected 
 qualified voters why, ask for a decision ? But let us hear the Governor 
 fully. I will not imitate his example by cutting sentences in two and 
 changing words to represent him as saying just the reverse of what he does say. 
 
 But, it may be asked, why disfranchise a man because he rotes against the Conven 
 tion ? The reply is, Congress, representing the conqueror, has submitted 
 construction and restoration of the Union, and the vote of each man, whit* or 
 be looked to as a test ofMsloyalty and willingness to see the Union restored and peace or 
 more established the tickets of all, black and white, will no doubt be numb 
 it will be an easy matter for the Government to see how each voted The ques 
 whether we will allow the freedmen to vote. Tliat is already established beyo; 
 
786 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 A^ain he says : 
 
 Mark it be not deceived. If you vote down the Convention, in less than two years 
 Georgia will be reconstructed with a representation in Congress ; the great mass of white 
 men, including all who vote against the Convention, will be disfranchised, and there will 
 be a very general confiscation of property to pay the war debt and pension the Union sol 
 diers who were disabled in the war. 
 
 Now, let every man in Georgia and in the United States fairly analyze 
 the above disclosures. 
 
 In the first place the object of submitting the plan of Reconstruction to 
 the vote of the people is not to ascertain the will of the people with a view 
 of respecting that will. Georgia is to be reconstructed anyhow in two 
 years, even though the people vote against it. The people are to vote, but 
 the vote is not to decide the question voted on ! 
 
 In the next place, we are not called on to decide " whether we will allow 
 the freedman to vote." " That" we are distinctly told, is "already estab 
 lished," and established " beyond revocation." If we were not all ciphers 
 we might ask, when, where, how, and by whom was this established ? 
 
 But what is the object ? If you did not intend to abide the decision, 
 why ask it ? The vote is asked as a means of ascertaining who is loyal. 
 " The vote of each man will be looked to as a test of his loyalty" Loyalty, 
 then, is not to depend upon support or adherence to the Constitution. It is 
 not to depend upon connection with the rebellion ! A man may have come 
 from the North ; he may have fought four full years in the Union army, 
 still if he has settled in Georgia and votes against Convention he is dis 
 loyal! It does not depend on color. " Whether black or white" if he 
 votes against Convention, he is disloyal. The tickets of all, black and white, 
 will be numbered! So, a man may be a Northern man a Northern black 
 man a Northern black Union soldier but if he votes " against Conven 
 tion," he is disloyal! And so a man may be a Southern man an original 
 secessionist and a real white man a Southern white Confederate soldier 
 who fought four years for the Confederacy but if he only votes for a Con 
 vention he is to be considered loyal! But why is a vote for or against a 
 Convention to be taken as the test of loyalty or disloyalty? Because it is 
 a vote for or against the plan " submitted by Congress" which plan is to 
 secure ten States to the Radical party. Here is plainly confessed what I 
 have labored to prove : whoever is a Radical is loyal. The Radical party 
 is thus substituted for the Constitution, for the laws, for the Union, and for 
 the Government ! People of the United States, was it for this you fought ? 
 Did the South, sure enough, fight for the Constitution, and the North for 
 the Radical party ? 
 
 But this is not all ? Why so anxious to ascertain who is loyal or rather 
 J disloyal ? Because all who, by this test, are ascertained to be disloyal, are to 
 be disfranchised and their property is to be confiscated ! 
 
 Thus, it turns out, that the only feature in this Congressional reconstruc 
 tion plan, which had even a farcical resemblance to anything virtuous, is 
 shown to be a snare, a trap, a disgraceful, deceitful, iniquitous inquisition. 
 I affirm there is nothing in the dark, cruel, and bloody history of the inquisi 
 tion of the Jesuits surpassing this scheme in the iniquity of its conception, 
 in the hypocrisy of its plan of execution, or in the villainy of its purpose. 
 And dark, cruel, and bloody, beyond any precedent in the past, will be many 
 years of American history if this plan be consummated. I have said, and I 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 
 
 against Convention are to be disfranchised, only negroes and a fe\v Afri 
 canized whites will be left to rule the country. Does any sane man believe 
 such a rule possible ? Under pretense of restoring the Union, ten negro 
 States are to be formed ! Under pretense of allowing the people to vote, a 
 hunt is devised to find victims for disfranchisement and robbery ! And all 
 these things done under oaths to support the Constitution ! 
 
 If this be only a threat originating with Governor Brown, what shall be 
 said of a Southern man who would manufacture such a threat against his 
 own people ? If it be the real purpose of the so-called Congressional plan, 
 what American citizen, after understanding it, can be so lost to every sense 
 of justice, of decency, of manhood, of honesty, and of honor, as to support 
 either the plan or the party which could desire or adopt it, or whose exist 
 ence could depend on its success. 
 
 If it be a desperate threat, how cowardly are they who will be alarmed 
 by it ? If it be the real purpose, how base is he who could possibly support 
 it f 
 
 So in any view it is absolutely necessary for every man who would pre 
 serve moral, political, or social respect, or any sense of manhood, either not 
 to vote at all, or vote, like a man, " against a Convention." 
 
 Governor Brown makes another very remarkable statement. He tells us 
 that almost all the entire property of Georgia is "already confiscated! 
 And, reader, how? He says by the Act of July, 1862. And this singular 
 statement is made by one who has been Governor of our State who tells us 
 he is a lawyer, and has a good profession. 
 
 In reply to this I say : 
 
 1. That this act was unconstitutional and void, even as a war measure, 
 and has been declared so even by some of the courts of the Northern States. 
 
 2. That, if Constitutional as a war measure, then, by its very nature, it 
 could only be of force during the war, operating on property seized during 
 the war, and necessarily ceased to have any force as soon as the war ended ; 
 and such has been declared to be the law by the courts of even Massachu 
 setts. 
 
 3. That the Act on its very face makes itself only a war measure, and de 
 clares its only purpose to be "to insure the speedy termination of the pres 
 ent rebellion." 
 
 Thus over the nature of the subject over the nature of the act over 
 decisions of Northern courts over the declared purpose of the act- -and, I 
 will add, over the express authority of every respectable international law- 
 writer in existence Governor Brown tells the people of Georgia this act is 
 still in force and by it their property is already confiscated. 
 
 Why don t the President execute it ? He seems to feel bound to execute 
 all acts of Congress. Governor Brown tells us that Thaddeus Stevens ar 
 raigns the President for having failed to execute it." Well, I do not know 
 what Stevens has done. Heaven forbid I should keep posted in his opinions, 
 or quote his acts or threats as authority for any people. But I believe GOT- 
 ernor Brown has slandered even poor old Thad Stevens. He and 
 have both been trying to induce Congress to pass bills to confiscate partially 
 our property. 
 
 Why ask such bills if they already have one by which the prop* 
 
788 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 already been confiscated? Not long since it was stated Mr. Stevens was 
 perfecting a bill for mild confiscation, which he hoped to get through Con 
 gress if he could live five years longer. Why pray for five years to perfect 
 a partial measure of confiscation when one more extensive is already on the 
 statute book unrepealed ! Why send even the resolution ? Has not Con 
 gress been anxious to find a reason to impeach the President ? Why not 
 impeach for refusing to execute a law which was passed by Congress and 
 approved by the Executive ? 
 
 I have desired to find some excuse for Governor Brown s advocacy of the 
 Military Bills. But I am utterly unable to palliate his conduct. He rushed 
 out in support of the Sherman Bill before the President had acted on it, and 
 before Congress had passed it over his veto thus weakening the President 
 and encouraging the Congress. He was then declaiming against the case 
 pending in the Court, before the Court had decided it. And now, what 
 Stevens and Surnner have been vainly trying to induce Congress to do 
 against the Southern people, this man finds out is "already done." No 
 need for poor old man Stevens to live five years more. Do let him be 
 informed of this great discovery of the " often honored " Southern states 
 man, that he may die in peace ! 
 
 Every decent radical paper in the North has denounced the idea of 
 confiscation even Mr. Stevens s mild confiscation as disgraceful robbery, 
 which would make the nation stink with infamy ; and yet, Governor 
 Brown so willing to sacrifice himself for the dear poor people has contin 
 ued to threaten us with confiscation "the sleeping lion on the speaker s 
 desk : -and now, at last, proclaims our property already confiscated. The 
 terrible lion has waked up crawled off the speaker s desk, and actually en 
 tered the " statute book " ! 
 
 Man, alas ! is a more dangerous animal than the lion. And better that 
 all the lions of the earth were turned loose upon the American people than 
 that this Radical party should be allowed longer to tear the American 
 Constitution and prey upon American liberty. 
 
 Poor man ! I knew he would not be a wolf, 
 But that he sees the Romans are but sheep ; 
 He were no lion, were not Romans hinds. 
 
 NUMBER EIGHTEEN. 
 
 The late short session of the fragmentaiy Congressional conclave has an 
 importance which the people do not now seem to comprehend. The future 
 historian will pronounce it one of the most marked events in the decadence 
 of American governments under written Constitutions. It is difficult to 
 realize the unique distinctness, and rapid, bold, straightforwardness of its 
 diabolical treachery to the Constitution. It carried the banner of destruc 
 tive progress, with a quick, bounding, fearless stride, far beyond the timid 
 boundaries reached by any previous Congress or conclave. Satan was not 
 more fearless in his flight through chaos, nor more grandly wicked in the 
 hellish mission which hurried him on. 
 
 The exclusion of the delegates from a State always conceded to be in 
 the Union who abandoned, yea, fought her sister Southern States, in order 
 to remain in and preserve the Union was a new step forward a measure 
 less stride forward. 
 
 Then the formal taking into consideration the question, whether the 
 
I JUS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 789 
 
 government of three States, always in the Union, was Republican in form 
 was another new and measureless step of descending progress Govern 
 ments under which these States had always lived, and two of which States 
 were of the original framers of the Federal Constitution. What a consum 
 ing blaze of indignation either of these acts would have produced in the 
 virtuous days of the Republic ! How the glorious Webster would have 
 shaken the continent with his grand periods of rebuke, and how burning 
 coals of speaking fire would have come rushing and withering from the liii" 
 of the immortal Clay ! But who is startled now? We must be dead, else 
 the very indifference would alarm. Oh Kentucky, Kentucky ! the troubled 
 spirit of him who made your name, through all the world, the very synonym 
 for manhood, beseeches you to remove his ashes from your bosom or this 
 stain from your honor ! 
 
 Age, thou art shamed ! 
 Rome, thou hast lost the breed of noble blood ! 
 
 But, startling as are these two acts, they are of much less importance than 
 others committed by this remarkable conclave. I shall not refer now to 
 anything done toward what are called the Rebel States. This word, Rtbel, 
 lias been the flippant and long accepted excuse for many ruthless violations 
 of the Constitution, when those violations affected the Rebel States. But 
 my earnest desire is to call the attention of the Northern people to the great 
 alarming fact, that this conclave at Washington, while directing the atten 
 tion of the people to the Rebel States, is destroying the Constitution for all 
 the States ; that, under cover of oaths to support the Constitution, and while 
 diverting the Northern people with pretenses of punishing the rebellion, and 
 exacting guarantees against future rebellion, this conclave is itself only 
 a hideous, organized, bold, and dangerous rebellion against the Constitution, 
 against the Union, and against liberty ! 
 
 In addition to the two crimes above specified against^these States always 
 in the Union, this conclave passed another Supplemental Military Bill, ex 
 plaining their meaning in the former Military Bills, directing how all shall 
 be executed. , 
 
 Now the Constitution expressly vests all " executive power in the Presi 
 dent." But this conclave, in this Supplemental Bill, ignores the President as 
 the Executive power, and expressly vests the executive power for these 
 measures in the General of the Army ! Thus the Executive Department of 
 the Federal Government is destroyed as to these bills, and if Congress can 
 destroy its power in one case it can destroy it in all. 
 
 Again : the Constitution expressly vests all judicial powers in certain 
 courts but this bill expressly provides that the military officers, in execu 
 ting these bills, shall not be bound by the opinion of any civil officer of the 
 United States! Mark the words, not civil officers of the State, but of the 
 United States. Thus, as to these bills, the Judicial Department of t lit 
 eral Government is destroyed, and, of course, if Congress can destroy 
 department as to one bill, "it can as to all. So, one of the three departme 
 of the Government has destroyed the other two departments as to t 
 and, by the same process can destroy them as to all measures ; and 
 department of the Government by its own act makes itsel 
 
 eminent. 
 
 Now, then, suppose you of the North are willing to forget the promi* 
 you made, to receive back these ten States if they would lay down their 
 
790 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 arms ; suppose you are willing to permit Congress to abolish the Constitu 
 tion as to these ten States, and to subject the white race to the rule of the 
 black race ; suppose you are willing to make of these ten States a tributary 
 of hell ; are you also willing to see that same Congress destroy two depart 
 ments of your own Federal Government ? How is it that you, who rallied 
 three millions of men to prevent us from separating from the Federal Gov 
 ernment, have become willing to see less than two hundred men in Wash 
 ington destroy that very Government ? Why did you prevent us from 
 going if you are bent on destroying? Why will you not believe us who 
 laid down our arms, and gave up ou: property, and submitted to every suf 
 fering and humiliation as evidence of our good faith in returning to the 
 Union, and yet will trust a set of men who daily deceive you, who daily 
 keep the Union dissolved, and who daily violate their oaths and trample on 
 the Constitution ? Are you mad that you may be destroyed ? Return, en 
 raged but deluded people of the North, return at once to a sense of reason 
 and justice, if not for us, at least for yourselves ; and let us all learn, by the 
 horrors of the past, that the only way to peace and prosperity in the future 
 is through the universal supremacy of the Constitution, and by its glorious 
 old spirit of mutual concession and harmony. By the memories of Bunker 
 Hill and Yorktown, I beseech you, let us forget Manassas and Gettysburg, 
 and drop tears of mutual f orgiveness on Anderson ville, Rock Island, and Fort 
 Delaware. Then may our children be as were our fathers, and, taught by 
 our errors, escape our misfortunes forever. 
 
 In the history of every nation especially of every Republic periods 
 occur which furnish what may be called opportunities for the development 
 of great men. The greatest of these opportunities do not often occur, and 
 sometimes pass by unperceived. At times circumstances conspire to make the 
 smallest, most legitimate act turn these opportunities to the greatest account. 
 Regulus has been loved and honored for two thousand years because he 
 valued his country s welfare and his personal honor above his life. Wash 
 ington was great in that he won liberty, but greater when he refused a 
 crown, and greatest of all when he surrendered his sword as a symbol of 
 the submission of military power to the supremacy of civil law. 
 
 No period in the history of this or any other country ever furnished a 
 more glorious opportunity to win imperishable renown than is now furnished 
 to a few men in America. 
 
 If the President would refuse to permit the execution of a law which seeks 
 his own official demolition and dishonor, and boldly enforce the Constitution 
 and the rights of alt the States, no character in Republican annals would 
 go down through all republican generations more honored and loved. And 
 Congress, in the effort .to destroy and disgrace him, has furnished him 
 the occasion for immortality. He has but to defend the integrity of his 
 office. He may remember, too, that the Southern people surrendered slavery, 
 and in all things submissively complied with all the terms of the fight and 
 the conditions of the surrender, and, far more, because of his assurance that 
 they would then be received in the Union, or rather continued in the Union, 
 and secured in all their rights. The very State governments Congress is 
 destroying by overthrowing his power w r ere formed by the confidence re 
 posed in him. If they now go down, he too, must fall fall forever. He 
 can save them, save the Federal Constitution, save the whole country, save 
 Constitutional liberty, and prevent a war of races, by simply defending the 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AXD WRITINGS. 791 
 
 integrity of his own office, and suppressing a treasonable attempt to usurp 
 its functions. 
 
 But General Grant has the opportunity of winning, if possible greater 
 renown and with more ease than the President. His word can win the vic 
 tory. He has been selected by Congress as the man through whom they 
 will execute their abolition of the executive and judicial powers. ThV 
 leader of the Union armies is chosen to execute the demolition of the 
 Constitution ! 
 
 The simple question is, will he consent to be so used ? If so, his reputation 
 will inevitably be lost. There are many now who insist that General Grant 
 is not really a great man. They say he took command of the Union armies 
 at a fortunate time, and was only a child of luck from Corinth to Peters 
 burg. The question of his greatness will soon be settled, and settled for all 
 time. If he has the wisdom to perceive, and the courage to appreciate and 
 perform his duty now, neither Cassar, nor Wellington, nor Washington can 
 be remembered longer, nor honored more. And how simple is that duty 
 and easily performed. 
 
 If General Grant will say to Congress, " The Constitution vests all the 
 executive power in the President, and I will not be made the instrument 
 for usurping it ; the Constitution makes the President the Commander-in- 
 Chief ; I will obey his orders, and not consent to be legislated into insub 
 ordination ; peace has been proclaimed and civil law restored, and I will 
 not execute a bill which seeks to subordinate civil authority to military 
 power," a thrill of joy would electrify the nation. Radical power would 
 disappear in a twinkling. The Constitution and the Union would be re 
 stored ; prosperity and good feeling would revive, and the name of Grant 
 would be loved and cherished in every section and by every class, as no 
 name ever has been loved and cherished in America or Europe. If we fail, 
 it will be a melancholy proof that he did perceive the opportunity of rescu 
 ing his country from ruin, and was unequal to the great crisis. Silence will 
 not do. Neutrality will not do. Negative acquiescence will not do. He 
 must speak plainly. He must act decisively. He must protect the Con 
 stitution and save the Union, and thereby, also, relieve and protect from 
 this harsh, unconstitutional domination, the people of the South, who laid 
 down their arms to him under promise that they should remain in the 
 Union and receive its benefits by obeying its laws. He ought to remember, 
 too, that without him the Radicals are powerless, and it is through him they 
 propose to carry out their schemes of ruin. He must refuse to be a tool of 
 usurpation, and declare he will be the defender of the Constitution, and, 
 under it, the protector of the people. 
 
 I have been amazed that among all the military commanders not one 
 has appeared to discover the opportunity in his hands of doing more good 
 and winning more honor by one simple act than a lifetime could achieve 01 
 a hundred victories secure. If any of the military commanders would s< 
 the example of obeying the Constitution rather than Radical will, and 
 feit his commission than execute unconstitutional oppression upon in un 
 resisting people, such a man would soon have a name 
 any on the continent. , 
 
 And what possible good can come of the course now being pursuei 
 Can honor be won by oppressing a helpless people ? Can greatness be se 
 cured by executing usurpations upon the Constitution ? 
 achieved by removing civil officers, by filling the land with spies in time 
 
792 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 peace, by insulting an unoffending people, and by breeding perpetual hatred 
 between the sections? 
 
 The issue is a grand one. Glory is to be achieved or infamy is inevi 
 table. If those who hold the power and could end all these troubles now, by 
 simply obeying the Constitution instead of the Radical party, fail to do so, 
 until the people shall themselves wake up and with indignation hurl these 
 Radicals from power, then, these men, who are now consenting to be made 
 the tools to execute unconstitutional measures, will find themselves sued and 
 arraigned as criminals before every court in the land, and they will become 
 a by-word and a scoffing among the living, and held up as mere illustra 
 tions of weakness and corruption in demoralized times, through all genera 
 tions. 
 
 NUMBER NINETEEN. 
 
 In all times of public excitement and demoralization, people are unusu 
 ally liable to run into error. For this reason, dangers to the Republic are 
 greatly increased. Therefore, whoever, in such times, undertakes the task 
 of advising the people with a view of avoiding errors, ought to observe with 
 great care certain rules. 
 
 1. In the first place he should see to it that his motives are unselfish, and 
 his opinions correct. 
 
 2. Next he should be charitable and forbearing to those who are unin 
 tentionally erring ; for in such times many good people are exceedingly 
 prone to err. 
 
 3. In the last place he should denounce most unsparingly those who con 
 sciously and deliberately advocate dangerous wrongs, and seek (as all 
 such do) for some selfish end to mislead the people. Language can 
 never be too severe when applied to men who take advantage of times of 
 danger to the public to promote their private ends, nor who persist in 
 falsely advising the people. Warnings to the erring and denunciations of 
 the designing can never be too distinct, too positive, or too severe. Such 
 was the course of Demosthenes toward Philip s emissaries and the credu 
 lous Athenians who were inclined to believe them ; and such was the course 
 of Cicero toward the popular Catiline and the Roman Senate and people, 
 who were slow to believe he was a conspirator. Two thousand years of re 
 flection and experience has rendered an unbroken verdict of approval for 
 both the Athenian and the Roman orators. 
 
 I have deemed it my duty to warn our people that they were, many of 
 them, about to commit perjury, or false swearing. Well, this is a very 
 grave and responsible position. I knew it when I took the position, and 
 took it deliberately. If the position be wrong, I owe it to myself and the 
 country to retract it. I could not expect to be regarded as an honorable 
 man, if, satisfied it is wrong, I did not retract it. So, on the other hand, if 
 the position be right, the people owe it to themselves and their children to 
 avoid the crime, and look with suspicion upon all who- still insist that the 
 crime be committed ; for no man can be either patriotic or honorable, who 
 would knowingly commit, or advise others to commit, such a crime. 
 
 With these solemn convictions, and at the instance of friends and foes, 
 I have re-examined the position. I have earnestly endeavored to make the 
 examination carefully, and I know I have made it conscientiously. 
 
 The result is, I reaffirm, the position taken on this subject in Note No. 10, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 793 
 
 and in the speech delivered at Atlanta ; and I earnestly beg every man to 
 lay aside all passion and come to an honest and candid examination of the 
 
 question 
 
 In Note No. 10, I sa 
 
 Are you willing to violate the Constitution ? Are you willing to swear to support it 
 with the intent, at the time of swearing to violate it ? Then, f proclaim, all posterm - 
 
 , , 
 
 will proclaim, your hell mortgaged conscience will never cease to proclaim voi 
 perjured. 
 
 In the Atlanta speech, the language as reported, is as follows : 
 
 Some of you will favor the acceptance of the Military Bills, take an oath to this effect 
 (to support the Constitution), and still intend to vote for a Convention which you admit to 
 be ordered contrary to the Constitution. How is this ? If you have a conscience I have 
 said enough. If you vote for the Convention you are perjured. 
 
 These announcements have excited much apparent indignation with the 
 Radicals, and they have charged me with dealing in abuse and calumny. 
 Now, reader, look carefully at my language. If a man is willing to violate 
 the Constitution, if he is willing to swear to support with the intent to vio 
 late it ; is this not itself an admission of false swearing? He swears to 
 support the Constitution with intent not to support it ! So, if a man swears 
 to support the Constitution, and intends to vote for a Convention which he 
 admits is ordered contrary to the Constitution, is he not guilty ? True, the 
 crime is not perfected until the act is done until the vote is given ; and it 
 is, therefore I warn him not to give the vote! And why do propositions 
 whicli are so self-evident awaken such indignation ? If a man honestly be 
 lieves the Military Bills constitutional he can vote for them. I may think 
 his brain is either weak or very falsely taught, but I make no charge against 
 his heart or purpose. So, thousands have intended to accept these bills 
 without having thought of this difficulty. They were and are simply not 
 informed. When informed they will reject the crime with as much horror 
 as I do. Against all these I bring no charge. My position is based on 
 knowledge and intent. Then, I repeat, why this indignation? The answer 
 is as plain as the truth of my position. Thero are many, alas ! too many, 
 who know the Military Bills are unconstitutional, and who yet have deter 
 mined, on some pretext, to take the advice of that sensuous infidel, Thad- 
 deus Stevens, vote for the bills, "and let conscience go to the devil. , 
 
 They feel guilty. They have, many of them, but recently consented to 
 be guilty, and their consciences are still bleeding from the stab, and are 
 very sore. Inform a good man of his error and he will love you ; but in 
 form a guilty man and lie will hate you. The guilty are always suspicious, 
 generally excitable, and very rarely dangerous. There are some, also, who 
 are troubled. They do not* positively know and admit that these bills are 
 unconstitutional, and various pretexts or excuses are resorted to to satisfy 
 their consciences, which are generally easily satisfied when willing to be 
 satisfied. With such, excuses become reasons, and pretexts are accepted as 
 arguments. 
 
 Of course, all reflecting men must admit there can be no justifiable 
 cuse for willful perjury ; but all men are not reflecting, and it is important 
 to notice some of the excuses offered as justifiable reasons for supporting 
 these Military Bills under an oath to support the Constitution. 
 
 1. The first great excuse offered as a reason is, that the bills have no 
 been declared unconstitutional by the courts. This excuse is wel 
 to mislead. There are cases in which certain ministerial and executive ott 
 
794 SENATOR P. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 cers are bound to execute orders until the court set aside the authority on 
 which the orders are based. But this rule applies only to officers. Why ? 
 Because such officers simply obey orders* Tho responsibility is with theii* 
 superiors who issue the orders. They are not to judge of the legality of 
 these orders. That was done, or presumed to have been done, before the 
 orders were issued. This rule with the officers in such cases, is not to judge 
 but to obey. He has no will no discretion. This is why the rule applies only 
 to executive and ministerial officers. All other officers have a right to 
 judge and are bound to judge honestly and decide conscientiously. Some 
 times even a ministerial or executive officer must judge according to the 
 issue presented or his situation. When a bill is presented to the President 
 for his approval, he is a judge, and if he thinks it is unconstitutional he is 
 perjured if he does not veto it if he approves it. One of our Presidents 
 declared that he would not approve a bill which he believed was unconstitu 
 tional " without surrendering all claim to the respect of honorable men all 
 confidence on the part of the people all self-respect all regard for moral 
 and religious obligations." Yet if Congress passed the bill, notwithstand 
 ing his objections, then it was not only no crime, no wrong, but his duty to 
 execute it. Why ? Because in the latter case he was only executing and 
 not approving or deciding. But when the courts decide such a bill to be 
 unconstitutional then he cannot execute it, because the power provided by 
 the Constitution has decided that Congress erred in overruling the objec 
 tions of the President. But this rule has a limit even in case of executive 
 and ministerial officers. It applies to cases of doubtful construction under 
 the Constitution. Congress can by no vote give vitality to an act which the 
 Constitution says shall not be passed. And no President can be excused for 
 executing such an act. If every act of Congress is binding until set aside 
 by the Court, Congress may make the most unconstitutional act the most 
 binding by abolishing both the President and the courts which they have 
 exactly done so far as relates to these Military Bills ! So as to ministerial 
 offices the rule has a limit. If the sheriff execute a man who has been sen 
 tenced by a judge, he is guilty of no crime, though the judge mistook the 
 law in passing the sentence. But if the sheriff execute a man sentenced by 
 one who was not a judge legally a judge the sheriff is guilty of murder, 
 though the man executed may have been guilty. If any officer execute a 
 citizen by order of a Military Commission, such officer is guilty of murder. 
 Why ? Because the Constitution says every citizen shall be presented or 
 indicted by a grand jury, and tried by an impartial jury, and no person on 
 this continent can confer any power to execute any citizen who has not been 
 so tried. Otherwise there would be a power greater than the Constitution, 
 which is absurd. This is why the officers who executed the writs of the 
 Star Chamber Courts, and obeyed the orders of King Charles I, were after 
 ward sued and indicted and made responsible and punished. No King, or 
 Court, or Congress, or President, or other official power can confer authority, 
 in direct conflict with the positive commands of the Constitution. All who 
 seek to confer such authority are criminals ; all who execute such authority 
 are criminals, and no person can release or forgive the crime. It is high 
 time this well-established distinction was understood. So far from an officer 
 being protected because the Courts have not set aside certain Acts, the 
 Courts themselves could not furnish such protection by positively sustaining 
 the Acts which amend the Constitution. And such has been expressly de 
 cided and repeatedly decided to be the law in England, where the Constitu- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 795 
 
 tion is not written. 
 
 time may prevent the application of 
 
 -, f^ . . , wi tv n in iviiiMt 
 
 that the Constitution is the only supreme ruler in America ; and that neither 
 President, nor Longress, nor Courts, nor bayonets can protect themselves 
 or protect others, from accountability for violations of the plain, unmistak 
 able commands of the Constitution. Without this glorious truth, Constitu 
 tions and rights would always be the mere creatures of bad, designing men 
 Passion and the rabble may crucify now, but this grand deliverer of the 
 oppressed will one day, yea, at an early day, come, and come with joy to the 
 faithful, and in terrible wrath to all wicked transgressors. 
 
 But the rule referred to as binding on executive and ministerial officers 
 does not apply to citizens or to voters. A voter obeys no order executes 
 no orders. He must exercise his judgment and vote according to his own 
 honest convictions. If he votes contrary to his convictions he violates his 
 conscience, and if he votes under oath and contrary to that oath, he is guilty 
 of false swearing or perjury. He is not sworn to support an act of Congress 
 until the Courts set it aside ; he is sworn to support the Constitution, and if 
 he supports an act which, in his opinion, is contrary to the Constitution, his 
 oath is broken. He being his own judge, his oath is broken, and " his con 
 science given to the devil," as Stevens advised. 
 
 2. But another pretext offered is, that these States are in an anomalous 
 condition and the Constitution does not apply to them. Well, if the Con 
 stitution does not apply why apply the oath to support it ! As a condition 
 precedent to voting you require an oath to support the Constitution in vot 
 ing; and then, in the very next breath, ask that the vote be cast for a meas 
 ure which is contrary to the Constitution ! Then you seek to justify by 
 saying that the Constitution does not apply. Then, why did you refuse to 
 allow the vote until the oath was taken to support the Constitution? Are 
 you wantonly exacting gratuitous perjury? If nothing else did, the oath 
 makes the Constitution apply. But the Constitution does apply. Even if 
 we are conquered by foreign States, the conqueror is bound by the well-set 
 tled laws of nations to govern us either according to our laws, or according 
 to his own Constitutional laws; the law of the conqueror extends over the 
 conquered. Nothing is better settled. In this day of civilized law no peo 
 ple, conquered or otherwise, are subject to be governed by arbitrary, vin 
 dictive will. Besides, by the very issue of the fight and the terms of sur 
 render, we are in the Union. We" are treated as in the Union by this very 
 fragmentarv conclave for every purpose of burden and vengeance. We are 
 denied only the privileges of the Union by a dastard perjury to the Con 
 stitution and an infamous treachery to the National faith. 
 
 3. But we are told it is no use to talk law and plead the Constitution be 
 fore a people who discard both. It can do no good; the Radicals have the 
 power and will do as they please, it is said. Well, suppose that is true, 
 does that justify us in committing perjury ! Are we not still the keepers of 
 our own consciences ? Are we compelled to violate our oath ? 
 
 the Radicals will reconstruct us in their own way anyhow, I say let them 
 do it their own way. Let them commit all \X\tperjury. We gam notl 
 by helpino- them destroy us; and why should we be anxious to commit per 
 jury, in order to help the Radicals degrade our race, destroy our tates, and 
 bring us under the government of the negro, and into a war of race 
 
796 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 patient. Don t run to overtake evil. Our way will come soon, and then let 
 us be strong with clean consciences. 
 
 4. But it is said, according to my argument, even I have committed 
 perjury in supporting divers measures heretofore. Suppose it is so ; does 
 that justify all of our people in committing such a crime ? But the charge 
 is false. I never in my life supported any measure which I thought was un 
 constitutional, or which was admitted by its supporters or framers to be 
 unconstitutional. All statements to the contrary are false, and are but pit 
 iable attempts of self -convicted criminals to cover themselves with a respect 
 able mantle. 
 
 These Military Bills furnish the very first instance in American history 
 in which the framers and supporters of the bills admit their unconstitution- 
 ality ; and they are the very Jirst measures in carrying out which the whole 
 voting people are required to take an oath to support the Constitution. This 
 is a remarkable fact. It would seem as if the Congress sought to palliate 
 their own perjury in passing the bills, by requiring wantonly requiring 
 the whole people also, to commit perjury in carrying them out. 
 
 When the last Military Bill was under discussion, in which two depart 
 ments of the Federal Government were being abolished, Thaddeus Stevens, 
 I believe the author and reporter of the bills, said : 
 
 Some fragments of the old shattered Constitution had stuck, perhaps, in the kidneys 
 of some senators [laughter] and troubled them at night. When they tried to progress 
 the ghost of the past Constitution was found in their way and obstructed them. 
 
 People of the North, is this man your representative ? You who have 
 listened to the glorious periods of the " Great Expounder," is this the language 
 that now suits you? Think of it, oh, my countrymen ; think of it ! In the 
 Congress of the nation where Clay, and Webster, and Bell, and Berrien, and 
 Fillmore, and Cass have taught devotion and reverence for the Constitution, 
 this old man now ridicules it as a ghost a shattered thing with its frag 
 ments sticking in the kidneys of senators ! And this blasphemy is received 
 with laughter. This man had just taken an oath to support the Constitu 
 tion ; it was by virtue of that oath he was permitted to speak ; and in the 
 face of the nation, from the seat of Webster, he ridiculed what, he had. sworn 
 to support^ and in every word he uttered he syllabled perjury. This old 
 man, we are told, is an infidel in religion, and a paramour of a colored wo 
 man, and has lived three-score years and ten defiling his race and blasphem 
 ing the laws of God and his country. 
 
 Is it strange that such a man, and the hideous crew who received his 
 blasphemy so merrily, should seek to degrade the white race ; yea, make 
 the white race degrade themselves ; and make them commit perjury that 
 they might have the privilege of degrading themselves? Will the white 
 race Southern white people throw away conscience and honor and reap 
 miscegenating anarchy only that such a crew, with such a leader, should be 
 kept in power. 
 
 5. But it is said, if it is perjury to vote for a convention, it is perjury to 
 register, because registry is an act under the Military Bills. Not so. If a 
 man registered in order to defeat the purpose of the bills, it must be very 
 different from one who votes to carry out the bills. Directly opposite inten 
 tions cannot constitute the same crime. A man may not commit perjury 
 who even votes for a convention as, in his judgment, the best means of de 
 feating the object of the bills. His intention certainly relieves him of the 
 turpitude of the offense. Still it is a hazard I cannot recommend. 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 797 
 
 It is said that Southern people ought not to be so sensitive about violat 
 ing the Constitution, as they violated it in seceding from the Union The 
 reply is they did not think they violated it by the act of secession. Some of 
 the framers of the Constitution taught the right of secession. Besides all 
 the secession conventions were very careful not to require of their members 
 an oath to support the Constitution of the United States. They certainly 
 did not commit perjury, and did not feel that they committed any offense 
 whatever. 
 
 We are in an important crisis. We should take our positions carefully 
 and write and speak frankly. I sincerely believe that every man who votes 
 for a convention, with a view or intent of carrying out the purposes of the 
 Military Bills, tramples on the Constitution and violates his oath. The 
 more I have reflected and examined the subject, the better I am satisfied of 
 this truth. Our people have woes and sorrows enough. Let them not be 
 led to crime also. A whole nation of perjured men ! Think of it. If 
 there be danger that this will be so, let us, in Heaven s name, avert it before 
 it is too late. 
 
 I feel prepared to sustain the position I have taken by authorities, and 
 by the best settled decisions and principles of the law. If there be a legal 
 gentleman in the State or in the South or North willing to take the opposite 
 proposition I am prepared to enter the discussion with him in a spirit of 
 earnest desire to settle the truth of the question. I do not wish an antago 
 nist I will not notice one who may seek only a little notoriety. But there 
 are able legal gentlemen in the South who are said to be willing, as thebett 
 they can do, to accept these Military Bills. I affirm they cannot be accepted 
 in the manner, and on the terms, and for the purposes, proposed by Congress 
 without false swearing. I am prepared to maintain this proposition by 
 authority and law, or admit my error if convinced I am wrong. 
 
 Gentlemen who have thoughtlessly concluded to accept the terms need 
 not think to shut their eyes and escape this question. It will not be hushed. 
 Excitement, and foolish anger, and flippant threats will avail nothing. You 
 shall not perjure yourselves and the poor deluded negro race for selfish, ig 
 noble purposes, simply to add strength to a party that would require perjury, 
 and think easily to escape the consequences. If the Southern States must 
 be Africanized, and the Constitution become aghost, and liberty for the con 
 tinent be destroyed, go back to your blasphemous conclave of a Congress, 
 and tell them to change their bills, and permit you to do the hellish work, 
 at least, without perjuring. 
 
 If you persist in your present course I warn you your guilt shall be 
 made so plain that the decent world shall scorn yourselves, and even if you 
 have nothing better within you, your very kidneys shall run you mad. 
 
 NUMBER TWENTY. 
 
 To General U. S. Grant: 
 
 It is not my purpose to criticise, or make a formal reply to General 
 Pope s letter. To all intelligent minds that letter must fiirm 
 severest criticism and its own most effective refutation. Besides, kn 
 the influences which surround him, and the characters of those who hurried, 
 with supple grace and smiling selfishness, to fill his deceived 
 ears, the General s situation inspires all my compassion and 
 
798 SENATOR R II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 anger. But these characters, through General Pope s position, are mislead 
 ing the government and people of the North, and, to secure favor to them 
 selves, are hurrying the Northern and Southern people into common mis 
 fortunes by prolonging and increasing mutual distrust. Therefore, I make 
 General Pope s letter of the 24th of July the occasion for addressing a few 
 Notes to yourself. Events have thrust upon you the gravest responsibility 
 in human annals. A few months will determine, and determine beyond re 
 call, whether you are equal or unequal to the task. You do not occupy, 
 General, the highest official position in the nation, but you do occupy the 
 position, created by events, from which, with the least effort, the greatest 
 good can be accomplished ; and from which, also, the greatest evils by mere 
 permission may be inflicted. Whoever else might save Constitutional 
 liberty, it is certain you can. American freedom, protected by governments 
 organized under and secured from excess by written Constitutions, is the 
 grand stake. Save it, and yours will rise the very Teneriffe of human 
 reputations. Let it be lost, or let others save it without your help, or in 
 spite of your opposition, and no mortal ever fell to lower deep from higher 
 place, only because so blind to chance or unequal to duty. 
 
 Now, then, to this end I ask you to pardon me if I beg you, first of all, 
 to fully comprehend THE ONE IDEA in American politics, without which 
 every other idea can only confuse and mislead ; that the written Constitution, 
 and that which is authorized thereby, is the only legitimate American will, and, 
 therefore, the only supreme American law. Violate, disregard, lose sight 
 of, or refuse to see this one truth, and no wisdom nor learning can enlighten ; 
 nor position, nor power, nor armies save. Then, anarchy as the ordeal, and 
 despotism as the goal, is inevitably American destiny. 
 
 In the next place, let me remind you that, in times of public peril, frank 
 ness, however discouraging, is the highest possible virtue, and deception, 
 however flattering, is the highest possible crime. If you have the greatness 
 of soul required to appreciate this truth, my letters will not be unheeded, 
 though the writer be represented from official headquarters as " turbulent 
 and disloyal." 
 
 Keeping on this standpoint of the Constitution and guided by this spirit 
 of frankness, I propose, in three separate Notes, to lay bare before you the 
 real facts touching three separate but important propositions : 
 
 1. Who they are, of the Southern white race, who will accept the Mili 
 tary Bills as a plan of reconstruction, and what are the reasons and notions 
 which control and actuate them in such acceptance. 
 
 2. Who they are, of the Southern white race, who reject said bills as a 
 plan of reconstruction, and what are the reasons and motives which control 
 and actuate them in such rejection. 
 
 3. What plan will cordially unite all the Southern people ; secure per 
 manent union ; avoid future wars ; restore and increase national prosperity ; 
 perpetuate Constitutional government, and most effectually protect the 
 African race in all their lights. And, finally, what the government and 
 people of the North must do as indispensable to peace, if they persist in 
 forcing upon the Southern States the plan of reconstruction proposed in the 
 Military Bills. 
 
 And on these three points I intend to set forth the facts, which neither 
 General Pope, nor his amphibious counselors, nor his numerous spies, either 
 can or will dare attempt to controvert. 
 
 First, then, let us ascertain distinctly and classify carefully the men in 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 
 
 and the most active again, of these, are those who came, or were sent from 
 the Northern States. Among these, it is a pleasure to say, there are some 
 gentlemen forming exceptions to the rule ; but nearly all of these excep 
 tions are opposed to the Military Bills. Some few among them I know to be 
 gentlemen, and who accept the bills, but the great body of these officers 
 seem only intent upon making themselves and the government odious to 
 our people. The civil officers of the States may be described as quiescent 
 rather than acquiescent. A few accept what they are ordered not to reject. 
 
 2. Adventurers. By these I mean persons who never act with any con 
 sistency of principle, nor from any settled conviction of right, nor in any 
 spirit of devotion to the public good. They are bred by all revolutions, 
 and, in their turn, breed the chief horrors of all revolutions. They gather 
 on States in trouble like flies in the room of the sick. They are always on 
 the strong side, General. They composed the unprincipled portion of the 
 Secession party. These are they who committed the frauds ; deceived the 
 people ; stirred the passions of the masses ; who went into secret socie 
 ties with an Indian name, and pledged themselves to force the State out if 
 the people did not vote out. These are they who led " the people into their 
 present desperate condition, and who seek to plunge them still deeper into 
 misfortunes." I know these men well. They are among General Pope s 
 counselors. They accept the Military Bills. They are popular at General 
 Pope s headquarters. They will serve out that full " term of six months," 
 which the General prescribes, to be relieved of their disabilities ! Indeed, they 
 will, and be on good behavior, too. They are smart. They have completely 
 turned poor General Pope round, and put his face where his back ought to 
 be, and caused him to put his coat on with his collar down ! They have 
 made General Pope recommend, by name, three men for banishment, be 
 cause they oppose the Military Bills, whom these very counselors and loyal 
 Radicals desired to banish, or mob, in 1860, because they opposed secession. 
 Alas ! how well I know them, and how well they know poor General Pope ! 
 Some of these abandoned the Confederacy very soon as soon as they failed 
 to get office or contracts and now call themselves original Union men, 
 and a few of them have actually taken the test oath. Others held on 
 to Secession as long as it was safe and profitable. Of course, now, to avoid 
 confiscation and disfranchisement, they are for Reconstruction, and swear 
 at every corner " the Radicals can do as they please the Constitution is 
 dead and the President is nobody." 
 
 Under this head it pains me to have to include some really original 
 Union men, who, failing to be recognized by the people as the only fit per 
 sons to have office after the surrender, became soured, and, with a desperate 
 petulance, abandoned the conservative principles of their lives and rusher 
 into Radicalism. 
 
 3. Timid men 
 want peace. So 
 
 Some of our people so long for peace 
 
 cries peace, like hungry sheep after the man who shakes a bund 
 
 never thinking p 00 r creatures, they are being led to a shearing house 01 
 
 slaughter pen ! So, some are alarmed with the idea of confiscation an 
 
 further disfranchisement. " We must take the best we can get, they say. 
 
 n We have among us some good-meaning men. They 
 >, Heaven knows, do-all of us ! Peace ! It is a sweet word! 
 >ple so Ions? for peace that they will run after anybody who 
 
800 SENATOR J3. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 " It is no use to talk about the Constitution. The Radicals are too mean to 
 regard that. They don t care for their oaths. They don t care for the 
 Union. They don t mind Johnson. They say if we don t take these Mill- 
 tary Bills they will put on us something worse, and they are mean enough 
 to do it, and the Northern people don t seem to care. They ll take our lands 
 and everything else. We had better go with them to keep them from ruin 
 ing us." Such are the arguments we hear everyday in favor of the Military 
 Bills. 
 
 I have heard of many reasons why different parties should be supported, 
 but the Radical party can monopolize this one, urged by its own supporters. 
 It disregards the Constitution, tramples on oaths, robs the people, and will 
 do worse things if it is not kept in power. 
 
 4. Policy men. These are of various kinds. Some say it is policy to 
 give suffrage to the negroes because the Southern whites can control their 
 votes and disappoint the Radicals. Some say we can seem to go with the 
 Radicals until we get in the Union and then we can do as we please. Others 
 say by accepting the Military Bills we can get control of the Convention 
 with the right kind of men and form a Constitution to suit us; or, if we must 
 form one to suit the Radicals we can afterward change it again. All 
 these policy men feel insulted if you call them Radicals. They excitedly 
 swear they are not Radicals. They are only going to trick the Radicals. 
 They are going to beat the Radicals at their own game of deception. They 
 also insist that the Constitution "is a ghost" the Government is gone 
 that the Radical party is the only existing Government, and we can do 
 more to destroy it by feeding it than by fighting it. 
 
 They frequently whisper, in confidence, " these Military men from Grant 
 down know nothing about law or Constitution. As for Pope, everybody 
 knows he is a fool, and it is no trouble at all to manage him. And as for 
 the Radical party > they care nothing for the negro. All they want is to 
 elect their President in 1868 and hold the offices. Let us help them do that, 
 and they will remove all our disabilities and let us fix our State Governments 
 just as we please." 
 
 Mark you, General, this is not my language. It is the language of Gen 
 eral Pope s friends these loyal men who, after "six months of good con 
 duct," like quiet boys, he is going to recommend to Congress as true patriots 
 worthy to be trusted with any office. I confess many of these policy men 
 are intelligent, even learned, and of high political and social position ; they 
 are disciples of the doctrine that " all is fair in war," " it is best to fight the 
 devil with fire," etc. I think they are wrong in principle, and will be fatally 
 deluded in fact. The devil cannot be whipped with fire, because it is his 
 element. So the Radicals cannot be defeated by deception, because decep 
 tion is the whole life of Radicalism. It would be as reasonable to play 
 scratch with the lion. The devil must be fought with truth and the Radi 
 cals with the Constitution ! Then victory, sooner or later, will be sure, per 
 manent, and glorious. " Get thee behind me, Satan," must be the language 
 of every true patriot to this modern political fiend, Radicalism. 
 
 Now, General, the catalogue is complete. Every white man in the South 
 who accepts the Military Bills belongs to one or othe-r of the above classes. 
 General Pope thinks they will be largely in the majority in Alabama, and 
 will have some majority in Georgia. I do not think so ; the two first classes 
 are stationary and uninfluential. The two last were, at one time, seemingly 
 very numerous, and embrace many of our best citizens. They were desper- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 801 
 
 ate, but the number has greatly diminished, and is daily and rapidly de 
 creasing. 
 
 But suppose every white man in the South were to accept, and should 
 
 vote with such convictions and purposes, for the Military Bills, what I 
 
 resu ts could follow ? I tell you frankly, I do not know a respeet.-ible white 
 
 of his disabilities, put himself on record as supporting or dei\-ndin_c these 
 bills as, in his opinion, Constitutional or righteous. We all know tlfat very 
 many of those who accept the bills openly declare them unconstitutional, 
 unjust, and oppressive. The uncandid accept the candid reject none uj- 
 prove and all despise! How long can a government last which is estab 
 lished over a people who universally feel that it is oppressive, know it is 
 illegal, and accept it only as a hard temporary policy ? How much good 
 will can it breed, and how much devotion can it inspire? Can such a recon 
 struction furnish a guarantee of future union and peace? Will it restore 
 confidence, or happiness, or prosperity? Will it pay the national debt, or 
 preserve the national honor, or build again the waste places ! You may, 
 with the help of the deceived negroes, force this plan. But force alone can 
 do the work, for it has no man s approval. If force alone can establish this 
 plan of Reconstruction, how long will it last when that force shall be with 
 drawn ? If force alone gives it origin, must not force alone secure its con 
 tinuance ? And does not this make military despotism permanent ? Is force 
 the " great principle of government " of which General Pope speaks ? Is 
 this the problem by which " to perpetuate Reconstruction in the spirit and 
 on the principles which can alone assure free government ? r Oh, what de 
 structive absurdity is this from the mouth or a ruler in a land of written 
 Constitutions ! 
 
 I think, as General Pope says, that three-fourths of the negro vote will 
 be " for the Convention," and to carry out the Military Bills. They do not 
 know what the Constitution is, or what they are voting for. But they are 
 taught, by emissaries and low office seekers, that the Radicals are their only 
 friends, and they must give such votes to keep their friends in power. They 
 are also taught that every white man who votes against a Convention is 
 their enemy. The negroes alone in the South approve these Military Bills, 
 and they approve from false teachings and in a spirit of hatred to the loAito 
 race. Is any man, North or South, so stupid as not to see to what this will 
 lead ! Can even force prevent a war of races under such a government ? 
 Will the Northern people press this fate upon us? Will they longer w- 
 tain a party which tramples thus upon every principle of freedom, every 
 sentiment of right, and every guarantee of peace to perpetuate its OUT: 
 criminal existence ? Will you, General, be the leader of that party \Vi 
 you be the nourishing breeder of hatred between the races, the willing in 
 strument of oppression upon a people who laid down their arms to you on 
 your assurance of protection so long as they obeyed " the laws <>t lh* Hate 
 in which they lived." Will you be the grand executioner of iberty in 
 continent? For I tell you no nation which forces despotism upon ten mil 
 lions of people can itself remain free. Despotism for all or despot i 
 none, is as just as truth and as inevitable as destiny. /// the 
 liberty for all and forever. Out of the Constitution is bloody anarchy 
 final despotism without hope. You won no victory in the war 
 
802 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 the Constitution now. Americans, from ocean to ocean, and from the ice 
 bergs to the orange groves, will remember, with sorrow and weeping, the 
 scenes at Appomattox Court-house if you forget the Constitution now. 
 You lead no armies for the Union if you enforce these Military Bills for the 
 Radicals. The Constitution or the Radical party must perish. Fame in 
 vites you to live with the first and infamy woos you to lead the last. 
 
 Who saves his country saves himself, saves all things, and all things 
 saved do bless him. Who lets his country die, dies himself ignobly, and all 
 things dying curse him I 
 
 NUMBER TWENTY- ONE. 
 
 To General U. S. Grant: 
 
 General Pope made one great mistake, and out of this many other mistakes 
 have grown. He supposed he was sent here to carry out the Military Bills. 
 He feels, therefore, that if he does not carry them out he is defeated. He 
 acts like a man in a battle. He fights. Every man who does not help him 
 carry out those bills he regards as an enemy his enemy fighting for his 
 defeat. He fails to comprehend the difference between the ballot and the 
 bullet. He does not understand that his business is to keep the peace, and 
 afford the people some people an opportunity to determine whether in 
 their judgment, the bills ought to be carried out. No ; the " great princi 
 ples of government " are gone, and every man is "turbulent and disloyal," 
 and the poor negroes are worse off than ever before if General Pope does 
 not win a victory. Constitutions, laws, rights, honor what are all these ? 
 Mere words nothing ; General Pope must have a victory. It being, there 
 fore, in his view, no question of judgment, he cares nothing for opinions or 
 motives. A man has no rigid to think the bills are wrong. He is disloyal 
 if he does think so or rather if he acts so. He cares not what a man thinks 
 about the bills ; if he only helps to carry them out, he helps General Pope 
 win the fight. This is exactly why he esteems all men as patriots who help 
 him, and all as disloyal who think the bills are wrong and will not help 
 him carry them out. Therefore, those who help, however they violate their 
 convictions of right, and will be faithful hypocrites for " the next six 
 months," he is going to recommend for promotion disabilities to be re 
 moved and then office ! But those who honestly think the bills are con 
 trary to the Constitution, and will ruin the country, and destroy the negro 
 race, and cannot conscientiously forbear saying what they honestly think, 
 and, acting upon such honest convictions, such men are terrible creatures ; 
 caused all the past troubles ; will cause more trouble ; will never let General 
 Pope win a clear victory ! These must be kept down, disfranchised, 
 frightened, slandered, and banished ? How gracious he has been to his 
 enemies. He has "permitted and encouraged the widest latitude of speech 
 and of the press ! " Wonderful ! He permitted what the Constitution says 
 shall not be denied shall not even be abridged! That old Constitution has 
 higher rank and an older commission than General Pope, and quite as much 
 wisdom. That Constitution commands the Continent and protects the 
 people. All lesser commanders are sworn to support that one. Better re 
 member that oath. But light breaks ! Our military commander has 
 stumbled upon one Constitutional idea freedom of speech and of the 
 press though he utters it like it was original and hurt him very much. 
 
 In the previous note, General, I classified the white people who accept the 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 
 
 Military Bills, and gave their own reasons for such 
 
 >ills. I > 
 rejection. 
 
 Military Bills, and gave their own reasons for sucli acceptance I repeat I 
 
 know of none who approve those bills. I will now classify thoie who rejeVt 
 tliem, with their reasons for such rejection. 
 
 taught so to believe by some of those most active framers of the Tomtit .it ion 
 and by many of the wisest men of each generation since- in even otion of 
 the country. They did not regard secession by the States then-Ton- a * anv 
 violation of the Constitution, or of good faith. These men also belie veil 
 that, owing to the many sectional antagonisms, the Northern and Southern 
 States could not continue members of the same Union in peace and as equals, 
 and that the interests of both sections would be promoted by a separation. 
 They believed, again, that such separation would be peaceful. Therefore, 
 they thought secession was right, wise, and would secure peace, and that 
 longer Union was war and the ultimate oppression of the South as the 
 weaker party. 
 
 It is well known I differed with these men. I belonged, always, to a 
 different school of political thinkers. It is not in order now to define the 
 difference. But I can truly say that, in my opinion, more sincere men, 
 better citizens, and truer patriots have never lived in any country. Their 
 doctrines were wrong, as I think, and, therefore, very dangerous ; but their 
 convictions were sincere and their minds enlightened ; their purposes pa 
 triotic and their actions manly. The unprincipled portion of their follow 
 ers have very much injured their good name. These men regarded that tin- 
 right of secession at will, as a Constitutional remedy, was the great issue 
 in the fight. The}*- defended it heroically. But they failed. Arms decided 
 the issue against them. They accepted the decision. And now they agree 
 that, by the judgment finally rendered, the Union has not been dissolved, 
 and that secession at will by a State is not the true construction of the 
 Constitution. But they still insist on the Constitution, and pledge them 
 selves to live in the Union under that Constitution, without the right of 
 Constitutional secession. Being sincere, they are entitled to trust. IJeiiiLC 
 honest, they deserve to be believed. Being brave, they will prove true to 
 trust and faith. And being sincere, honest, and brave, they are compelled 
 to reject these Military Bills, as conceded to be contrary to the Constitu 
 tion, and clearly contrary to the terms of the fight, the conditions of sur 
 render, the sacred pledge of the nation, dishonorable to the government, 
 degrading to the white race, and destructive of the black race. The issue 
 in the war was as to what the Constitution did really mean. The differ 
 ence was honest, and neither party were or could be rebels. But the i^uc 
 made by the Radical party in these Military Bills is, whether we shall bare 
 a Constitution at all ; whether Constitutional liberty shall continue ; 
 whether the nation shall keep its faith and preserve its honor ; whether, 
 under pretense of punishing rebels, the government shall be subverted; wheth 
 er, in the name of loyalty, the Union shall be forever broken ; whether, in the 
 name of philanthropy, the white race shall be dishonored and the black 
 race exterminated, and whether Federal legislation shall promote the 
 oral welfare," or shall promote and increase hatred between the 
 the nation until the nation itself shall cease to exist, or take n fu^e 
 anarchy in despotism. Ah, General, that clear-sighted, honest-hour d, 
 
804 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 
 
 truth-telling chronicle called History, will be at no loss to determine who 
 are the rebels aye, the traitors and who the patriots in this issue. Be 
 not deceived. Radicalism is canonizing secession ! Press this Radical 
 programme through, and you will indeed, as Thaddeus Stevens says, "create 
 a new government," but that government will not be a " political para 
 dise." No paradise can be created by force, fraud, and perjury. But 
 weeping mourners from Northern States will deck the graves of the 
 Confederate fallen ; a monument to Jefferson Davis will one day lift its 
 sunward summit from Bunker Hill ; Appomattox will be visited where 
 liberty surrendered its sword to power ; and Fortress Monroe will become 
 the political Mecca whither sorrowing patriotic pilgrims will wend their 
 way to see the room in which " the last defender of Constitutional govern 
 ment in America " was oppressed, insulted, and chained. 
 
 2. Union Men up to Secession. A large number of our people resisted 
 secession earnestly and faithfully until, in spite of them, it was an accom 
 plished fact. They then deemed it their duty to go with their section. 
 Some did so to restrain excesses, and prevent, if possible, war ; some to watch 
 a favorable moment to bring about a reconciliation of the sections ; some 
 because they believed they owed their allegiance to their State and were 
 compelled to go ; and some, because they believed that the Union, once 
 dissolved, could never be restored, and they intended to live in the South. 
 But all these loved the Constitution and the Union under it. They 
 lamented the subjugation of their section and the misfortunes of their peo 
 ple, but they accepted the result of the fight ; agree to reunion, and 
 earnestly desire to restore the prosperity and harmony of all the country. 
 These necessarily oppose and reject the Military Bills, because they regard 
 them as more unconstitutional than secession, as prolonging the bad passions 
 of the strife, and as surely making disunion permanent and future good 
 will hopeless. 
 
 3. All the time Union Men. These never believed the North would op 
 press the South. They loved the Constitution and the Union. They could 
 see no good in secession. They hated secessionists of all classes. They 
 begged our people to stop the fight, and either stood aloof, or did all they 
 could to end the strife. All this they did, sincerely believing that the only 
 object of the war on the part of the North was to preserve the Union. 
 They endured all the obloquy of being against their own people, firmly 
 believing that results, in a restored Union, would vindicate their wisdom 
 and demonstrate the error of those who differed with them. 
 
 Of all our people these last have the greatest cause to complain of the 
 bad faith of the Government and the ungenerous and destructive action of 
 the Radicals since the surrender of the Southern armies. These Military 
 Bills make their wisdom madness, their promises lies, and their hopes the 
 bitterest gall. They would lose their own respect and the respect of all 
 men if they did not denounce and reject these bills as embodying the most 
 infamous treachery to the National faith and the most ungrateful contempt 
 for Union fidelity in the South. They opposed Radicalism for the same rea 
 son they opposed secession because they loved and still love the Constitu 
 tion and the Union under it. But now they find the United States Congress 
 laughing at the Constitution as a "ghost," and they find General Pope blindly 
 loving the most unprincipled of the secessionists, and denouncing true Union 
 men as " turbulent and disloyal reactionary leaders," who must be banished 
 from the country before peace can be secured under Radical reconstruction, 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 805 
 
 . f , . ~j ~~ ~"v, ix ii i -n , nun i- - 
 
 tion of the secession wing of the old Democratic party, and most ofUw 
 Jackson and Union wing ot that party, and the great body of the oM 
 -the followers of Clay and admirers of Webster. In my opinion 
 
 \-J s*\m*~\ Tl I 1 " - ^"1 4- r\ f\ wr I . ! .. n*.n i , 1 _ 1 * *(. ^ . 
 
 ^^.^. ..... i* tllCV 
 
 incapable of being false to their pledges, and are the very best ~protectors"of 
 the negroes on the continent. Every charge made by General Pope to the 
 contrary is simply gratuitous slander, prompted by unprincipled men who 
 have never been faithful to any government, nor true to any promise, nor 
 settled in any good principle. 
 
 Contrast the reasons of these men for rejecting these Military Bills with 
 the reasons of those who accept them. 
 
 1. Those who accept these bills concede they are unconstitutional, but 
 justify them by saying the Constitution is dead at the North and does not 
 apply at the South, who are conquered foreign States. Those who reject 
 the bills deny that the Constitution is dead anywhere. Love for it at the 
 North seems to be cold, but as the passions of the war die out this love will 
 revive, and it is the duty of every man to aid in warming it into life. That 
 the Southern States are not foreign States, because the result of the war de 
 cided that secession was void, and this decision was accepted by the South 
 as made by the North in the fight and according to the surrender. That, 
 besides, if conquered foreign States, it is a universal law of nations, well es 
 tablished, that the fundamental law of the conqueror extends over the con 
 quered, and that in this case that fundamental law is the Constitution. 
 
 Now, General, which party is right on this point ? Is the Constitution 
 dead ! Has it no force in the South ? Then why swear to support it f 
 Why did you swear to support it ! Why swear every man, who registers 
 to vote on these very bills, to support it ! When you pledged protection to 
 the gallant men who took your paroles on condition that they obeyed " the 
 laws of the States in which they resided," did you mean States out of the 
 Union ? Did you preserve the Union broken. 
 
 2. Those who accept these Military Bills concede they are wrong, un 
 just, and oppressive ; but they say Congress has no respect for right, no re 
 gard for justice, and is guided by a spirit of vengeance, and that every 
 time we reject a proposition they put worse conditions on us, and that if 
 we reject these bills, they will provide a plan to take all our property and 
 disfranchise nearly every white man ; and that the Northern people, in this 
 spirit of vengeance, are ahead of the Congress and will sustain them in 
 every measure of oppression. Those who reject the bills admit the North 
 ern people have acted in a manner we did not expect, but insist that they 
 have been misled by their leaders and blinded by the passions of the war. 
 That the masses really love the Constitution and the Union, and that a* 
 soon as the excesses of the Congress open their eyes to the great fact that 
 these extreme measures are putting at still greater hazard everything they 
 thought they had saved by the war, a reaction will take place and the peo 
 ple will repudiate the Radicals as they did the secessionists, and with more 
 fierceness, since thev will discover them to be the most treacherous enemy, 
 not only to the Union, but to Constitutional liberty itself. We have 
 
806 8KNATOH . II. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 faith, General, in the ultimate justice of the Northern people. Are we de 
 ceived? 
 
 3. Those who accept the bills, say they do not approve them, and are no 
 Radicals, but they will seem to go with the Radicals until they get in the 
 Union, and then will undo all they have done and defy the Radicals. 
 Those who reject them say no plan of settlement can be reliable or peace 
 ful, or lasting, which is not sincere and honestly approved. They will be 
 no party to a deception. Besides, the deception will fail. The Radicals 
 and negroes will get the power and hold it until a war of races destroys the 
 negroes, destroys the Government, and precipitates anarchy and final des 
 potism over all the United States. If the white voters do not give their 
 consent to this unconstitutional usurpation, it can never have validity, and 
 they are determined, therefore, never to give that consent. And they will 
 exhaust all legal remedies to expose its invalidity without that consent. 
 
 4. Those who accept the bills say we can thereby at least save our prop 
 erty, and, as for the government, that is gone anyhow. It is all a question 
 of power now, and not of law or right. Those who reject the bills say that 
 no people are fit to have property who consent to their own dishonor, and 
 that at all hazards we will save our honor as a people. If the North rob us 
 further that is their act. If we consent to our dishonor that is our shame. 
 That law and right will ultimately be restored, and then robbers and 
 oppressors will be attended to, and will receive sympathy from no side. 
 
 I will not continue this contrast. In every respect, I ask you if those 
 who reject are riot right ? Who are the pernicious, disloyal, and danger 
 ous ; and who are the manly, worthy, and true ? 
 
 Will you lead the Radicals in further war upon such men with such 
 principles? Is he a conqueror who invades the helpless? Is he a general 
 who leads the assault on the unresisting ? 
 
 Are these " the cardinal principles of our Government " ? 
 
 NUMBER TWENTY-TWO. 
 
 To General IT. S. Grant: 
 
 The American people have been destroying each other because of dif 
 ferences of opinion. These differences exist and have existed chiefly be 
 cause the people of the respective sections have not understood and do not 
 understand each other. Everything has been managed by policy and decep 
 tion. Our statesmen have been merely strategic partisans. If the people of 
 the North could now be made to see the real desires and purposes of the peo 
 ple of the South, they would become ashamed of that deceptive Radical 
 catch-word rebel, and all distrust and bitterness would disappear, and dis 
 union would not continue one hour. The people of the South never desired 
 to get rid of the Constitution. They were made to believe the North in 
 tended to deny their equal rights under that Constitution, and to oppress 
 them. They seceded, as they believed, from oppression and not from the 
 Constitution. They may have been deceived. Were they? Has the 
 oppression come ? Can Union and oppression live together and restore pros 
 perity? If the North can be assured that Union can be secured without the 
 oppression, will they not abandon the oppression and repudiate the oppres 
 sors ? I believe they will. Therefore, I write most plainly, and without 
 any concealment. Bad men in both sections keep up false impressions, and 
 encourage mutual hatreds. Bad men, like certain animals, live on the car- 
 
JTTS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 
 
 casses of good things. They fatten on ruin. If the people were virtuous 
 and wise, bad men would be ofticeless and powerless 
 
 Now then do the people of the North really desire to understand ntf 
 
 so, do not let them be blinded by epithets as "rebels" "traitors" -md 
 men who desired to break up the government," for these things are laid 
 bv bad men, and are said to keep up passion and not to inform the mind 
 Understand motives and judge acts in the light of motives. 
 
 For this reason, General^ I have made "known to you the men in the 
 South who accept the Military Bills, and the motives which attract them. I 
 have also made known to you those who reject those bills and the motives 
 which actuated them. The first class can yieldall but the desperate ones 
 would be glad to yield because they accept against their convictions of 
 right, and from horrid motives of fear and policy. The latter never can 
 yield, because to yield they must violate their convictions of right and of 
 duty to the country, to the Constitution ^violate their oaths ; degrade the 
 white race ; bring a war of extermination on the black race, and destroy 
 free Constitutional government in America. No man has answered Gen 
 eral Pope does not try to answer the arguments by which they prove the 
 correctness of their convictions. If, with these convictions, they were to 
 yield, would they not be rebels indeed, and would not you despise them, and 
 would not they despise themselves? Would an honorable man ask them to 
 yield against such convictions, much less denounce them as " turbulent and 
 disloyal and deceitful," because they openly, and in the most patriotic utter 
 ances possible, avow them? 
 
 But there is a way to reconcile all these differences ; to end strife ; to 
 restore harmony and good-will ; to perpetuate the Union ; to build again, 
 as never before, national prosperity ; and to secure freedom and equal pro 
 tection to all sections, races, and colors. Now, then, if the North will still 
 their passions long enough to hear and fully comprehend what the South is 
 willing to do ; and will meet the South in a like spirit of frankness and 
 honest purpose, Eureka ! Eureka ! will burst, in loud acclamations of joy, 
 from the lips of thirty-five millions of people, rescued from bloody anarchy 
 and perpetual despotism ; and bonfires and illuminations will blaze in a com 
 mon light from the Atlantic to the Pacific and from the Lakes to the Gulf, 
 revealing the grand jubilee of the nation over Constitutional reunion. 
 
 An humble citizen, claiming no merit save a life during which no man 
 can truthfully say I ever sought or desired to deceive a living thing, I tender 
 you myself, my all, for a hostage, that what I now say in the behalf of the de 
 ceived and unfortunate, but gallant, noble, and ever honorable people of tin- 
 South, is as true in fact as it is fearless in utterance. 
 
 1. The Southern people are willing, anxious, to obey the Constitution and 
 to live in the Union under it. They admit that the construction which th.-y 
 honestly placed upon that Constitution, of the right of a {State to secede 
 from the Union at will, has been decided against them by arms, and they 
 accept that decision, and will live by it, and maintain it, if necessary, with 
 arms. 
 
 2. They concede and will maintain the freedom of the African race in the 
 United States. To this end they will maintain and defend the &. /" " / < 
 the State governments, by which that freedom was made a part of 
 
 eral Constitution, and by" which it was guaranteed in the Mate 
 
 Whatever may have*been their opinions of the right of iUvery, an 
 benefits to the African race, they discovered that it cost more to maintau 
 
808 SENATOR P. H. HILL, OP GEORGIA. 
 
 slaves than, as a property, it was worth. Therefore, for peace and interest, 
 they yielded it, and will never, by their acts, restore it. Moreover, the negroes 
 being free, they concede and will maintain, shall have and receive in the 
 law, before tlie law, and by the law, equal protection in all their rights with 
 the white race. So, also, being* members of society, and society being ben 
 efited by intelligence and virtue, and injured by ignorance and vice, the 
 Southern white people will do all in their power to educate, improve, and 
 elevate the African race. And any statement or intimation, whether from 
 " official headquarters " or malevolent informers, that those who oppose the 
 Military Bills are wanting in will to do justice full, equal justice to the 
 negro, or have a secret purpose to discriminate against the negro in the 
 making, or administering, or executing of the laws, is a gratuitous calumny 
 upon a peaceful, honorable, but unoffending, helpless people, which no hon 
 orable man would originate, which no brave man would fail to recall, and 
 which no virtuous white people will believe. And not only will rights be 
 secured, but trusts will be conferred on the African race, when and as, 
 by improvement and culture, so encouraged and fostered, they shall de 
 velop a capacity, moral, social, and intellectual, which will satisfy those 
 to be affected thereby, that such trusts, being so conferred, will promote the 
 good of society and the stability of government, or will not damage either 
 society or government. The Southern people believe that office and suffrage 
 are not rights born with a man, but are trusts conferred by society and solely 
 for the good of society, and not for the profit of the individual. 
 
 3. But the Southern people will never consent to be governed by the col 
 ored race, whether with or without the aid of the mischief-making adven 
 turers from abroad, or selfish apostates from their own blood at home. They 
 will not consent to the abrogation of their State government by Congress. 
 They will help in the elevation of the black race, but they will never con 
 sent to the degradation of the white race ! Never ! Never ! Never ! 
 They will never consent to abandon the right of citizens to trial by jury, 
 and will never fail to regard as tyrants and murderers those who dare 
 oppress or execute a single citizen, black or white, without such trial. 
 
 They will never consent to surrender the glorious heritage of free gov 
 ernment under written Constitutions, or agree to erase one single syllable 
 of the people s Bill of Rights so plainly set forth in those written Constitu 
 tions. 
 
 All these wrongs and outrages, and many more, they see attempted in 
 these Military Bills, and, therefore, they will never consent to the plan of 
 reconstruction so falsely pretended to be proposed by these bills. 
 
 They admit that all these things may be forced upon them. They are 
 not able to resist. They are tired of war. They are helpless. They have 
 no arms. They surrendered them to you, sir, as to an honorable foe ! 
 They are poor. Little bureau officers daily insult them. Little sergeants 
 daily oppress them. Little assessors and collectors daily rob them. High- 
 titled generals daily slander them. Black and white spies daily dog them. 
 A mighty nation, which pledged them protection if they would lay down 
 their arms, dominates in vengeance over them, and will not so much as hear 
 their wrongs or permit them even to make complaint of their grievances. 
 So, force on! You have the power. But know this : The force which thus 
 oppresses us, breaks your own Constitution ; tramples in the dust your own 
 pledged faith as a people ; is accomplished by the perjuring of all those 
 who execute it, and to the shame of all those who oppose it or permit it. If 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 809 
 
 you think it honorable to inflict, we shall deem it manly to Buffer and in 
 flict as you may, one thing you can never force : You shall never iecure 
 our consent to our own dishonor. And if you, too, of the North, shall tinallv 
 fa 11, as, persisting m such sins, fall you must, you will feel all our *O6i and 
 a keener sting than any which has ever yet "pierced the Southern prot,!,- 
 the sting or dishonor. 
 
 You will fall, not contending in a manly fight for what you believe to 
 be your own endangered rights, but you will fall in the work of dr-radin- 
 your own race, and by the iniquity of oppressing those who surrendered to 
 you their arms, trusting to your own magnanimity to redeem your own 
 pledged faith according to your own written law ! The South may be poor 
 Mordecai at the royal gate of our imperial Constitution, but take care the 
 North does not become the humble Hainan at the scaffold ! 
 
 It is now quite certain that if this Radical programme is persisted in, 
 these States must become the victims of negro rule, unless we shall succeed 
 in arresting it with legal remedies, for we do not propose armed resistance. 
 Even those of us whom General Pope denounces as "turbulent and dis 
 loyal," urged the white people to register! I confess, for one, it required 
 considerable sacrifice to give this advice. My judgment and desire was to 
 have no decent man touch, taste, or handle the unclean thing. But I !.- 
 came satisfied that registration did not commit to the legality of the act, 
 and might enable us to defeat the whole scheme at once, and without strife 
 between the races. And if the military commanders had respected the will 
 of the people, and not considered themselves as ordered to carry out the bills, 
 we might have succeeded. But it now seems that the purpose is to force 
 through the plan without regard to the will of the people, and to strike from 
 the lists registered until this can be done. The large white disfranchise- 
 ment, the large negro vote, and this fraud on the election will, in all proba 
 bility, accomplish the call of a convention. 
 
 But I give my opinion now that no decent white man can go to that con 
 vention and retain his character. There is an effort to get respectable men 
 to go to the convention. Why? Not to shape its proceedings, for thoc 
 are dictated from Washington and no discretion is permitted. The purple 
 is to make character for the wicked movement ! It will fail. It ought to 
 fail. You cannot purify or polish a sink by throwing a diamond into it, but 
 you certainly will cover the diamond with filth. These will be the first 
 conventions called for the express purpose of disfranchising white men, and 
 enfranchising negroes, and for putting the odious discrimination in the 
 Constitution of the nation. Every white man who engages in it will 
 inevitably lose the respect of his race, and would do well to pray God to 
 change the color of his skin. Let the negroes go. They have the power, 
 and it is their convention. Every white man who engages in this work will 
 find black stains all over him which will be harder to wash off than Un 
 bloody stains on the hands of the guilty Macbeth. Murder, if y<>" </"/>, >/" 
 equality of the white race! Your policy for managing the convention 
 might save from disgrace, if there was room for discretion, and a fair vote 
 permitted. But the scheme is now stripped naked, and it is nothing but 
 triple-shaped monster of force, fraud, and perjury. Let it alone, or you 
 will sell yourself to social infamy. This course I press on some whom 
 have always esteemed, and who, I know, imagined they could possibly do 
 some good by accepting the Military Bills and controlling the convention. 
 
 Of the correctness of one legal principle there can be no doubt : unlei 
 
810 SENA Ton R IL HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 majority of the legal white voters qualified by existing laws give their 
 consent thereto, this negro Constitution can never be valid. Let us, by all 
 means, and under all trials, withhold that consent. Then, if the force of 
 law is ever restored, the whole proceeding will be set aside as void from the 
 beginning, and every officer under it will be declared a criminal. If the 
 lav is never enforced again, we cannot possibly lose anything by refusing 
 our consent to usurpation. No white man can, therefore, ever be excusable 
 for giving his consent to this Radical scheme of universal ruin. 
 
 General Pope represents to you, General Grant, as his official opinion, 
 that "unless some measures are adopted to free the country of the turbulent 
 and disloyal leaders of the reactionary party, there can be no peace." I feel 
 it my duty to say to you, and to the government, and to the Northern peo 
 ple, that in this statement General Pope is correct. His only mistake is in 
 giving so much importance to leaders, and calling those "disloyal" who op 
 pose the Military Bills as a plan of reconstruction. While the application 
 he makes is wrong, the principle he announces is correct, and is of far more 
 general importance than he represents. Peace under the Radical programme 
 is impossible, if decent, intelligent, manly white people are permitted to re 
 main in this country. General Pope says the wisest provisions of the Mili 
 tary Bills are those which disfranchise men of ability. If this scheme is to 
 succeed he is also right in this proposition. The scheme will commend it 
 self to nothing but ignorance and vice. Its very purposes and effects are to 
 degrade virtue and intelligence, and denude the country of all true man 
 hood. Bad, designing men are seeking to get elevation under these bills. 
 They can only succeed through negro votes. They are anxious to get rid of 
 the men of intelligence, truth, and worth, and are engaged in teaching the 
 pooi , ignorant negroes to hate such men as their enemies. And in this 
 work they are protected by the military, and it is the only protection I 
 know of the military extending to anybody. Good men need no protec 
 tion, but how long they will not need it is the problem to be solved. They 
 will never get it from the Radical Military because they are already de 
 nounced by the commander as unsafe to the country and ought to be gotten 
 rid of. 
 
 But the men to whom General Pope refers will never consent to the 
 scheme of destruction in these Military Bills. They will never advise the 
 people to consent. The people will never consent, whether the leaders advise 
 it or not. They are not going to consent to negro government. They in 
 tend to exhaust all remedies known to the law to defeat, obstruct, and set 
 aside the pretended government under these Military Bills. They will resist 
 nothing by violence ; they will bear every oppression ; but they will never 
 consent to dishonor, and they will make it the business of their lives to bring 
 to just legal punishment, as criminals and trespassers, all those who, under 
 pretended authority of unconstitutional Military Bills, oppress the people of 
 this country, or seek by force to usurp the State government now existing. 
 We see despotism and a war of races if these bills succeed, and we see it all 
 for no purpose but to keep a mere party in power, and we shall never con 
 sent to it, nor submit to it, except as the courts may compel, and we have 
 fauth that the time will come when the courts will do their duty, and the 
 now boastful violators of the rights of States and of freemen will tremble. 
 
 All these evils can be prevented by simply returning to the Constitution 
 simply obeying the Constitution we are all sworn now to support accord 
 ing to its fixed construction. If the government and the people of the North 
 
LIFE, 8PSSOHSJS, AND Wl!/r!\Cffi. 811 
 
 will not consent to this, but will persist in forcing upon these State* these 
 degrading, destructive, and universally /tezfccl hill s, then their dut \ is plain. 
 Jhuiish or behead every decent, honorable, intelligent white person. I .uild 
 your guillotines and get ready your escorts, for the doomed art million*. 
 And when the intelligent and noble are all buried or exiled, tin- Al ricani/ed 
 whites and the negro, like the mulattoes and blacks in llayii, will go to war 
 among themselves. So, then, if you will have negro Radicalism, and insist 
 upon having it in peace, you must make this fairest domain of God s bounty 
 to man a desolated wilderness, or define peace to consist in bacchanalian 
 revels, miscegenating orgies, and bloody lawlessness of negroes, adven 
 turers, and apostates. 
 
 The issue is in the hands of the Northern people. They can have the 
 Constitution, union, peace, good-will, prosperity, now, and have them for 
 ever. Or, they can/brce Radicalism, discord, devastation, hatred, disunion, 
 blood, and ruin without hope and without end till Caisar. 
 
 This number ends the series of "Notes on the Situation." 1 :ig;iiu re 
 turn thanks for the many encouraging letters I have received from all por 
 tions of the Union, from New Hampshire to Arkansas, and from soldier- and 
 citizens. I believe passion is subsiding, and reason is returning to the people 
 everywhere. If so, ability need not fear disfranchisement, nor candor ban 
 ishment, nor patriotism war. 
 
LETTER TO HON. ROBERT C. HIIMBER, REVIEWING THE 
 
 HAYES ADMINISTRATION. 
 
 The action of President Hayes, in placing in office every man and woman whose 
 corrupt practices had secured him the Presidency, was the inspiration of this letter. It 
 is a most terrific arraignment of the President and his party, and a vivid exposure of the 
 civil service of the Administration. 
 
 ATLANTA, GA., October 2, 1878. 
 
 My Dear Sir : In this day of much printing it is almost impossible to 
 have one s opinions or motives correctly represented. I suppose it is be 
 cause misrepresentation is so easy. 
 
 I have never cast any " slurs on the President." I have never expressed 
 any " bitterness toward Mr. Hayes," because I have never felt any. 
 
 I have never complained or indulged in pique because Mr. Hayes did not 
 appoint persons to office who were recommended by me. I have never 
 recommended any. I have indorsed some applicants as qualified, and have* 
 greatly desired to see the civil service improved especially in the South. 
 
 I trust no man who knows me needs to be assured that, in the dis 
 charge of my public duties, I am incapable of being influenced by personal 
 piques and disappointments. 
 
 With me all personal feelings and relations, whether of friendship or 
 otherwise, are subordinated to the public good. 
 
 But I should be very uncandid if I did not confess that I have been 
 most grievously disappointed in Mr. Hayes and in his administration. If 
 my grievance were only personal, the world would never suspect it in my 
 official conduct and opinions. It is because my grievance relates only to our 
 National character and the public weal that I make known its existence, and 
 will proceed to set forth briefly the reasons for it. 
 
 I believe that what is known as our " civil service," as it now exists, and 
 has long existed, is a crime against popular government and civilization. I 
 believe it has been the chief cause of many troubles and corruptions in the 
 past, and, if not thoroughly reformed, will surely undermine and destroy 
 our free institutions. I will not stop here to discuss the grounds of this 
 belief. They have been long and well considered, and have produced abso 
 lute conviction. I always did abhor that old party slogan, " To the victors 
 belong the spoils." It was never suited to any but bandits and plunderers, 
 and was always disgraceful to men claiming to be patriots and statesmen. 
 It reduces the science of government to the tricks of gamblers, the hypoc 
 risy of demagogues, and the blows of ruffians. 
 
 I heard Mr. Hayes when, in his inaugural address, he announced his policy, 
 or rather his purpose of civil service reform. To say I was pleased, would 
 feebly express the truth. In spite of my conviction that he was not elected 
 by the people, but owed his office to unmitigated frauds for .which I believed 
 hewas not responsible, I felt willing to bury this last and greatest wrong with 
 the many that had preceded it, and for which all sides were more or less 
 responsible, and unite my humble efforts in support of a policy which, in 
 my judgment, promised escape to our whole country from all such wrongs 
 in the future. 
 
 812 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 813 
 
 1 - 
 
 Y > " - -g 
 
 cance. nia Southern policy was a necessity of the situation. M , 1 1 lv 
 
 had no power to avoid it. The end of carpet-bag plundering in the S u 
 and disgrace to the Nation had come by events. iLn GenSml SI 
 that the army could no longer be used to settle eontested election, in ,1,, 
 States, and maintain robbers in power. But with our corrupt and ,v,r 
 
 corrupting civil service the situation was different. This evil had its origin 
 before the war. It had grown up under the nurture of the leaden of part 1M 
 It had pushed its brazen supporters and beneficiaries to the front seat! of 
 authority. It had grown and strengthened with every year, and se.-m, ,1 to 
 have intrenched itself irapregnably during General Grant s administration. 
 \V hen, therefore, m the very day of its insolent power, in the verv midst of 
 its pampered courtiers, and on the very field of its greatest sway, Mr. Haves 
 announced in clear and unfaltering voice his purpose to strangle this Hvdra 
 of many heads, he seemed to exhibit the courage, manliness, and patriotism 
 of one worthy to be President. This exhibition gave me high hopes of tin 
 man, and several early free and frank interviews, which I felt encouraged to 
 seek with him, greatly strengthened and encouraged these hopes. 
 
 Now, my friend, it is the utter and sickening disappointment which these 
 hopes have experienced, and nothing else, which has forced from me the 
 few words to which you allude, and which have been falsely construed by 
 Republican papers to express personal bitterness and hostility on my part 
 toward Mr. Hayes. 
 
 In my opinion Mr. Hayes has utterly failed to improve indeed, has 
 strangely thrown away an opportunity to make for himself a name worthy 
 to be enrolled with that of Washington, because that opportunity improved 
 would have conferred on his country a benefit quite equal to any conferred 
 by Washington himself. 
 
 He has failed because he has shown himself utterly unequal to his oppor 
 tunity. He has shown himself unequal in that he has utterly failed to realize 
 that the Chief Magistrate of a great country has no personal friends, no 
 personal enemies, and owes no personal obligations, but is under obligations 
 only to his country, and to that country s honor, glory, prosperity, Constitu 
 tion, and laws. He has thrown away his opportunity to honor himself, and 
 even his country, by recognizing an obligation to reward those who, by frauds 
 most disgraceful to their country, gave him this opportunity. He has thrown 
 away the grandest opportunity ever given to a man, only that he might <jive 
 offices and rewards to as worthless a set of rapscallions as ever disgraced 
 humanity. 
 
 A man may become President by reason of a crime, and yet himself not 
 be tainted or even culpable. Twice, in our history, have nu-n become Presi 
 dents by reason of crime. Andrew Johnson became President by reason of a 
 wicked and foul assassination. Mr. Hayes became President by iva^m of a 
 wicked and foul conspiracy to change, and which did changr, the ballots of 
 the people after those ballots had been cast. Yet each became President 
 through the forms of the Constitution and Laws. 
 
 How did Mr. Johnson deal with those who committed and who >\ 
 charged with aiding to commit the crime by^ which he became President 
 He pursued them for punishment with such vigor that, as all the world n..w 
 believe, an innocent woman was hanged ! 
 
 How has Mr. Hayes dealt with those who committed, and 
 were charged with aiding to commit, the crime by which he becamr 
 
814 SENATOR B. If. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 dent? If you will examine the list, from the humblest manager of the 
 election precincts in Florida and Louisiana, through the visiting statesmen, 
 as they are now in mockery called, and up to and through the electoral 
 commission, and show me one, black or white, high or low, who is known 
 to be guilty, or who is suspected of the guilt of this crime, who has not re 
 ceived or been offered an office, you will relieve to that extent the pain and 
 mortification I feel in looking over these sickening developments. There 
 was a woman charged to be among the conspirators in both crimes. 
 
 In Mr. Johnson s case, Mrs. Surratt, protesting her innocence with an 
 honest woman s tears, and a devoted mother s entreaties, was chained, and 
 mocked, and hung ! 
 
 In Mr. Hayes s case, Agnes Jenks, confessing her guilt in brazen gibberish 
 never before equaled, receives an office of good pay and little work in the 
 Treasury, and that, too, at a time when many ladies of unquestioned worth, 
 with hungry children, and husbands slain in battle, were rudely turned 
 away with the gruff answer " no vacancies." 
 
 If, instead of fleeing as a criminal, Wilkes Booth had sought the presence 
 of Andrew Johnson as one who had rendered the latter good service, and 
 Mr. Johnson had entertained him at the Executive Mansion and given him. 
 an office, what would the world have said ? What would you say ? 
 
 Letters have *been produced before the Potter Committee, written by 
 Republican members of Congress, which were written to Republican f riends 
 and not intended for publication, which strikingly exhibit the superior influ 
 ence of Kellogg, Packard, Wells, and Anderson at the Executive Mansion. 
 In other ways we know now that almost every person connected with the 
 fraud has claimed or exercised special influence or favor at the White House. 
 But the contrast may be stated in one short sentence : 
 
 In Mr. Johnson s case, all the criminals, real or suspected, were specially 
 marked for punishment. 
 
 In Mr. Hayes s case, all the criminals, real or suspected, were specially 
 marked for reward. 
 
 I would be really glad if I could find some excuse, some apology, or 
 some palliation for the course Mr. Hayes has pursued in this matter. But, 
 after full consideration, I can find none. It is no palliation to say that 
 assassination \vas a greater crime than fraud. Both were crimes. If it is 
 right to reward crime at all, then the greatest crimes should receive the 
 highest rewards. You cannot produce innocence, much less merit, by 
 grading crimes. All deserve punishment and none are entitled to reward. 
 To reward fraud is a greater crime than to commit it, for the reward invites 
 many commissions. If Andrew Johnson had rewarded Booth, the whole world 
 would have pronounced him a greater criminal than Booth. It is difficult 
 to conceive of a greater crime than the defeat by fraud of the popular will 
 in a government which rests on the popular will. If there be a greater crime, 
 it is committed by those who reward the authors of such fraud, for such re 
 ward invites the perpetual defeat of the popular will, and, therefore, a 
 direct subversion of the government, and assumes the most insidious form 
 of treason. 
 
 It is worse than no excuse it is itself a crime to say that Mr. Hayes 
 was under obligation to these authors of fraud. If there had been no 
 assassin Booth, there would have been no President Johnson. But, was 
 the President, therefore, under obligation to the assassin ? If there had 
 been no frauds in Florida and Louisiana, there would have been no Presi- 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WHITINGS. 815 
 
 dent Hayes. Is the President, therefore, under obligation to all who lid,,, ,1 
 commit the fraud ? It seems that all have claimed reward. 
 
 It is no apology to say that Mr. Hayes did not believe these people were 
 guilty of any fraud. It was his duty to protect the character of the nation 
 and the integrity of the administration. He can do neither by i.laein- 
 great numbers of men in office who are charged with crimes, and whom 
 largely more than half of the people believe are guilty. In truth, I do not 
 believe any intelligent man doubts their guilt. But I trust we have in 
 this country a sufficient number of men of unsuspected honesty to fill the 
 offices, and both the public character and the public interests require that 
 only such men should be appointed. Besides, if these men were in truth 
 innocent, they would not have asked or accepted office from Mr. Hayes, for 
 they would not have been willing to bring weakness upon the administra 
 tion nor disrepute upon the civil service. Their universal and brazen 
 demands for office is the highest proof of their guilt, for it shows they care 
 nothing for Mr. Hayes nothing for the honor of the country nothing for 
 the good repute of the civil service. Their every act in pressing for office 
 shows that reward was their object, and reward they must have. Every 
 man of the guilty gang who has not been satisfied with the office offered 
 him has confessed the frauds. Every man who has not confessed the 
 frauds has been kept satisfied with office. Why should he confess, whote 
 confession would defeat his reward ? How does it happen that those only 
 are not entitled to belief who confess the frauds? And how does it happen 
 that the credit of none was denied until after confession was made ? 
 
 It is no palliation now to say that the larger number of these appoint 
 ments were made by certain members, or by a member of the Cabinet. If 
 Mr. Johnson had made Wilkes Booth a member of his Cabinet, he could not 
 have complained if Booth had provided places for his tools and subordi 
 nates. Nevertheless, if, when the revelations on this subject were made be 
 fore the Potter Committee, Mr. Hayes had promptly ordered a sweeping 
 purgation from the civil service of these obnoxious characters, as I greatly 
 hoped he would do, he would have been largely vindicated. Instead, how 
 ever, of dismissing any he appointed more, and some of the appointments 
 seemed to have the special purpose of suppressing or affecting testimony be 
 fore that Committee. 
 
 If anything were wanting to increase the wicked heinousness of the frauds 
 upon the ballots in Florida and Louisiana, it would be found in the only . \- 
 cuse which the authors and abettors of these frauds have offered for their 
 perpetration. It must never be forgotten that the great facts are not denied 
 but admitted ; to wit : that the ballots were changed after they were < 
 and the verdict of the people reversed after it had been rendered and was 
 known. The excuse for this, as alleged, is that there were intimidations at 
 the precincts which prevented a free expression by the people, 
 cuse is false in fact, then the crime stands confessed without excu- 
 of us who have been familiar with carpet-bag villainies, knew from the 
 that the excuse was false. But the proof now revealed abundantly 
 that the excuse is not only false, but was actually manufactured for the e> 
 press purpose of a cover for the fraud. Thus the excuse itself becomes part 
 of the fraud, and the most infamous part of it. Not only was the exe. 
 itself manufactured, but the evidence to make the excuse deceive 
 ern people was also manufactured in the Custom House in New 
 elsewhere. Forgeries are shown to have been numerous, and perjuries were 
 
816 SENATOR R H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 secured under promises of reward. In this vile work men holding high 
 positions took active part, and every one who took such part has received 
 high office from Mr. Hayes, and has thus been enabled to become himself a 
 dispenser of rewards to his subordinates. 
 
 Take it all in all its origin, its extent, its wicked adroitness, its delibera 
 tion, the variety of characters engaged, its numberless perjuries and reckless 
 forgeries, its marvelous success and its absolute control of a great govern 
 ment of unequaled patronage for its rewards and it must be confessed that 
 the Presidential fraud of 1876 a is withoat a parallel in any history. It dwarfs 
 all other frauds, conspiracies, and robberies into comparative insignificance. 
 If allowed to go unpunished, it will elevate perjury into a virtue, forgery 
 into an art, and will reduce usurpation to a science ! 
 
 The administration which I for one had fondly hoped would inaugurate 
 a new era of elevation, purity, and efficiency in our civil service, has persist 
 ently identified its life, its power, and its character with the frauds of its 
 origin, and has thus done more than all our previous history to bring that 
 civil service into disrepute, and the advocates of its reform to confusion and 
 shame. The keenest pang of all is that which springs from the fact that 
 will not down, that all this has been done to silence, gratify, and reward 
 as vile a set of scoundrels as ever robbed without remorse or lied without 
 blushing. 
 
 It has given me no pleasure to write this letter. I have been slow and 
 reluctant to give up the hopes I had formed of this administration. I am 
 not willing even now to discredit my own judgment of men so far as to ad 
 mit that rny first impressions of Mr. Hayes were altogether incorrect. I pre 
 fer to believe, and do believe, that he has fallen under the control of men 
 who were deeply involved in the guilt of this fraud, and whose power over 
 him he has not been able to resist. Even now, if he would purge his ad 
 ministration of every person connected with the frauds, he might yet rally 
 good men to his support, and close his term of service with something of 
 benefit to his country and respect for himself. But I fear the serpents of 
 fraud have their coils so wrapped around him that he is unable, and may 
 have become unwilling, to release himself. 
 
 There is but one more step between our free institutions and destruction. 
 The government has become identified with fraud, and is administered by 
 the authors of fraud. If the people shall fail to repudiate the fraud and its 
 authors, abettors, and rewarders, then we shall have entered upon that phase 
 of our career when the offices and immense patronage of this richest of 
 countries will take the form of glittering prizes offered to induce the com 
 mission of crimes against the popular will. Assassins will be made heroes, 
 and the greatest criminals will become most entitled to enjoy the honors and 
 live on the benefactions of government. Beyond that, the man who talks 
 of the safety and purity of popular governments will be a lunatic. 
 
 Your friend, 
 
 BENJ. H. HILL. 
 Hon. Robert C. Humber, Eatonton, Ga, 
 
REPLY TO HON. WILLIAM H. FELTON, JANUARY 14, 1882. 
 
 In 1881 there was formed in Georgia a coalition between some Independents and Re 
 publicans for the purpose of breaking up the solidity of the South. The object of this 
 coalition was to be accomplished by the liberal use of the Federal patronage. Senator 
 Hill made an attack on this coalition, and did much to destroy it. In one of his inter 
 views with Mr. Grady on the subject, he made some reference to Dr. William H. Felton. 
 The allusion was not unkind, but regretful. He resented Mr. Hill s allusion to him, and 
 published a most vituperative article against him. It was in reply to this unexpected and 
 unmerited attack from a life-long friend that Mr. Hill wrote the following letter. I in 
 sert the article in this collection because of its terse and vigorous style, and because of 
 the great general truths enunciated touching of our political condition at the time. 
 
 WASHINGTON, January 14, 1882. 
 
 Editors Constitution : In your issue of the 10th instant I have read the 
 letter of the Hon. Wm. H. Felton. 
 
 This letter is certainly the most bitter and venomous summary of charges 
 against my public and private character I have ever seen. The vilest pro 
 duction of carpet-bag slums could not say more to defame me. I am pic 
 tured as having been all my life "before the war, during the war, and 
 since the war a " corrupt," " hypocritical," " malevolent," " mendacious 
 man, whose counsels have " blighted the State of my birth, and destroyed 
 the Democratic party," and as one who, " under professions of friendship," 
 has always been treacherous and vindictive. 
 
 All public men are liable to abuse. I thought I had enjoyed my full 
 share and would have some exemption from such in the future. But this 
 letter gathers up nearly all the worst calumnies of the past, colors them with 
 new odium, and then adds new ones invented by the author for the occasion. 
 This fierce flood of vituperation comes, too, from a man of whom I never in 
 all my life spoke or wrote one unkind word, but in whose behalf I had spoken 
 and written more kind words than I ever did for any other man, and be 
 cause of my friendship for whom, for seven years, I had almost imperiled 
 my own standing in the Democratic party. 
 
 My self-respect will not allow me to retaliate in kind, and my respect 
 for the people of Georgia will not allow me to descend to a contest of dirty 
 epithets. The explosion is personally harmless from overcharge, but this 
 letter from Dr. Felton has a significance and meaning of public importance 
 at this moment, and to show this meaning and significance is the purpose of 
 this writing. 
 
 First, Does Dr. Felton really believe the charges he has rehearsed a 
 invented with such sudden virulence? During the rugged voyage of 
 stormy period in which my social and political life has been passed, J 
 sometimes heard pleasant voices. Many kind and partial things have been 
 said and written about me, and it has been my ambition to deserve 
 No man has been more earnest, or more frequent, or more fulsome in 
 praises of me for forty years, than Dr. Felton. *o man has repelled wi 
 more indignation all slanders upon my public and private life, and espec 
 some of the very slanders he has now rehearsed to defame me. 
 
 During four consecutive canvasses for Congress in the seventh 
 
 817 
 
818 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 he has warmly eulogized me as ever a model public man, and has made con 
 spicuous iny indorsement of his personal and political integrity as proud 
 evidence to the people of his fitness to be their representative. All the peo 
 ple of the district will bear testimony in support of this statement. 
 
 Does any man or child believe that, when Dr. Felton was indulging in 
 these high-wrought eulogies upon me, he really believed I was, and all my 
 life had been a "corrupt," "mendacious," "hypocritical," and bad man? 
 If he did believe so, while pronouncing such eulogies, he has certainly 
 shown himself to be the most expert hypocrite ever yet known. To act the 
 part of such a hypocrite for a long series of years, without ever exciting the 
 slightest suspicion of his sincerity, is a success in hypocrisy never before 
 attained, and would entitle its author to the distinction of being the hero of 
 hypocrites. 
 
 Up to the writing of this letter, I do not believe Dr. Felton ever uttered 
 an unkind word of me either in public or private. I am sure I never did of 
 him. It is impossible to conclude that Dr. Felton believes the charges he 
 has now made, because it is impossible for any man to attain to such per 
 fection in hypocrisy. 
 
 On the other hand, if Dr. Felton did not believe the charges to be true, 
 and yet made them, and made them, too, with such furious mendacity, then 
 he has shown himself to be the most perfidious and ungrateful slanderer that 
 the purlieus of a degraded form of politics ever produced. Without provo 
 cation, without explanation, and without the slightest previous notice, he 
 has slandered an admitted friend of forty years, and a friend who, for 
 seven years, exposed himself to the reproaches and criticisms of his party in 
 order to maintain this one man in his political aspirations. And he has 
 slandered me, too, with a reckless violence and an abandoned untruthfulness 
 never equaled by my worst enemy, even of the carpet-bag regime. 
 
 As there could be no possible reason for this conduct, the next question 
 is, What is the excuse for it ? Dr. Felton uses for his excuse an interview 
 with me reported by Mr. Grady, in which interview he says I abused him 
 and made against him an implied charge of dishonesty. The reader will 
 see the utter weakness of this excuse at once. That an interview, reported 
 in the language of another, should authorize such a flood of calumny against 
 a friend of forty years of unbroken confidence is too absurd. I am not now 
 explaining or denying the interview. There is not a word in the interview 
 which is or which can be justly construed to be personally unkind, and Mr. 
 Grady, or the Constitution, has so distinctly stated. But even if there was 
 one word which might possibly bear such a construction, even an enemy 
 would have asked for an explanation before letting loose such a deluge of 
 billingsgate and calumny. 
 
 But, aside from all this, there is one fact w^hich it is my painful duty 
 to state here, which will make this pretense of unkind ness more damaging, 
 if possible, to Dr. Felton s good name than the slanderous letter. 
 
 For years Dr. Felton and myself have been in the habit of writing frank 
 and confidential letters to each other. One of the first things I did after 
 reading his interview published in a Chicago paper and embodying his ne\v 
 platform, I wrote Dr. Felton just such a letter. In the unreserve of his long 
 friendship, and feeling that his political course would somewhat involve me, 
 as I had always maintained his political honesty, and believing I might be 
 better posted as to the meaning of recent political movements than himself, 
 J expressed the pain I felt on reading this interview, I also said, that if it; 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 819 
 
 were true, I apprehended it would make him a Republican, and a stalwart 
 Republican at that. I warned him of the dangers ahead, and expressed the 
 earnest hope that he would not allow himself to be ensnared at this late day 
 into the Republican party. But in this letter I also said that I could never 
 speak of him otherwise than kindly. This letter he must have had before 
 him when he made unkindness by construction his excuse for abusing me 
 as no political enemy had ever done ! The letter was private, but I do not 
 object to its publication. 
 
 Either Dr. Felton believed the charges made and invented in his letter, 
 or did not believe them, and on this subject these propositions are now es 
 tablished : 
 
 1. If he believes the charges, he convicts himself of being the worst hyp 
 ocrite on record. 
 
 2. If he does not believe the charges, he convicts himself of being the 
 worst slanderer on record. 
 
 3. The excuse he offers for making the charges was not only unfounded, 
 but was known to be false when offered ! I will not announce the terrible 
 conclusion as to what the letter and the pretense together convict him of 
 being. I leave him with the facts, and the simple statement that a man who 
 will be false to a friend will be true to nothing. 
 
 But every effect must have a cause, and this letter of Dr. Felton being 
 an extraordinary effect must have an extraordinary cause, and that cause is 
 not and cannot possibly be anything I have said or done, nor is the cause 
 in Dr. Felton s belief or unbelief of the charges he has made. To say he 
 believes the charges is to discredit him as a hypocrite. To say he does not 
 believe them is to discredit him as a slanderer. And to say he made , 
 the charges for the excuse rendered is to discredit him both as a hypocrite 
 and a slanderer. 
 
 The truth is, the only cause of this unprecedented letter exists, and exists 
 only, in Dr. Felton himself. After a hard struggle with the bitterness of de 
 feat, and the wooing of ambition, Dr. Felton has formed a new purpose, and is 
 to have new friends and allies. He has not changed any of his political con 
 victions, but he has changed his political purposes and affiliations, and he is 
 himself ashamed of the change. 
 
 He hopes to deceive others who have stood by him in all his struggles, 
 and he hopes by deceiving them to carry them to his new allies. But he has 
 no hope of deceiving me. He feels and knows I understand him, and that I 
 will lose respect for him. He cannot stand in my presence and remember 
 the assurances he has so often given me, when begging me to stand by him, 
 that he could never deceive or disappoint me, and not lose respect for 
 himself. There was but one desperate resource left, and that was to get rid 
 of me. He gathered all his energies for the blow. He called to his assist 
 ance all the dirty scandals of years, which he had so often denounced, but 
 which it now seems he had preserved in his scrap book, and he adds to these 
 sucn as the advantages of a long confidential friendship enabled him to 
 invent, and discharged the aggregated mass at my unsuspecting head ! 
 my poor sadly fallen friend can survive the blow, I can. I never wrote any 
 thing more in sorrow and less in anger. I do not envy the man who can 
 witness the perfidy or feel the ingratitude of a life-long friend and not 
 sad. There is a manly way to change opinions and affiliations which every 
 man must respect. Such changes, great and good men have often made in 
 the past and will often make again. There is an unmanly and foul way 
 
320 SENATOR B. If. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 forming mongrel coalitions of incongruous elements for the common pur 
 pose of winning spoils, which no man can respect. These changes only per 
 fidious men ever have made or ever can make. 
 
 We have now arrived at the point when we can fully understand the 
 meaning and significance of Dr. Felton s letter and his " new movement." 
 But before showing this I feel I ought to make a brief explanation to the 
 Democracy of the State, and of the seventh district especially. I did not 
 approve of Dr. Felton s so-called Independentism, but for four elections I 
 refused to go into the district to oppose him, and for every election I gave 
 him a new certificate of good character, personal and political, which I was 
 often told by both parties and by himself, he used with great effect. I often 
 spoke well of him in private and in public, and twice, at his earnest request, 
 introduced him in most complimentary terms to large audiences in my own 
 city of Atlanta. 
 
 It is due to my self-respect to say that all I said of Dr. Felton I believed 
 was true at the time, and vet believe was true when said. In addition to 
 
 / 
 
 the fact that we had long been friends, and that both the ladies he married 
 were the daughters of highly esteemed friends, both of whom are still 
 living, venerable in years and good works I say, in addition to these facts, 
 I had undoubted confidence in Dr. Felton s Democracy, and never once 
 suspected he would disappoint me. His personal assurances on this subject 
 were very numerous and of the most earnest character, and I would have 
 believed his assurances alone. But his actions were entirely confirmatory 
 of these assurances. I will state two facts on this point : 
 
 1. In Washington Dr. Felton attended the Democratic caucus and re 
 spected its decisions as faithfully as any Democrat in Congress. We sat 
 side by side during the forty-fourth Congress, and his votes were on the 
 extreme Democratic line. In contested elections for seats in the House he 
 voted for Democratic claimants, even where Democrats of the most pro 
 nounced type doubted their election, and I can even now recall one case in 
 which he voted for the Democratic claimant against the majority report of 
 the Democratic committee on elections, who reported that the Republican 
 was elected. These were certainly severe tests of party fealty. 
 
 2. In 1876 I went to Georgia in advance of the adjournment of Congress 
 in order to be in Cartersville on the day the executive committee of the 
 Democratic party was called to meet there to issue the call for a convention. 
 I made this visit at the special request of Dr. Felton, and for the special 
 purpose of ascertaining, if I could, whether Dr. Felton could probably get 
 the nomination if he would submit his name to the convention. He was 
 anxious to avoid the repetition of the struggle of 1874, and I was anxious 
 for him to avoid it, and he was then not only willing but anxious to be 
 reconciled to his party and get the nomination. The result of my inquiries 
 were not encouraging, and I so advised him. So again in 1878 I wrote a 
 letter urging the Ringgold convention to tender Dr. Felton the nomination, 
 and said in the letter that if they would tender it and he rejected it, I would 
 canvass the district against him. I knew he would not reject it, and I was 
 anxious to see the reconciliation. I regret yet that the nomination was not 
 tendered him. So again in 1880 I made, with others, and at Dr. Felton s 
 request, an earnest effort to discourage any nomination against him. He was 
 anxious to be brought into accord with his party, but thought the overture 
 should come, or seem to come, from the party. 
 
 I deeply regret our efforts were, not successful. If they had 
 
HIS LIFE. SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 821 
 
 cessful I would not now be writing this very unpleasant letter, and the 
 Republican manipulators of the new coalition to capture the South would 
 have to find another leader for Georgia. 
 
 I thus personally knew that Dr. Fulton was not only a Democrat, but a 
 party Democrat, and that his apparent hatred of caucuses was only apparent 
 for lie attended the caucus in Washington, and was really anxious to have a 
 voluntary caucus nomination in the seventh district of Georgia. I thought 
 his desires were sincere and honorable, and I earnestly labored to eratifv 
 them. 
 
 I never saw defeat affect any man as it did Dr. Felton. It seemed to 
 arouse all the evil of his human nature. I have really had serious appre 
 hensions about him in more respects than one, but I never suspected that he 
 would actually abandon all his convictions and pledges, and aid in a coal- 
 ition to secure Radical domination in Georgia, and I firmly denied intima 
 tion of that character here, up to the very appearance of his new platform. 
 I knew sadly what that meant. But I did not suspect, even then, that he 
 would fly into mad rage with me and become at once my worst calumniator. 
 I now see he is a fallen and a changed man, and is a sad illustration of the 
 dangers of a reckless ambition for political place. During the last six years 
 the Democrats of Georgia have frequently complained of what they called mv 
 encouragement of the Independents. I did not encourage them and I did 
 not abuse them. While the Republican party in Georgia was dormant, and 
 there was practically but one party in the State, it was natural that discus 
 sions would spring up, and that opposing Democrats under various names 
 would contend for the offices. I was anxious that this should not breed 
 bitterness and permanent division in the party. I was opposed to denounc 
 ing all Independents as Radicals because I thought the denunciation was 
 neither true nor wise. There are no truer Democrats to their convictions 
 than the great body of the Independents. I did not doubt that the time 
 would come when the dormant Republican party would wake up and make 
 another effort to radicalize the State. I believe in that event the Independ 
 ents would all come home, and be as true and gallant as any against the 
 common enemy. I believe the time has come when they will justify my 
 confidence. I believe no Independents in Georgia will go into the coalition, 
 except a few who have lost themselves in the bitterness of disappointment, 
 or who are hungry for office " and tired of waiting." I know I have no 
 better friends than the great body of the Independents, and I do not and 
 cannot believe they will be led blindly into the Republican party. 
 
 Every intelligent and patriotic citizen of the United States must see the 
 great importance of eliminating from our politics all war issues and race 
 issues. No man has been more open and undisguised in the expression of tin* 
 opinion than myself. But the truth is, we can never get rid of either th<- 
 war issues or race issues until we get rid of the Republican party, and 
 especially of the stalwart wing of that party. The party lives by these 
 issues and would pass away forever without them. 
 
 Less than one year ago there was some hope more than a mere SULTL" ;-- 
 tion that a great and elevated movement was possible which would 
 the country out of the mire of sectional hatreds, and form our political part I6fl 
 on living issues adapted to every section alike. But this hope 
 rudely brushed away, and the lowest and most infamous coalition for mer 
 corrupt party ascendency has been formed in its stead. This coalition 1 
 already humiliated the noblest old commonwealth of the Union by comb 
 
822 SENATOR B. H. HILL, OF GEORGIA. 
 
 ing ignorance and venality against intelligence, property, and honor. This 
 coalition embraces four distinct propositions : 
 
 1. The reopening of the race issues by pandering to the ignorance and 
 prejudices of the black race. 
 
 2. By encouraging local division among the Democrats of the South on 
 any and all questions that are available for that purpose. 
 
 3. By promising the Federal offices to such Democrats as will agree to 
 aid the work, and this is called " cementing the coalition." 
 
 4. By blatant pretenses of reform, and still more blatant outcries against 
 that mystical monster the Bourbon Democracy of the South. 
 
 And it is boldly proclaimed by the most dangerous and efficient man in 
 the Republican party " that anything which will build up this coalition in 
 the South is justifiable in morals and law." 
 
 This is the foul coalition into which the independent Democrats of the 
 South are now so wooingly invited. Of all men on earth, the real, true, in 
 dependent Democrat ought to feel the most insulted by the offer. It assumes 
 that he will betray his party, either as the victim of his local spite or as the 
 corrupt subject of a debauched civil service. 
 
 It is understood that the selected leader in each State may write out his 
 own platform that will suit him and his State, and he is not to be embar 
 rassed by any inconsistency in his platform with that of the national party, 
 or that of any other State. Anything that will entice or buy Democrats 
 into the coalition is to be considered " justifiable in morals and in law," pro 
 vided, always, that the result shall inure to the benefit of the Republican 
 party and break down the Bourbon Democrats. 
 
 This is the whole scheme, briefly stated. It is not new. It is precisely 
 the scheme on which Catiline formed his conspiracy, and it is covered 
 already with nineteen centuries of infamy ! 
 
 I have an abiding faith that even the colored people will discard it, for 
 to them it portends the greatest mischief. I believe the better class of Re 
 publicans will repudiate the coalition and adhere to their party integrity ; 
 and the Democrats who allow themselves to be ensnared into it will find 
 no life long enough to repent sufficiently their folly. 
 
 Can anything be more utterly disgusting than the proposition to reform 
 Georgia by such a movement as this ? 
 
 In our State, more than in any other, the people aro recovering from the 
 effects of war and reconstruction. The race issue has completely disap 
 peared from our politics in Georgia. Nearly one hundred thousand of the 
 colored children are being educated by the taxes of the white race. The 
 State has endowed a colored college. Colored people own six hundred thou 
 sand acres of land in their own right. Everybody votes as he pleases and 
 his vote is counted. Factories are springing up in all directions. Our 
 industries are being multiplied as never before. Thousands of the best 
 men of the North have gone home from the exposition enthused with 
 the brightening prospects of all business in the State. Our taxes were 
 scarcely ever so low. Our credit was never so high. Capital and people 
 and machinery are flowing in, and everybody is brushing away the tears of 
 war, and laughing with a new hope in a new era ! All this, all this has been 
 accomplished under the rule of the men who are denounced by trading poli 
 ticians as narrow-minded, intolerant Bourbons, and this is the condition of 
 things which must be reformed by a coalition of ignorance, disappointment, 
 and venality, cemented by the public offices, and all shaped, directedj au4 
 
HIS LIFE, SPEECHES, AND WRITINGS. 823 
 
 controlled by a lot of audacious machine Republicans, who owe all their 
 prominence to corrupt methods in the politics of their own States. If anv 
 man cannot see and understand the real meaning and significance of the new 
 movement in Georgia, he is one who, "having eyes sees not, and having ears 
 hears not." Must our peace be destroyed, race collisions again provoked, 
 and our budding prosperity arrested merely to gratify a few men who are 
 willing to run with all parties and be true to none? 
 
 For several years we have had divisions in the Democratic party in 
 Georgia, because, having no common enemy to fight, we have fought each 
 pther. I have studiously labored to keep out of these party wrangles. I 
 have not hesitated to condemn what I believed was wrong even in my own 
 party. But now that a new movement is made, of a most insidious charac 
 ter, to take advantage of our divisions and utilize them for the Republican 
 party, they will prove themselves the best Democrats and truest Georgians 
 who" soonest forget their individual grievances and labor most earnestly to 
 heal all party wounds. The new enemy is already organized, and is open 
 ing the campaign before the snows of winter have melted. Let us not make 
 the mistake of assuming that they will be weak because their coalition is 
 incongruous and their purposes are iniquitous. They must not oifly be de 
 feated but overwhelmed, and then no like coalition will rise to fret this 
 generation. Let regulars and independents now forget their differences, 
 and when we see a common enemy before us, let us unite and organize, and 
 meet that enemy with united strength. If we will do this now, and vigor 
 ously, and show that we cannot be enticed by prejudices nor bought with 
 promises of Federal patronage, the coalition will die before any damage can 
 
 be done. 
 
 BENJ. H. HILL. 
 
 THE END. 
 

 


VINHOJIIVO 
 
 AWHHIl VINHOJITVD JO AJ.ISHS 
 
 COLUMBIA : -*AL CLASP 
 
 FAT. ;. 290,083 1,593,048 
 
 ELOPEC( iFIELB,MA5S. 
 
RETURN TO the circulation desk ot any 
 University of California Library 
 
 or to the 
 
 NORTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 Bldg. 400, Richmond Field Station 
 University of California 
 Richmond, CA 94804-4698 
 
 ALL BOOKS MAY BE RECALLED AFTER 7 DAYS 
 
 2-month loans may be renewed by calling 
 (510)642-6753 
 
 1-year loans may be recharged by bringing 
 books to NRLF 
 
 Renewals and recharges may be made 4 
 days prior to due date. 
 
 DUE AS STAMPED BELOW 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 12,000(11/95) 
 
 LD21A-60m-3, 70 
 (N5382slO)476-A-32 
 
 General Library 
 
 University of California 
 
 Berkeley 
 
YD 12529 
 
 
 67470 
 
 HV-SJ4S 
 
 THE ttNVESITY OlffcALIFORNlA LIBRARY